The Problem Is The Post Play Not the Guards

[hoyafoeva]

Not trying to argue or anything, I respect opinions, but I will try to address what you are saying. Believe me, Roy being 7'2", he gets up and down the court and establishing position just as quick and better than Macklin believe this, go back and look at our games if you've recorded them, you will see this. We don't push the ball up the court that often, so I don't know where your coming from with this.

All I know when the ball gets down court we run our and if Roy is on the right left side of the basket posting up and the ball is shifted to that side he doesn't get the ball and I'm like why do they keep passing him up.

I know why especially from last year. Last season folks though I was crazy when I said something "jealousy" last season, come to find out I wasn't the only one who knew, because Big John knew, and he stated after one of the games that was like this one, he said "this no time for equal opportunity basketball, give Roy the ball." Do you know what he meant by that? I do. I have been saying all along, and it doesnt take a genius to figure that out especially when you have played and coached.

You're right Roy did get touches, but not in the paint. A lot of passes thrown by Jwalls and Jessie were lazy no zip or too late passes. You have to give the ball to Roy in rhythm. One game Roy is our hero, the next we lose because of selfishness, and not going inside consistently and NO GUARD PENETRATION. Where was DaJuan? In another world. If you wanna talk about anyone's soft play, check DaJuan and Jessie and Jonathan and Rivers.

Oh heck yeah, as soon as Tyler went out everything went to hell. Tyler was ready for this game, and we needed him, he's a sure nuff banger. Man, he's the toughest player on that Georgetown team that will ruff it up in a heartbeat. He looks like a rock. lol

[DanMcQ]

If I can summarize (and correct me if I am wrong hoyafoeva), it's a little bit of everything. It's not just inability to get Roy the ball at the right time. Although that is a problem, it's more complicated than that. It's a team game, and only a few of the guys were ready to play heads up ball on either end when the game started. Some adjusted, others did not. The coach said the team was flat - I would agree with that.

[seaweed]

The latest spew from 'foeva"
"I know why especially from last year. Last season folks though I was crazy when I said something "jealousy" last season, come to find out I wasn't the only one who knew, because Big John knew, and he stated after one of the games that was like this one, he said "this no time for equal opportunity basketball, give Roy the ball." Do you know what he meant by that? I do. I have been saying all along, and it doesnt take a genius to figure that out especially when you have played and coached."

First let me say I highly doubt your 2 years of Jr High ball qualifies you to say you've played.

Second, I don't think you read well. The above quote is not about 'jealousy' but about an offense designed to distribute scoring opportunities. JT and JT III might disagree on the virtue of getting different players different shots, but that does not entitle you to an opinion.

Third, get a life man! You are posting way too much in this thread, starting to make it look like it is all about you. Lay off the RedBull and get outdoors.

[hoyarooter]

I just want to ask hoyafoeva who eva is. ;D

[HoyaSpirit]

Jan 15, 2008 11:25:40 GMT -5 hoyafoeva said:

Jan 15, 2008 9:21:19 GMT -5 buffalohoya said:

The problem is two-fold.

Roy is too passive at times and doesn't physically assert position in the post, but at times the guards/forwards do a TERRIBLE job of getting him the ball in the post when he's establishing position.

Freeman did a good job on entry passes last night, I thought. He looks as though he knows how to work angles, help Roy work the man he's posting up, etc. At other times (and this has been going on for two years or so), the guys wait a split second too long to toss it inside... which gives the defender on Roy just enough time to work around him for the deflection.

I'm not worried about guard play. I'm not worried about Roy. I'm worried about the two coming together and functioning as one on a consistent, night-in/night-out basis. Like I and many others said in the offseason when many were quick to dismiss the huge hole left by Green's departure, this offense needs SEVERAL players to step up BIG TIME and develop parts of their game that heretofore weren't at the level needed to win the Big East, the BET, and advance to the Final Four.

Roy is in position in the post and everyone in America knows that now. He's not getting the ball enough consistently, bottom line.
I don't know what games some people are watching, but obviously its not the same game and Im sure some would agree.

My bad, I didn't read your last sentence, but you have to make up your mind. It has nothing do with being passive, it has everything to do with our guard play, and shooting too many darn 3'sssss and relying on those. You just can't do it, not us, we have too many bigs.

