West Liberty Hilltopper Basketball

[Columbuseer]

Fyi
Steubenville's Aiden Davis, wlu 2025 signee, has been nominated to McDonald's All America classic in brooklyn.
From the list of nominees, they will pare the list to 48 players at a later date.

[Columbuseer]

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at Point Park 1/23/25

Pt. Park (PP) Game Plan
PP is a tall, athletic team that uses the traditional guard, forward, center concept, with a talented point guard (#0 16 ppg) and a tall, athletic center (#13, 11 ppg). Their performance is erratic, but on a given night they have the athletes to be dangerous (they beat WV State and lost to Fairmont by 5). Apparently, the coach allows the point guard to dominate the offense. The point guard dribbles excessively looking for his shot, while taking 25% of the three-point shots and 20% of all field goal attempts for the season, despite the fact that he only makes 39% of his field goals. Typically, PP averages 26 three-point shots a game, making about 33%. Their height and athletic ability pose a potential matchup problem for WLU.

The PP strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED –Use their athletic ability and superior height to attack the rim on offense, both in half court and when breaking the press in transition, looking to score or get to the foul line.
• PASSED – Draw fouls and get to the Free-Throw line. PP caused 17 WLU fouls and shot 90% (18-20) foul
shots. PP committed 19 fouls, resulting in 74% (17-23) free-throws for WLU. When PP closed the lead from 20
to 12 points in the first half, foul shooting was an important factor.
• PASSED– Win the rebounding battle. PP outrebounded WLU 42-31. The college average is a 72% defensive
rebounding rate. PP got 67% of defensive rebounds compared to 57% for WLU.
• FAILED – Mitigate the effects of fatigue. PP played 10 players 9 minutes or more, but the box score statistic is
misleading. For example, the point guard played 25 minutes, but the coach took him out of the game with
11:19 remaining in the game and down 32 points. He actually played 25 of 29 minutes or 86% of the time
when PP was still contesting the outcome. PP played their starters far too long before subbing. IMHO, playing
for more than 6 minutes continuously against WLU pressure significantly degrades a player’s skills and
judgment.
• FAILED– Keep WLU off the offensive glass. The average offensive rebounding % in D1 college basketball is
28%. WLU was a good 33% offensive rebounding percentage compared to an above average 43% for the
taller PP team.
• FAILED– Shoot at their average from three. PP shot 24% from three, far below their average of 33%.
• FAILED – Take care of the ball and avoid getting sped up in their game. PP had 30 turnovers, of which 18
were steals, resulting in 45 points off turnovers by WLU.
• FAILED– Try to get Harper and Woodward for WLU in foul trouble by attacking them. WLU mitigated this risk
by distributing more minutes among all the big men on the roster and getting help from a sagging guard when
the ball went inside.
• FAILED – Defend the 3-point shot from WLU. WLU averaged 47% (15-32) for the game, far above their
average of 34%.

Comments on the WLU 112-73 Victory
WLU is focusing on matchups in their subbing strategy, blending height, experience, and three-point shooting. There were far more combinations of players on the court beyond just the two platoons. WLU may be getting to the stage where they can mix and match players according to the competition and situation.

• First Shift of each half: D’Augustino, Woodward, Harper, Spadafora and Dragas

WLU used more of a selective substitution strategy rather a strict platoon approach. For example, at the beginning of the game, they subbed 3 players after about 1.25 minutes, leaving 2 players in to play roughly 4 minutes. The subbing strategy for much of the game was based on matchups and situational substitutions. Ten WLU players played 14 or more minutes with the most minutes recorded by Spadafora (25 minutes), D’Augustino (24 minutes) and Woodward (23 minutes).

