royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,294
Member is Online
|
Post by royski on Mar 10, 2009 20:37:38 GMT -5
We are seeing and hearing a lot of negativity regarding the offense on this board. Some regards the offense in general, others attacks it for not playing to our player's strengths. So my question for the board is, what type of offense SHOULD we run? I'll briefly give my quick evaluations of our main player's offensive games, in order to help try to piece it together.
Chris Wright- Very fast point guard. Good ball handler. Streaky shooter. Some questionable decision making. Good penetration ability. Decent passer. Has some trouble with the press. Developing finisher.
Austin Freeman- Decent spot up shooter. Ok ball handler. Moves moderately well without the ball. Doesn't appear to have a great motor. Is a talented, but developing finisher. Is probably playing out of position at the 3. Has no post game at all to speak of.
DaJuan Summers- Good shooter. Willing to be a volume shooter. Seems to prefer the 3 point line to the midrange game. Probably out of position at the 4 given an extremely underdeveloped post game for a PF. Very poor at moving without the ball. Not a good ball handler. Not a good passer. Has some trouble with penetrating because of ball handling, but has potential to be a good finisher.
Jessie Sapp- Streaky shooter. Decent ball handler. Not a good finisher. No post game. Has shown good ability to move without the ball when motivated. Can occasionally take his man off the dribble for penetration. Solid passer.
Greg Monroe- Developing jumpshot. Good post moves, but lacks strength. No right hand. Excellent floor vision and passing. Seems to not want the ball in his hands in critical situations. Moves well without the ball. Has shown the ability to take an opposing center off the dribble from the top of the key to score or get to the line consistently.
Jason Clark- Developing ball handler. Decent, developing jump shot. Not much penetration ability at this point.
Nikita- Ok shooter. Poor driver. Poor post game. Good entry passer. Ok passer overall.
Sims- Developing big man. Flashes a jumper. No back to the basket center skills much displayed this season.
What sort of offense should we have run given our skill sets, if you don't believe the Princeton works for this team?
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Mar 10, 2009 20:43:19 GMT -5
Well I would argue with you on the fact that Austin and Jessie dont have post games...they both have posted up successfully before in our offense.
And a good offense that this team would run is one that not many teams run, its called the Princeton. Ever heard of it? Just make sure that DaJuan is the FINAL option and the last one to get the ball
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,294
Member is Online
|
Post by royski on Mar 10, 2009 20:45:32 GMT -5
Feel free to make your own evaluations of our player's games, those are just my untrained opinion. I'm more interested in what those who advocate a different offensive system would prefer, and why it would have worked better given the talent we have.
|
|
alleninxis
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,216
|
Post by alleninxis on Mar 10, 2009 20:48:40 GMT -5
I just want ball movement, moving without the ball WITH A PURPOSE, finding the open man. Taking the ball strong to the basket.
There's no need to change the offensive system or even think about it.
There is a need to change how we execute and play.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 10, 2009 20:54:31 GMT -5
It's not the system that makes an offense tick -- most of what college coaches run are well thought out and have advantages and disadvantages. If we moved to a pick and roll or Triangle or whatever, I'd be cool with that as well.
Execute. Play as a team.
Someone said it in another thread, but the fact that we don't make open shots is one of our biggest problems on offense.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,440
|
Post by lichoya68 on Mar 11, 2009 10:40:30 GMT -5
the game is won by scoring more points than the other team adn that means putting the ball in the basket inside and outside SO thats what we gottta practice get out htere and shoot shoot shoott gotta finish in games even greg the last few weeks not strong finishing inside PUT THE BALL IN THE BASKET PRACTICE SHOOTING NOT ONLY IF THE MANAGER MAKES YOU you can be VERY GOOD HOYAS NEXT YEAR but that is key go hoyas BEAT THE PATRIOTS
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 11, 2009 12:01:49 GMT -5
The best offense in basketball is letting the players play on instinct and go. When that isn't available--you then run your halfcourt stuff. Problem is--to execute on instinct--your players have to show the proper skill level to play in an open style and this team had too many flawed players to do that. Not enough ball handling, some awful passers, and last but not least, they played poor defense/didn't rebound well enough to get the ball and get out in open court.
Some of that is on coach--but most of it is on personnel. A coach adjusts to what he has-and in all honesty--this team was so dreadful passing, they had to milk the clock down and hoist--and focus on playing defense because they didn't possess enough skill to execute it or any other offense--unless it would've been telling 3 guys to stand and watch Monroe/Wright work a 2 man game and that is not easy when the other 3 aren't good enough shooters to prevent a zone defense from taking that away.