Very accurate. As long as we only give an All-American 7'2" center who is very strong offensively (shooting 60% this year and 65% last year) only an average of 8 shots a game, there is only a small chance of winning it all and we probably should be ranked around 11. Simple as that. Roy works very hard establishing position in the post - harder than probably 90% of centers and gets little reward - a paltry 8 shots per game. This is a coaching problem - Thompson needs to train the guards (both in practice and in games, including sitting guys a bit if needed) to get him the ball consistently until he has 12-16 shots per game - probably should average 14 shots a game. As long as he is not first or second in total shots (currently four other guys take more shots than him - meaning he's 5th), we have a very small chance of a championship and probably are not a top 5 squad.

Besides the fact we lose extra points each game by not having a 60-65% shooter get more shots, it means other guys get fewer open looks b/c when Roy gets the pass and the double, we get open looks, it also means fewer boards as Roy ends up out at the 3 line because he's ignored and can only get it out there.

It also means that instead of having an open guy, 4 on 3 when they double Roy, that when he comes out to 3, that we're not even 5 on 5 at that point, it becomes 4 on 5 because Roy's guy is way off him ready to help others. Now of course if Roy starts nailing more 3s, that could shift but most of the time our shooting % is hurt because running an offense 4 versus 5 means bad shots. Same thing when Macklin gets the ball out at 3. Not only a waste of time, but it hurts us. It becomes 4 versus 5.

The interesting thing is that I like a team whose potential is say only being #14 but plays to its potential and plays right - more than a team that could be top 5 but plays more like #12 and plays stupidly, which is why I haven't been that connected to this year's squad emotionally even though they're ranked high and even though with the 8 shots per game for the 7'2" all-american they should still be a top 15 team, possibly higher. My Dad used to scream when guys didn't pass the ball to someone working for position inside - particularly if the guy was good.

This could be fixed pretty easily. We'll see. i'm not optimistic - unless we lose a couple more games early on and they are somehow spurred to fix it. If not, they'll carry on doing ok, we'll be ranked between 6 and 15 and most likely lose in the 3rd or 4th round. If we somehow manage to stay hot from 3 for 6 straight games we win it all, but I put very low odds on it. I'll take a sweet 16 finish but to be honest, in the years where we have the talent to pull it all off, I'd like to have a good shot at doing it.

[HoyaSpirit]

Jan 15, 2008 15:52:27 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

If I can summarize (and correct me if I am wrong hoyafoeva), it's a little bit of everything. It's not just inability to get Roy the ball at the right time. Although that is a problem, it's more complicated than that. It's a team game, and only a few of the guys were ready to play heads up ball on either end when the game started. Some adjusted, others did not. The coach said the team was flat - I would agree with that.

SF - almost everything in the universe is complicated to some extent and this is as well. That said, the primary problem is getting Roy the ball. Sometimes it's not even a matter of the right time or not. Sometimes he's in the same spot posted up for 3 seconds straight with the guard looking at him and still doesn't pass it. Sure we'll still lose every now and again and will have other things needing fixing. But addressing the primary problem is key.

One other note. If we went to Roy every time down the court almost without fail, I bet we could (a) foul out the other team's center a large percentage of the time, at which point Roy would probably have a cakewalk - as most teams don't have a good or tall backup, and (b) we'd reach the double bonus with a lot of minutes remaining each half and rack up points for free (if we shoot 70% from the line, that's 20 percent higher than from the field) even on ticky tack fouls on other teams, or offensive fouls. In close games, this many times decides games especially in the final minutes - one team getting lots of free throws and the other team not.

Sure there might be some games we don't do that for certain reasons, but right now we almost never do that or even come close. 8 shots per game is tiny. Consider in this game he got just 7 shots but I think got to the line 7 times. If he got double the number of shots, we would have had even more FTs.

Besides the benefit of this, our offense runs great through Roy and we get more open outside looks. And the other benefits above.

[SFHoya99]

• So, err, how do you explain this?
  
  Roy Hibbert is taking a larger percentage of the team's shots while he is in than last year -- 25% to 23% -- and last year's team went to the Final Four. Just so you know.
  
  Using FGA per game is collosally pointless. First, you're ignoring every time Roy gets fouled, which Roy does at a pretty good rate. For example, he didn't take 7 shots against Pitt -- he took ten.
  
  Just so you know -- 14 FGA per game with Roy is probably 18 or so shots. A couple of those would probably due to offensive boards -- so call it 16 shots ending a possessions. We average 62 possessions per game and turn the ball over on 18% of those - call that 11 possessions. Roy's playing 61% of our minutes, so of those 53 possessions that end with a shot, Roy's in for 32 of them. So Roy is supposed to take the shot in 16 of the 32 possessions that end in a shot?
  