Keys to Victory

• WLU did a great job of having a guard double team the post player to limit their inside matchup advantage.
• When the PP point guard would go around high ball screens from post players, both WLU defenders would
jump out and make him pick up his dribble. Then the WLU defender would sprint back to pick up the
unguarded post player. This WLU tactic disrupted the PP offense and confused the point guard, resulting in
several shot clock violations.
• WLU’s offensive efficiency was an amazing 140 points per 100 possessions, far above their season average
of 114. This is much higher than the typical WLU teams of the past that typically averaged 125. PP had 93
points per 100 possessions due to the free-throws and points in the paint.
• WLU committed 6 turnovers on only 7% of their possessions. PP had 30 turnovers, of which 18 were steals by
WLU (live ball turnovers).
• WLU shot the three extremely well at 47%, which forced PP players to leave the paint on defense, which in
turn opened up the passing and driving lanes in the paint. WLU had an effective field goal % of 61%.
• WLU scored an outstanding 1.50 points per forced turnover.
• WLU shared the ball incredibly well with 21 assists and an assist to turnover ratio of 3.5, which is incredible for a point guard, and even more so for a team. WLU had assists on 53% of field goals, which probably
underestimates how well they were sharing the ball. Some goals were wide-open drives to the rim for layups.
Else, the assist % would have been higher.
• WLU had an Effective Possession Ratio (EPR) of 1.10, which is amazing. For comparison, the 90th percentile
EPR for D1 is .993. [Effective Possession Ratio (EPR = (Possessions + Off. Rebounds - Turnovers) /
Possessions)]

Areas for Improvement for WLU
• WLU must continue to improve offensive and defensive rebounding; else they will be vulnerable on a subpar shooting night when the opponent is shooting far above average and not committing numerous turnovers.

[Layton]

It’s annoying being Wheeling’s Super Bowl every year lol. If they played this hard every game they wouldn’t be a toilet program

[Columbuseer]

Fyi

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at Wheeling 1/25/25

Wheeling University (WU) Game Plan

WU is an athletic team that is about the same size as WLU. They are struggling this year with only 1 conference win. However, they played with great effort and intensity in this rivalry game that is almost always a closer game than expected. There were 16 lead changes and 11 ties.

The WU strategy seemed to be:

• PASSED – Play a very physical game. They committed 25 fouls, while forcing WLU into 21 fouls. WLU shot 25-37 free throw attempts in the game (68%). WU shot 15-22 free throws (68%).
• PASSED– Take care of the ball and avoid getting sped up in their game. WU had only 11 turnovers on 14% of their possessions. Seven of their turnovers were WLU steals, but their 11 turnovers resulted in only 12 WLU points.
• PASSED –Use their athletic ability to attack the rim on offense, both in half court and when breaking the press in transition, looking to score or get to the foul line.
• PASSED– Win the rebounding battle. WU barely outrebounded WLU 45-42. The college average is a 72% defensive rebounding rate. WU got 72% of defensive rebounds compared to 71% for WLU.
• Passed– Keep WLU off the offensive glass. The average offensive rebounding % in D1 college basketball is 28%. WLU was an average 28% offensive rebounding percentage compared to an above average 29% for the WU team. WU got 22 second chance points to only 11 for WLU.
• PASSED– Shoot at their average from three. WU shot 34.6% from three, slightly above their average of 34.0% and 47.2% FG overall, compared to their season average of 42.3%.
• PASSED– Defend the 3-point shot from WLU. WLU averaged only 29% (8-28) for the game, below their average of 34%.
• FAILED – Mitigate the effects of fatigue. WU played a meager 6 players 13 minutes or more. For example, #5 Smith played 38 minutes, #01 Ealy 36 minutes, and #13 Hutchinson 29 minutes. WU played their starters far too long before subbing. Key WU players were playing over 9 continuous minutes without rest. IMHO, playing for more than 6 minutes continuously against WLU pressure significantly degrades a player’s skills and judgment over the course of a game.
• FAILED– Try to get Harper and Woodward for WLU in foul trouble by attacking them. WLU mitigated this risk by distributing more minutes among all the big men on the roster and getting help from a sagging guard when the ball went inside.

Comments on the WLU 99-92 Victory

WLU is focusing on matchups in their subbing strategy, blending height, experience, and three-point shooting. There were far more combinations of players on the court beyond just the two platoons. WLU may be getting to the stage where they can mix and match players according to the competition and situation.

First Shift of each half: D’Augustino, Woodward, Harper, Spadafora and Dragas

WLU used more of a selective substitution strategy rather a strict platoon approach. For example, at the beginning of the game, they subbed 3 players after about 1.5 minutes, leaving 2 players in to play roughly 3-4 minutes. For much of the game, the subbing strategy was based on matchups and situational substitutions. Eight WLU players played 13 or more minutes, with the most minutes recorded by Harper (29 minutes), D’Augustino (29 minutes), Dragas (27 minutes), and Woodward (27 minutes).