Only way this team is better next year-they have to improve in offseason and improve to point that they can bring teams out of a zone and then make them pay when they do by having multi-faceted players who can pass, take you off the dribble, and move off the ball.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 11, 2009 12:20:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bigtymehoya on Mar 11, 2009 15:55:17 GMT -5
I just want ball movement, moving without the ball WITH A PURPOSE, finding the open man. Taking the ball strong to the basket. There's no need to change the offensive system or even think about it. There is a need to change how we execute and play. This post I can definitely agree with. However, what makes any of us think we are going to be any better with Wright's continuous refusal to run the offense? Many of you love Wright, but I think this team probably would have been better with Wright running the 2 spot or if we had a different player that chose to play within the offense. This team had a hard time because many times, players were forced to just watch Wright play one-on-five ball, but wouldn't only pass when he got in trouble. This is what happened to Duke when JJ Redick played. In the past years, everyone would touch the ball and we would continue to work the clock down until we got a backdoor or an open shot. Why do you think John Wallace shot so well? You would never see him shoot with players in his face...he was not that type of player. Why do we think Sapp shot so well last year? He too bought into the system even though he is in the NYC dribble a lot point guard mold. Why do you think Ashanti Cook shot so well? (and his range was far better than Wright's) We used to pass the ball around until someone had an open shot. JT3 should have forced Wright to run the offense. I am tired of people claiming that Wright was the only one playing hard in these games. Wouldnt you all get frustrated if your point guard would not run the offense? If Clark was a better player and dribbler, I think we would have been way better off with him in the game along with Sapp in the backcourt. Our struggles are because we didn't run the offense. Last I checked, that was the job of the point guard! Put it like this: the Detroit Piston are playing extremely well this past week or two without Iverson because now they are able to run the same stuff they have been running for years. No one is going to say that Iverson cannot play basketball, but sometimes, some players just don't fit into some systems unless you force them to. Piston basketball should not be changed for any one player! Georgetown basketball is like Piston basketball: team ball and tough defense. Wright plays defense, but just doesn't believe in team ball (and passing the ball out when you are in trouble is NOT team ball). Why JT3 didn't sit Wright more often maybe can be attributed to the fact that Clark wasn't good enough or maybe he needed to make sure Wright was happy and came back for his Junior year? (I have my own theories.) However, one thing is for sure: our offense does NOT run better with the ball in the hands of a player that thinks "shoot first." Wright is a good player, just not fit for the Princeton Offense (unless JT3 forces him). And NO, there is no justification for starting Nikita--he is not a better player than Sead or Amadou, and those players didn't play either. Moreover, DaJuan CAN play basketball--we would not be better off without him. He has improved all of the past three years. This team probably will come back next year, but I am not so sure we will be better off even with another year of playing together (unless JT3 forces certain players to play Georgetown basketball). At least the core players will be Juniors and one Senior next year, so the coach won't have to worry about them transfering...
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,926
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 11, 2009 16:28:03 GMT -5
The offense is fine as long as the players buy into what we are doing. I still think the confidence thing undermined the entire offense this season. However, for JT3's offense or any offense to work you need multiple shooting threats on the floor (which we lack) or you need someone who can consistently score from the block (which we lack). If you have neither there is no offense that will help you. If you cannot spread the defense with shooting and are not physical enough to score inside, you will simply not succeed. You need one or the other, or you can have both and that usually makes you a Top 10 team.
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,294
Member is Online
|
Post by royski on Mar 11, 2009 16:33:41 GMT -5
I just want ball movement, moving without the ball WITH A PURPOSE, finding the open man. Taking the ball strong to the basket. There's no need to change the offensive system or even think about it. There is a need to change how we execute and play. This post I can definitely agree with. However, what makes any of us think we are going to be any better with Wright's continuous refusal to run the offense? Many of you love Wright, but I think this team probably would have been better with Wright running the 2 spot or if we had a different player that chose to play within the offense. This team had a hard time because many times, players were forced to just watch Wright play one-on-five ball, but wouldn't only pass when he got in trouble. This is what happened to Duke when JJ Redick played. This is NOT what happened to Duke when JJ Reddick played. Duke ran an entire motion offense around the principle of screening and picking all over the place to get Reddick an open shot, which he generally nailed. Duke was very very very good with Reddick and knew how to use him to help the team win, and that meant making a guy who couldn't really create his own shot a volume shooter somehow. In his 4 years there, Duke had 2 30 win seasons, 3 ACC titles, 3 Sweet 16s, and a Final Four. They never exactly came close to the NIT. Georgetown hasn't had a 4 year run that successful since the golden years of Ewing. EDIT: As for the rest of your post, Georgetown lost overall for the season (the opponent scored more than we did) when only two players were off the floor. When any others were off, we still outscored our opposition. Who are they? Greg Monroe and Chris Wright. I'd really like you to explain why we win with Wright on the floor (including in the BIG EAST) and lose when he's off it if you think he's the problem.