  Just trying to make sure what you are advocating. Because no player, ever, on any good team, has taken 50% of his team's shots. 40% is the absolute limit of a player, but none of those teams are very good. Kevin Durant was at 34% of his team's shots.
  
  
• I love Roy, but people need to get over his shooting % and get over the idea he's anywhere near the scorer a Kevin Durant was. Roy shoots so well because he limits himself. He waits for good position, rarely to never shoots over a double team and gets lots of dunks and easy baskets off offensive rebounding.
  
  Could Roy get more shots? Sure, but it isn't this huge gap like you are trying to put forward like he should be shooting 16 times a game. If he took a shot or two more he'd be over 30% of the shots. It's an adjustment at most, not this catstrophic fatal flaw like you are painting.
  
  
• I also don't get your argument at all that we're losing the open guys off Roy's double teams -- we had them all freaking game, we just missed the shots? So let me ask you also, do you want him shooting over the doubles or passing?
  
  
• I respond with this ranking again: even after collosally bad shooting, our offense is in the Top 10 in both raw and adjusted offense.
  
  
• Lastly, I guarantee the Hoyatalk board from January had a thousand posts saying we were overrated and had no shot to do well in the tourney. One of these years you might even be right.
  
  

[SFHoya99]

Jan 16, 2008 0:46:54 GMT -5 HoyaSpirit said:

SF - almost everything in the universe is complicated to some extent and this is as well. That said, the primary problem is getting Roy the ball. Sometimes it's not even a matter of the right time or not. Sometimes he's in the same spot posted up for 3 seconds straight with the guard looking at him and still doesn't pass it. Sure we'll still lose every now and again and will have other things needing fixing. But addressing the primary problem is key.

We're not great at entry passes. That's obvious. BUT sometimes I think people ignore that Roy, even at 7'2", isn't the easiest target. He can be fronted well because he isn't much of a jumper and quicker players -- like Blair -- force a decent amount of turnovers on entry passes.

Can we go down to Roy more? Sure. 14 FGA a game? No one wins with that lack of balance.

One other note. If we went to Roy every time down the court almost without fail, I bet we could (a) foul out the other team's center a large percentage of the time, at which point Roy would probably have a cakewalk - as most teams don't have a good or tall backup,

Roy draws a decent number of fouls, but I doubt this is true. More likely, they'd front him or double him and pressure the passer and half the time the pass wouldn't be open.

Also, like against Pitt, when the game gets rough, Roy isn't drawing the fouls at the same rate.

and (b) we'd reach the double bonus with a lot of minutes remaining each half and rack up points for free (if we shoot 70% from the line, that's 20 percent higher than from the field) even on ticky tack fouls on other teams, or offensive fouls. In close games, this many times decides games especially in the final minutes - one team getting lots of free throws and the other team not.

Again, same as above, plus, if this is true, why doesn't UCLA do this with Kevin Love (less % of shots than Roy), UNC with Tyler Hansbrough (YEP, less % of shots than Roy), Indiana with DJ White (less), Pitt with DeJuan Blair (less)... need I go on?

Balance is key. I agree we need to go to Roy a bit more. But Roy also needs to go up when he is single covered more. But it is HIM choosing not to shoot. III is not going to yell at him for shooting that shot.

Sure there might be some games we don't do that for certain reasons, but right now we almost never do that or even come close. 8 shots per game is tiny. Consider in this game he got just 7 shots but I think got to the line 7 times. If he got double the number of shots, we would have had even more FTs.

Your dependence on FGA per game is refuted above. Roy's ten shots in about 59 possessions -- of which Roy was in for about 45 of them and we committed turnovers in something like 9 more of those. So he took about 10 shots in 36 possessions. Not great, but over 25% (again, more than season averages for most of the above.

Plus, he had a couple of assists, right?

Besides the benefit of this, our offense runs great through Roy and we get more open outside looks. And the other benefits above.

Agree that giving Roy more touches would be beneficial. But Roy also has to get more aggressive because he passes up easy shots -- and that's HIS decision.

But 14 FGA per game is an unreasonable expectation for a team that plays as slow as we do with a player who doesn't play 40 minutes. No team ever wins with someone dominating their offense that much because it is too easy to take away and then your other players aren't ready to shoulder the load.

Getting Roy a few more shots a game and a few more touches is a more reasonable expectation.

[AvantGuardHoya]

SF,

Your post is too objective and analytical. And need I point out that quality is better than quantity. Impossible for them to coexist.