Keys to Victory

• WU had a good strategy, was shooting well, avoiding blackouts due to turnovers, and WLU was shooting below average, which is nearly a perfect storm for a WLU loss. However, IMHO, the root cause for the victory was the cumulative effect of fatigue from the WLU pressure, which started to become apparent with 10 minutes left in the game. On offense, WLU was getting a step ahead of their man and getting to the rim,
scoring quickly and easily, with the WU player often not even being close enough to foul. The WU fatigue got progressively worse as the clock wound down to 3 minutes. WU was paying the price for playing their starters for too long without a break. WU closed the gap when WLU prudently slowed the pace to shorten the game.
• WLU worked very hard in half-court defense, guarding WU deep into the shot clock.
• WLU’s offensive efficiency was a very good at 119 points per 100 possessions, above their season average of 114. In comparison, the 90th percentile for D1 teams is 113. WU had a very good 114 points per 100 possessions, which normally would be sufficient to win most games.
• WLU committed 4 turnovers on only 5% of their possessions, which is incredibly good.
• WLU shared the ball very effectively with 14 assists and an assist to turnover ratio of 3.5, which is incredible for a point guard, and even more so for a team. WLU had assists on 42% of field goals, which probably underestimates how well they were sharing the ball. Some goals were wide-open drives to the rim for layups, especially in the second half. Else, the assist % would have been higher.
• WLU had an Effective Possession Ratio (EPR) of 1.11, which is amazing, and WU had 1.01. For comparison, the 90th percentile EPR for D1 is .993.
[Effective Possession Ratio (EPR = (Possessions + Off. Rebounds -Turnovers) / Possessions)]

Areas for Improvement for WLU

• WLU must continue to improve offensive and defensive rebounding; else they will be vulnerable on a subpar shooting night when the opponent is shooting far above average and not committing numerous turnovers. This game was an example.
• WLU needs to improve defensive angles and alignment to stay in front of opponents who have the ball in an open court or in a clear-out 1-on-1 situation. WLU needs to make them change direction. WU was clearing out the lane for some of their players to go 1-on-1 and WLU was not staying in front of their man and essentially ceding them a path to the goal by running with them adjacent to the opponent’s hip.

[Topper_Hopper]

Nice to see the three pointers falling vs. WV State (16 for 37). Has to be close to a season high.

[Columbuseer]

Fyi
west liberty now #14 in nabc poll after wheeling victory.
https://hilltoppersports.com/news/20...p-25-poll.aspx

[boatcapt]

Up next a suddenly reeling Charleston team coming off back to back losses to WVS and Wheeling. Charleston's back is against the wall at 6 losses on the season and in danger of playing themselves out of NCAA consideration. We got the W in the first game this season by 6 points at the ARSC, buuutttt...they beat us THREE times last season. They are always a tough game for the Toppers.

[Scrub]

Up next a suddenly reeling Charleston team coming off back to back losses to WVS and Wheeling. Charleston's back is against the wall at 6 losses on the season and in danger of playing themselves out of NCAA consideration. We got the W in the first game this season by 6 points at the ARSC, buuutttt...they beat us THREE times last season. They are always a tough game for the Toppers.

Tough building as well. Charleston, Fairmont, & Concord are the three hardest road trips in the conference. Some of that is due to good programs living in those buildings. Some of that is about quality fanbases that come out to the gym to support. But some of that also seems to belong to mystique. WLU has lost games in those buildings to far inferior teams in front of bad crowds before. So I say buckle up for a war tomorrow regardless of what UC has been up to this past week.

[Columbuseer]

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs WVSU 1/29/25

WV State Univ (WVSU) Game Plan

WVSU is a tall, athletic team that has 5 players that average in double figures. Their performance is erratic, they are on a 3-game winning streak, having just beaten Charleston. For this game, they are missing their starting guard, Mims, who averages about 10 points a game. The key players are Slack, Martinez, and athletic 6-8 Cox. They also have athletic 6-10 forward in Toussaint, who is a transfer from D1 Marshall. However, much of their depth is talented, but inexperienced. To mitigate the lack of experienced depth, WVSU decided to take a calculated risk and play zone some of the time to rest their players.