|
|
|
Post by bigtymehoya on Mar 11, 2009 18:12:08 GMT -5
This post I can definitely agree with. However, what makes any of us think we are going to be any better with Wright's continuous refusal to run the offense? Many of you love Wright, but I think this team probably would have been better with Wright running the 2 spot or if we had a different player that chose to play within the offense. This team had a hard time because many times, players were forced to just watch Wright play one-on-five ball, but wouldn't only pass when he got in trouble. This is what happened to Duke when JJ Redick played. This is NOT what happened to Duke when JJ Reddick played. Duke ran an entire motion offense around the principle of screening and picking all over the place to get Reddick an open shot, which he generally nailed. Duke was very very very good with Reddick and knew how to use him to help the team win, and that meant making a guy who couldn't really create his own shot a volume shooter somehow. In his 4 years there, Duke had 2 30 win seasons, 3 ACC titles, 3 Sweet 16s, and a Final Four. They never exactly came close to the NIT. Georgetown hasn't had a 4 year run that successful since the golden years of Ewing. EDIT: As for the rest of your post, Georgetown lost overall for the season (the opponent scored more than we did) when only two players were off the floor. When any others were off, we still outscored our opposition. Who are they? Greg Monroe and Chris Wright. I'd really like you to explain why we win with Wright on the floor (including in the BIG EAST) and lose when he's off it if you think he's the problem. This is what is wrong with people that just follow the numbers. We are a better team when we run the offense. Sure, our numbers may be up when Wright is in the game (I don't have the stats), however, there is also a lack of movement of the basketball, which means that no one else is able to establish a good rhythm. This would also explain why there appears to be a NEED to have him on the floor because the players essentially are not accustomed to running the offense (Wright averages 33+ minutes, I think). Just because Wright puts up points does not mean the team is playing better because the more he goes for his, the more it paralyzed the team when he was out the game. This IS what happened with JJ Reddick and Duke. Their coach coined the term "JJ watching" because the players would stand there and expect Reddick to do it all (which he was certainly capable of). Moreover, I never compared Gtown to Duke--I just made an analogy to a concept where seemingly good players sometimes don't play as well when there is one player that they expect to "do it all" for them. Again, why do you think the Pistons are playing better? For all of Iverson's ability to score, Piston basketball requires good ball movement and Iverson does not fit in well with the starting line-up. He is better suited for the bench group where he can do what he does best. My main point is that when you have a player that dominates the ball by taking bad shots or not moving the ball around unless he is in trouble, the rest of the team does not play to its capabilities. If Wright would run the offense, we would be REALLY good. I just don't think he is the type of patient PG this team needs. Again, I am not trying to knock him as a basketball necessarily. All of our players were stars at their respective high school programs. The difference is that they were willing to give a little for the better of the team. Wright is probably the only player that has not had to "give in." He plays Chris Wright basketball, which is fine--just not for our program.