BTW, does anyone know if there’s a “self internal” variety of jealousy?

[sbgorms]

Amen. Just because a stupid person shouts the loudest doesn't make them smart.

[hoopsmccan]

When SF breaks out the bullet points, you know you are in for a world of hurt...

[hoyafoeva]

Jan 15, 2008 15:52:27 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

If I can summarize (and correct me if I am wrong hoyafoeva), it's a little bit of everything. It's not just inability to get Roy the ball at the right time. Although that is a problem, it's more complicated than that. It's a team game, and only a few of the guys were ready to play heads up ball on either end when the game started. Some adjusted, others did not. The coach said the team was flat - I would agree with that.

Of course, I agree with coach on that...but remember they still didn't play the right and I guess that flatness contributed to a lot of that or most. I agree with coach.

[hoyafoeva]

Jan 15, 2008 19:46:10 GMT -5 seaweed said:

The latest spew from 'foeva"
"I know why especially from last year. Last season folks though I was crazy when I said something "jealousy" last season, come to find out I wasn't the only one who knew, because Big John knew, and he stated after one of the games that was like this one, he said "this no time for equal opportunity basketball, give Roy the ball." Do you know what he meant by that? I do. I have been saying all along, and it doesnt take a genius to figure that out especially when you have played and coached."

First let me say I highly doubt your 2 years of Jr High ball qualifies you to say you've played.

Second, I don't think you read well. The above quote is not about 'jealousy' but about an offense designed to distribute scoring opportunities. JT and JT III might disagree on the virtue of getting different players different shots, but that does not entitle you to an opinion.

Third, get a life man! You are posting way too much in this thread, starting to make it look like it is all about you. Lay off the RedBull and get outdoors.

SEAWEED, LOL HAVE A NICE LIFE, OH BY THE WAY I HAVE A NICE LOVELY LIFE AND HAVE FUN WITH PEOPLE LIKE YOU!!! ;D

[hoyafoeva]

Jan 15, 2008 21:22:06 GMT -5 hoyarooter said:

I just want to ask hoyafoeva who eva is. ;D

Something you wouldn't understand, Mr. Perfect!


You're funny!

[hoyafoeva]

Jan 16, 2008 0:29:23 GMT -5 HoyaSpirit said:

Jan 15, 2008 11:25:40 GMT -5 hoyafoeva said:

Roy is in position in the post and everyone in America knows that now. He's not getting the ball enough consistently, bottom line.
I don't know what games some people are watching, but obviously its not the same game and Im sure some would agree.

My bad, I didn't read your last sentence, but you have to make up your mind. It has nothing do with being passive, it has everything to do with our guard play, and shooting too many darn 3'sssss and relying on those. You just can't do it, not us, we have too many bigs.

Very accurate. As long as we only give an All-American 7'2" center who is very strong offensively (shooting 60% this year and 65% last year) only an average of 8 shots a game, there is only a small chance of winning it all and we probably should be ranked around 11. Simple as that. Roy works very hard establishing position in the post - harder than probably 90% of centers and gets little reward - a paltry 8 shots per game. This is a coaching problem - Thompson needs to train the guards (both in practice and in games, including sitting guys a bit if needed) to get him the ball consistently until he has 12-16 shots per game - probably should average 14 shots a game. As long as he is not first or second in total shots (currently four other guys take more shots than him - meaning he's 5th), we have a very small chance of a championship and probably are not a top 5 squad.

Besides the fact we lose extra points each game by not having a 60-65% shooter get more shots, it means other guys get fewer open looks b/c when Roy gets the pass and the double, we get open looks, it also means fewer boards as Roy ends up out at the 3 line because he's ignored and can only get it out there.

It also means that instead of having an open guy, 4 on 3 when they double Roy, that when he comes out to 3, that we're not even 5 on 5 at that point, it becomes 4 on 5 because Roy's guy is way off him ready to help others. Now of course if Roy starts nailing more 3s, that could shift but most of the time our shooting % is hurt because running an offense 4 versus 5 means bad shots. Same thing when Macklin gets the ball out at 3. Not only a waste of time, but it hurts us. It becomes 4 versus 5.

The interesting thing is that I like a team whose potential is say only being #14 but plays to its potential and plays right - more than a team that could be top 5 but plays more like #12 and plays stupidly, which is why I haven't been that connected to this year's squad emotionally even though they're ranked high and even though with the 8 shots per game for the 7'2" all-american they should still be a top 15 team, possibly higher. My Dad used to scream when guys didn't pass the ball to someone working for position inside - particularly if the guy was good.