The WVSU strategy seemed to be:

• PASSED –Use their athletic ability and superior height to aggressively attack the rim on offense, both in half court and when breaking the press in transition, looking to score or get to the foul line.
• PASSED – Draw fouls and get to the Free-Throw line. WVSU caused 26 WLU fouls and shot 57% (21-37) foul shots. WVSU committed 20 fouls, resulting in 85% (22-26) free-throws for WLU.
• FAILED– Win the rebounding battle. Despite a significant height disadvantage, WLU outrebounded WVSU 52-44. The college average is a 72% defensive rebounding rate. WLU got 76% of defensive rebounds compared to 68% for WVSU.
• FAILED – Mitigate the effects of fatigue. WVSU played 7 players 15 minutes or more, but the box score statistic is misleading. For example, #8 Slack played 33 minutes (92%), Brown played 30 minutes (88%) and Cox played 22 minutes (69% due to ejection for 2nd Tech foul with 8 minutes remaining), and Toussaint 25 minutes (69%). The percentages reflect the time played before WVSU cleared the bench with 4 minutes remaining and losing by 34 points. WVSU played their starters far too long before subbing. IMHO, playing for more than 6 minutes continuously against WLU pressure significantly degrades a player’s skills and judgment. IMHO, the fatigue played a role in the flagrant 2 ejection on Bradford and 2 tech fouls on Cox during the game. The WVSU coach also got a tech foul.
• FAILED– Keep WLU off the offensive glass. The average offensive rebounding % in D1 college basketball is 28%. WLU was a good 32% offensive rebounding percentage compared to a subpar 24% for the taller WVSU team.
• FAILED– Shoot at their average from three. WVSU shot 6% (1-16) from three, far below their average of 32%.
• FAILED – Take care of the ball and avoid getting sped up in their game. WVSU had 20 turnovers, of which 8 were steals, resulting in 24 points off turnovers by WLU.
• FAILED– Try to get Harper and Woodward for WLU in foul trouble by attacking them. Although Woodward picked up 3rd and 4th foul with 15:46 and had to sit for 8 minutes, the rest of the team picked up the slack and WLU was not significantly affected.
• FAILED – Defend the 3-point shot from WLU. WLU averaged 43% (16-37) for the game, far above their average of 34%

Comments on the WLU 118-76 Victory

Continuing on the theme from the last few games, there were far more combinations of players on the court beyond just the two platoons. Much more than in previous games, WLU used more wholesale 5-in, 5-out subbing, with different combinations in each platoon. WLU may also be getting to the stage where they can mix and match players regardless of size, according to the situation. For example, WLU feels comfortable subbing Spadafora for Clanet, or Shuler for Tinsley.

First Shift of each half: D’Augustino, Woodward, Harper, Spadafora and Dragas

At the beginning of the game, they subbed 3 players after about 1.25 minutes, leaving 2 players in to play roughly 4 minutes. Ten WLU players played 15 or more minutes with the most minutes recorded by D’Augustino (27 minutes), Spadafora (24 minutes), and Harper (22 minutes). Freshmen Tinsley and Dragas each logged 21 minutes.

Keys to Victory

• WLU played with incredible energy the entire game. Their press was working at a high level and players were filling their lanes in transition. They succeeded in getting WVSU into an up-and-down, open gym pace. Two minutes in to the second half, WVSU was on the foul line, bent over with their hands on their knees. Their fatigue caused a blackout. With 14:40 remaining, the WLU lead was 11. In about 4 minutes at 10:33, the WLU lead was 21. By 8:24, the lead was 30. By 2:12 the lead was 41.
• WLU did a great job of packing the lane and restricting the success of WVSU in driving to the rim. They were taking the calculated risk of giving them more 3-point shots in order to mitigate their inside advantage.
• WLU was outstanding in rebounding the ball against the taller WVSU.
• WLU’s offensive efficiency was an elite 125 points per 100 possessions (90th percentile in D1 is 113), far above their season average of 114. WVSU had 85 points per 100 possessions.
• WLU committed 12 turnovers on only 13% of their possessions. WVSU had 20 turnovers, of which 8 were steals by WLU (live ball turnovers).
• WLU shot the three extremely well at 43%, which forced WVSU players to leave the paint on defense, which in turn opened up the passing and driving lanes in the paint. WLU had a shooting efficiency of 56% and a true shooting % of 61% (90th percentile in D1 is 58.9%), which includes foul shots.
• WLU was impressive in limiting WVSU to just 0.75 points per turnover.
• WLU shared the ball incredibly well with 24 assists and an outstanding assist to turnover ratio of 2.0, compared to 0.35 for WVSU (which reflected their 1-on-1 play). WLU had assists on 60% of field goals, which is outstanding, compared to 26% for WVSU.
• WLU had an Effective Possession Ratio (EPR) of 1.03, which is outstanding. For comparison, the 90th percentile EPR for D1 is .993. [Effective Possession Ratio (EPR = (Possessions + Off. Rebounds - Turnovers) / Possessions)]

