GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Jan 4, 2009 0:38:16 GMT -5
Pitt's starters: 5'10, 6'3, 6'6, 6'7, 6'8 Georgetown Starters: 6'1, 6'3, 6'5, 6'8, 6'11 The problem is not height. I think that's fair, but, at the same time, our post guys play small. Monroe is a short 6'11" and is someone we'd probably want as a "point forward" - Jeff Green role - in ideal circumstances, where Blair is 6'8" but plays as if he is 6'11" due to wingspan and his approach to the game. Similarly, Dajuan is 6'8" - just like Blair - but he's a perimeter player and could be 6'6" like Sam Young and it would not make too much of a difference in his game IMO. So height may be a problem in that our guys don't use it to their advantage, for better or for worse. Height is objective. If you have it, it's not the problem. Using it to your advantage is not height's fault because height doesn't lie. It's the fault of the players.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jan 5, 2009 3:40:57 GMT -5
The same coach that is coaching this team coached the team two years ago that was one of the better rebounding teams in the country. I doubt that the problem is the coach (or at least the coaching techniques). Michael Dunigan would look very good on this team, but he opted for Nikeville.
Our rebounding has been abysmal in well more than half of the games we have played. It seems highly unlikely that this problem will be remedied this season. We are not an elite team this year because of this problem. I'm not saying this in a jumping off a bridge manner, merely stating what I see as fact. I fully expect us to still have an excellent season in the Big East, and we can do well in the Dance, but this team has no realistic shot at the final four unless things break our way in a remarkable manner (i.e., we don't face any really strong rebounding teams at all along the way).
|
|
OldHoyafan
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,387
|
Post by OldHoyafan on Jan 5, 2009 8:38:55 GMT -5
"Rebounding isn't a new issue for Georgetown. Thompson's teams have never been good rebounding squads. But the minor shortfall of the 2007 Final Four team that morphed into a routine weakness last season has devolved into a consistent, glaring flaw. " (Barker)
Always love Barker's analysis. This is a problem that will be a "glaring flaw" that will be there throughout the year. There is no Ewing Jr. to come off the bench and help give a physical presence in rebounding. Luckily the only teams left on schedule with the talent to match Pitt's size and offensive prowess are Syracuse and Louisville. The Hoya limited personnel makes them similar to the Nova teams of a few years ago when Sumpter was there, they will have to have at least 3 of starting five have big nights against the good teams to offset rebounding flaw.
|
|
|
Post by FromTheBeginning on Jan 5, 2009 9:31:37 GMT -5
7-28 shooting from our backcourt is never going to be good enough in this league - missed shoots = more rebounds (of which, on most nights, we won't get the majority) = more possessions for the opponent. When we hit shots we will win - or at least compete with anyone. When we shoot 25% from the guards - we probably are in real trouble.
This doesn't address the basic rebounding problem - but it makes it insurmountable.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 5, 2009 9:32:32 GMT -5
Totally agree with hoyarooter. This team is flawed but it will still be a fun and rewarding season. If we get some breaks, ala Davidson last year, who knows what can happen. The same qualities that make our players so dynamic and well-rounded unfortunately is the same thing that causes this lack of rebounding prowess.
If we play well against ND tonight I will feel better about overcoming this obstacle, but if ND outrebounds us by a wide margin, uh oh.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 5, 2009 15:32:17 GMT -5
Great post by CO on Hoya ProspectusThere's an interesting pattern CO has identified over the last two years that may bode better than expected. My point is simple in terms of potential solutions for this year: 1. Working harder. Very possibly will work somewhat but also seems a bit like wishcasting, doesn't it? 2. Playing Vaughn or Sims more with Monroe. It may generate more rebounding; it may not. The offense certainly won't function as well. Are we sure we want one of these guys getting 25 mintues? 3. Crash the boards. We're not fast breaking much anyway if we're not getting rebounds. Five guys on the defensive boards -- anyone breaks out for an easy bucket gets benched. The last one is my favorite.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Jan 5, 2009 15:42:15 GMT -5
That is a really good post by CO on Hoya Prospectus. I think that with our increased propensity for getting to the line this year coupled with our always high offensive efficiency, as long as we can achieve somewhere around a 50% rate for Total Reb.%, we should be in great shape. The trends over the past few years are indicative of improvement (hopefully from practice/experience), but I'd also like to see if the general BE competition has decreased as we moved through the conference schedule (it has always seemed to me during the past 2-3 years that we have started out with extremely difficult schedules which tend to ease up somewhat in February and early March).