This could be fixed pretty easily. We'll see. i'm not optimistic - unless we lose a couple more games early on and they are somehow spurred to fix it. If not, they'll carry on doing ok, we'll be ranked between 6 and 15 and most likely lose in the 3rd or 4th round. If we somehow manage to stay hot from 3 for 6 straight games we win it all, but I put very low odds on it. I'll take a sweet 16 finish but to be honest, in the years where we have the talent to pull it all off, I'd like to have a good shot at doing it.

Yes indeed, tell em man, I told you there are more folks that knows whats going on. Go figure! ;D

[PopeJohn2]

Jan 15, 2008 11:48:12 GMT -5 hoyafoeva said:

I'm not worried about the loss because the Big East is the Big East and we were on the road, but those are the games you have to win in a hostile environment and we didnt and that hurts especially during conference play.

keep in mind pitt is depleted without fields and cook. we coulda shoulda beat a team like that even on the road if we expect to go far. i think it just shows how awesome freshman blair is. can u say nba?

[Coast2CoastHoya]

Interesting to note - reading through all the threads since Monday afternoon - that one of the major solutions offered to a variety of poster-perceived problems is the use of Vern as a 4, focusing on hitting boards.

I'd like to see whether Coach addresses this on Saturday or Monday. With Vern's height, passing ability, quickness, and post moves, he might also alleviate some of the interior pressure off Roy, and if he really does focus on rebounding, grabbing/putting it back the few times Roy misses.

The more I think about this strategy the more I like it.

[hoyafoeva]

Jan 16, 2008 0:46:54 GMT -5 HoyaSpirit said:

Jan 15, 2008 15:52:27 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

If I can summarize (and correct me if I am wrong hoyafoeva), it's a little bit of everything. It's not just inability to get Roy the ball at the right time. Although that is a problem, it's more complicated than that. It's a team game, and only a few of the guys were ready to play heads up ball on either end when the game started. Some adjusted, others did not. The coach said the team was flat - I would agree with that.

SF - almost everything in the universe is complicated to some extent and this is as well. That said, the primary problem is getting Roy the ball. Sometimes it's not even a matter of the right time or not. Sometimes he's in the same spot posted up for 3 seconds straight with the guard looking at him and still doesn't pass it. Sure we'll still lose every now and again and will have other things needing fixing. But addressing the primary problem is key.

One other note. If we went to Roy every time down the court almost without fail, I bet we could (a) foul out the other team's center a large percentage of the time, at which point Roy would probably have a cakewalk - as most teams don't have a good or tall backup, and (b) we'd reach the double bonus with a lot of minutes remaining each half and rack up points for free (if we shoot 70% from the line, that's 20 percent higher than from the field) even on ticky tack fouls on other teams, or offensive fouls. In close games, this many times decides games especially in the final minutes - one team getting lots of free throws and the other team not.

Sure there might be some games we don't do that for certain reasons, but right now we almost never do that or even come close. 8 shots per game is tiny. Consider in this game he got just 7 shots but I think got to the line 7 times. If he got double the number of shots, we would have had even more FTs.

Besides the benefit of this, our offense runs great through Roy and we get more open outside looks. And the other benefits above.

I, myself couldn't of put it better Spirit...Thank you sooo much, we needed this...

[PopeJohn2]

Jan 16, 2008 13:07:36 GMT -5 Coast2CoastHoya said:

Interesting to note - reading through all the threads since Monday afternoon - that one of the major solutions offered to a variety of poster-perceived problems is the use of Vern as a 4, focusing on hitting boards.

I'd like to see whether Coach addresses this on Saturday or Monday. With Vern's height, passing ability, quickness, and post moves, he might also alleviate some of the interior pressure off Roy, and if he really does focus on rebounding, grabbing/putting it back the few times Roy misses.

The more I think about this strategy the more I like it.

yes i think originally proposed by RDF. hes really athletic and it allows summers to play the 3 and freeman to play 2. im sure iii has thot of this so there must be some reason us neophytes dont know of as to why its not optimal maybe its lack of handle and macklins move is the hook? but why not give it a try against live competition.

[hoyaboy1]

Jan 16, 2008 13:07:36 GMT -5 Coast2CoastHoya said:

Interesting to note - reading through all the threads since Monday afternoon - that one of the major solutions offered to a variety of poster-perceived problems is the use of Vern as a 4, focusing on hitting boards.

Strange that a zero rebound performance would spur this.