Areas for Improvement for WLU
It is hard to find significant issues; perhaps reduce some lazy passes and score more on live ball turnovers. 

[boatcapt]

Tough building as well. Charleston, Fairmont, & Concord are the three hardest road trips in the conference. Some of that is due to good programs living in those buildings. Some of that is about quality fanbases that come out to the gym to support. But some of that also seems to belong to mystique. WLU has lost games in those buildings to far inferior teams in front of bad crowds before. So I say buckle up for a war tomorrow regardless of what UC has been up to this past week.

You forgot the hardest road trip for MEC schools...That being a trip up the mountain to West Liberty!

After back to back losses, UC find's themselves in a must win situation if they want to have any more than a crapshoot chance at the NCAA Tourney. That makes todays game triple dangerous for WLU...Playing at UC...playing a team that has had our number...and playing a UC team that has their back to the wall. You never know how games will play out, but in all likelyhood, this ain't a game we can just gut our way to a win. We need to do something we've had trouble doing all year, that is bring our A game for the full 40 minutes...We need to shoot at or near 40% from 3...we need our D to produce turnovers...we need to protect the ball...we need our "bigs" to stay competitive on the glass and not get pushed around inside....we need our bench to produce quality minutes, turnovers and points.

[Scrub]

Maybe if they would start the freaking stream we could actually see it.

[Columbuseer]

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at UC 2/1/25 - WLU 95 UC 81

Univ. Charleston (UC) Game Plan

UC is a tall, athletic team that also has great three-point shooters, 7-0 d1 center transfer Loveday and strong forwards. As a team, UC averages 38.4% from three and has three 40+ % three-point shooters. UC has 5 players that average approximately in double figures. Their performance is erratic, for they had a 6-game winning streak, followed by close losses in the last 2 games, with their leading scorer coming off an ankle injury (Meredith). The key players are Lipkins (14 pts, 43% from 3), Jones (12 pts, 38% from 3), Shelton (10pts, 32% from 3), and Ugwuakazi (9.9 pts, 37% from 3). They have limited depth.

The UC strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED – Avoid getting into a fast-paced game with WLU and leverage their inside and outside strength. UC only had 10 fast break points and 7 points off WLU’s 9 turnovers. UC scored 36 points in the paint and 27 points from three.
• PASSED - Draw fouls and get to the Free-Throw line. UC caused 18 WLU fouls and shot 84% (16-19) foul shots. However, UC committed 18 fouls, resulting in 90% (17-19) free-throws for WLU, which was basically a draw.
• PASSED– Keep WLU off the offensive glass. The average offensive rebounding % in D1 college basketball is 28%. Both teams did a good job of keeping opponents off the offensive glass. WLU had a 21% offensive rebounding percentage compared to 20% for the taller UC team.
• FAILED– Win the rebounding battle. Despite a significant height disadvantage, WLU outrebounded UC 35-34. The college average is a 72% defensive rebounding rate. WLU got 80% of defensive rebounds compared to 79% for UC.
• FAILED – Mitigate the effects of fatigue. UC played 7 players 15 minutes or more. For example, #5 Jones played 40 minutes, #0 Lipkins 36 minutes, #4 Barrett 32 minutes, #32 Shelton 21 minutes, and Loveday 19 minutes (less minutes due to WLU wearing him down). In a common mistake, UC played their starters far too long before subbing. IMHO, playing for more than 6 minutes continuously against WLU pressure significantly degrades a player’s skills and judgment. IMHO, the fatigue played a role in UC only shooting 35% in the 2nd half compared to 57% in the first half.
• FAILED– Shoot at their average from three. UC shot 30% (9-30) from three, below their average of 38.4%.
• FAILED – Take care of the ball and avoid turnovers. UC had 14 turnovers, but 10 were in the first half, which allowed WLU to recover from a 20-7 deficit and take a 10-point lead of 50-40 at the half. For the game, WLU forced 10 steals on 14 UC turnovers, resulting in 23 points.
• FAILED – Defend the 3-point shot from WLU. WLU made 10-22 threes (45%) in the first half. UC focused on stopping the three in second half, which spread the court. WLU adjusted and took advantage by scoring inside, going 0-3 from three in the second half or 40% from three for the game.