Again, hate to beat a dead horse, but I just rewatched the Pitt game and saw Vaughn miss yet another board by having it stripped from him and off his leg out of bounds. The biggest thing III can do for him this year is to get him to latch on to the ball and CONTROL IT without being tied up or stripped. He is costing us 1-2 possessions/easy putbacks a game because of this. In a close game, that could be the difference.
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,991
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Jan 5, 2009 15:53:41 GMT -5
in regard to the lack of rebounding, i think the biggest culprit on our team is summers. the guards and freeman rebound pretty well, but summers should be much better. he rebounded well in spurts last year, but i thought he's be much more consistent this year. his rebounds are down 1+ per game from last year. he has to realize he IS the power forward and start getting that 6'8" 240 body on the boards.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 5, 2009 16:30:34 GMT -5
All five guys crash the boards- OF COURSE. Every Hoya should be going to the defensive boards on every shot by our opponents. And I agree with SF- those who don't comply should sit next to III for a while.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 5, 2009 16:32:17 GMT -5
Summers has been much worse than last year.
The other main culprit is Monroe versus Hibbert. Monroe is great, but he's not a good rebounder yet.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jan 5, 2009 16:33:02 GMT -5
Is it just me or do none of our shooters follow their shots? Omar always looks like he's MJ and just put up a game-winner, but even Freeman against Pitt started making his way back when his three's clanged off the iron. Is that a valid strategy as some of my friends have asserted? Or is it just a bad habit on the part of our players, as I assert?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 5, 2009 16:36:32 GMT -5
Is it just me or do none of our shooters follow their shots? Omar always looks like he's MJ and just put up a game-winner, but even Freeman against Pitt started making his way back when his three's clanged off the iron. Is that a valid strategy as some of my friends have asserted? Or is it just a bad habit on the part of our players, as I assert? I don't mind that so much because at least they are back on D to avoid transition points for the other team. But when we're on defense, you're just cherry picking.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 5, 2009 16:57:41 GMT -5
I disagree with those who think this is an unfixable problem, because its really not. I have absolutly no confidence that this team WILL fix it, becauce its been the same problem for over a year, but they certainly can. JTIII said it himself, its more about the guys just going in and getting the ball, which they aren't doing. And if they are doing it they aren't doing it correctly, the second a shot goes up you need to turn and box the player clossest to you, then go get it. We either go get the ball without boxing, which causes the opponent the ability to do the same so they get their rebounds. Or we box the other team out, but don't go for the ball and the other team just goes over us, like with Memphis. The main problem we always seem to have is that we almost never box out the shooter, especially when he is within 2 or 3 feet of the basket. The shooter is the most dangorous offensive rebounder because they usually know exactly where their shot is going. Instead of turning and boxing right after they release, we turn and watch the ball, allowing the shooter to go wherever they want. Against Pitt we didn't even do that much, we looked like we just assumed the ball was going in every time they shot it, and barely even moved. There are plenty of drills that you can do to reinforce the basic rebounding principals that we seem to have forgotten, but most highschool coaches don't even use them because they are so basic they seem as if they would be useless, so I don't think we would ever use them either. Because of the things many here have mentioned we will never be a great rebounding team and it will never be our strength, BUT we every team every team can be atleast a decent rebounding team if they just turn and box then go for the ball, which we almost never do!
|
|