Comments on the WLU Victory

Continuing on the theme from the last few games, there were far more combinations of players on the court beyond just the two platoons.

First Shift: D’Augustino, Woodward, Harper, Spadafora and Dragas

At the beginning of the game, they subbed 3 players after about 4.5 minutes. Nine WLU players played 10 or more minutes with the most minutes recorded by D’Augustino (27 minutes), Spadafora (24 minutes), and Harper (22 minutes). Freshmen Tinsley and Dragas each logged 21 minutes.


Keys to Victory

• On cold shooting, WLU was losing 20-7 at the 12:23 mark of the first half and had only generated 3 UC turnovers. WLU then turned up the pressure to another level and started to wear down UC, getting 7 more turnovers before the end of the half and turning the 13-point deficit into a 10-point lead at 50-40 at the half.
• WLU held their own in rebounding the ball against the taller UC.
• WLU’s offensive efficiency was an elite 123 points per 100 possessions (90th percentile in D1 is 113), far above their season average of 116. UC had an above average of 105 points per 100 possessions.
• WLU committed 9 turnovers on only 12% of their possessions. UC had 14 turnovers, of which 10 were steals by WLU (live ball turnovers), which resulted in 23 WLU points.
• WLU shot the three extremely well at 40%, which forced UC players to leave the paint on defense in the 2nd half, which in turn opened up the passing and driving lanes in the paint. WLU proceeded to show that they don’t live or die by the three by attempting only 3 threes in the 2nd half. Yet, WLU still had FG% of 56% in the second half, despite shooting 0-3 from three. For the game WLU had a shooting efficiency of 58% (90th percentile D1 is 56%) and a true shooting % of 63% (90th percentile in D1 is 58.9%), which includes foul shots.
• WLU was impressive in limiting UC to just 0.78 points per turnover, while WLU scored an outstanding 1.64 points per UC turnover.
• WLU shared the ball incredibly well with 19 assists and an outstanding assist to turnover ratio of 2.1, compared to 0.79 for UC (which reflected their excessive dribbling and good WLU defense). WLU had assists on 56% of field goals, which is outstanding, compared to 39% for UC. The assists would have been higher, but WLU was getting open drives to the paint off ball screens.
• WLU had an Effective Possession Ratio (EPR) of 0.97, which is very good. It was limited by the excellent defensive rebounding by both teams. For comparison, the 90th percentile EPR for D1 is .993. [Effective Possession Ratio (EPR = (Possessions + Off. Rebounds - Turnovers) / Possessions)]

Areas for Improvement for WLU
It is hard to find significant problem areas, although everyone should strive for continuous improvement

[Topper_Hopper]

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at UC 2/1/25 - WLU 95 UC 81

• WLU shared the ball incredibly well with 19 assists and an outstanding assist to turnover ratio of 2.1, compared to 0.79 for UC (which reflected their excessive dribbling and good WLU defense). WLU had assists on 56% of field goals, which is outstanding, compared to 39% for UC. The assists would have been higher, but WLU was getting open drives to the paint off ball screens.

Ball movement was a highlight for me. Finley Woodward had a great a game.

[Scrub]

Ball movement was a highlight for me. Finley Woodward had a great a game.

9 assists for the big man was huge. He also showed he was able to take on the much bigger Loveday on several occasions and throw that hook shot over him and/or use a quick first step to get around/under him. Nice night for Woodward.

[Columbuseer]

9 assists for the big man was huge. He also showed he was able to take on the much bigger Loveday on several occasions and throw that hook shot over him and/or use a quick first step to get around/under him. Nice night for Woodward.

Great points. I am starting to see influence of coach Butler in his moves against Loveday. Fin has always been a pass first player. It is good to see him take that hook. It makes him even more dangerous to opponents.

I am also seeing great improvement defensively by Kam and JP. JP was guarding Jones in the open court and he could not get by JP.