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Mar 11, 2009 18:24:25 GMT -5
Don't really agree with many points in the player evaluation but won't waste my time picking them apart. Keep the Princeton O, bring in shooters. The offense is deadly when the outside shot is falling at even a moderate rate, it's a complete did when it's not though
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,294
Member is Online
|
Post by royski on Mar 11, 2009 18:33:29 GMT -5
This is NOT what happened to Duke when JJ Reddick played. Duke ran an entire motion offense around the principle of screening and picking all over the place to get Reddick an open shot, which he generally nailed. Duke was very very very good with Reddick and knew how to use him to help the team win, and that meant making a guy who couldn't really create his own shot a volume shooter somehow. In his 4 years there, Duke had 2 30 win seasons, 3 ACC titles, 3 Sweet 16s, and a Final Four. They never exactly came close to the NIT. Georgetown hasn't had a 4 year run that successful since the golden years of Ewing. EDIT: As for the rest of your post, Georgetown lost overall for the season (the opponent scored more than we did) when only two players were off the floor. When any others were off, we still outscored our opposition. Who are they? Greg Monroe and Chris Wright. I'd really like you to explain why we win with Wright on the floor (including in the BIG EAST) and lose when he's off it if you think he's the problem. This is what is wrong with people that just follow the numbers. We are a better team when we run the offense. Sure, our numbers may be up when Wright is in the game (I don't have the stats), however, there is also a lack of movement of the basketball, which means that no one else is able to establish a good rhythm. This would also explain why there appears to be a NEED to have him on the floor because the players essentially are not accustomed to running the offense (Wright averages 33+ minutes, I think). Just because Wright puts up points does not mean the team is playing better because the more he goes for his, the more it paralyzed the team when he was out the game. This IS what happened with JJ Reddick and Duke. Their coach coined the term "JJ watching" because the players would stand there and expect Reddick to do it all (which he was certainly capable of). Moreover, I never compared Gtown to Duke--I just made an analogy to a concept where seemingly good players sometimes don't play as well when there is one player that they expect to "do it all" for them. Again, why do you think the Pistons are playing better? For all of Iverson's ability to score, Piston basketball requires good ball movement and Iverson does not fit in well with the starting line-up. He is better suited for the bench group where he can do what he does best. My main point is that when you have a player that dominates the ball by taking bad shots or not moving the ball around unless he is in trouble, the rest of the team does not play to its capabilities. If Wright would run the offense, we would be REALLY good. I just don't think he is the type of patient PG this team needs. Again, I am not trying to knock him as a basketball necessarily. All of our players were stars at their respective high school programs. The difference is that they were willing to give a little for the better of the team. Wright is probably the only player that has not had to "give in." He plays Chris Wright basketball, which is fine--just not for our program. I think your misunderstanding the stat I used. It's the +/- stat. Wright doesn't just put up points. Georgetown was an average team in the Big East when he was on the floor, and a failure when he was off it. I don't think that's too bad from essentially a freshman point guard. I'll touch on Reddick briefly again. He took a lot of shots because he made a lot of shots. Who else on that team was supposed to shoot? Shelden Williams certainly got his touches. Outside of him, who really are we talking about here? You think Duke would've been a better team if JJ passed it off to Dockery and a young Paulus/McRoberts combo a little more? I don't think so. Also, I disagree with you about Wright moving the ball. I'm gonna throw out a few more "numbers" for you, so if you want to ignore them, feel free. But Chris Wright was the ONLY player on our team to have an assist rate over 20, according to Kenpom. Only Monroe was even above 15 for the team, at 19.2. But Chris was cruising along at 24.5, ranking 247th nationally. While not IDEAL, that is in line with the kind of passing expected from a standard, good starting point guard. In fact, it's the highest rate of any player for Georgetown in the JTIII era. A lot of that has to do with the fact that he has the ball in his hands and is expected to make plays. But it seems pretty clear that the problem with passing is far more due to the fact that nobody else on the team has any idea how to do it outside of Monroe, not that Chris isn't moving the ball enough. To recap by year... 2009: ARate 15-20: Greg Monroe, ARate 20+: Chris Wright 2008: ARate 15-20: Roy Hibbert, Jon Wallace, Patrick Ewing Jr., ARate 20+: Chris Wright, Jessie Sapp 2007: ARate 15-20: Jon Wallace, ARate: 20+: Jeff Green, Jessie Sapp 2006: ARate 15-20: Ashanti Cook, Darrel Owens, ARate 20+: Jon Wallace, Jeff Green. The problem isn't Chris Wright, it's that nobody else on the team has shown the ability to pass outside of Sapp and Monroe, and JTIII BADLY misused Jessie this season. There aren't enough good passers in general, and that's why the offense stagnates and why Chris sometimes has to force things. Unless his first pass is to Monroe, it's very unlikely that he's about to get a hockey assist. Given how our offense works, that's a serious serious serious problem.
|
|
|
Post by bigtymehoya on Mar 11, 2009 18:50:49 GMT -5
This is what is wrong with people that just follow the numbers. We are a better team when we run the offense. Sure, our numbers may be up when Wright is in the game (I don't have the stats), however, there is also a lack of movement of the basketball, which means that no one else is able to establish a good rhythm. This would also explain why there appears to be a NEED to have him on the floor because the players essentially are not accustomed to running the offense (Wright averages 33+ minutes, I think). Just because Wright puts up points does not mean the team is playing better because the more he goes for his, the more it paralyzed the team when he was out the game. This IS what happened with JJ Reddick and Duke. Their coach coined the term "JJ watching" because the players would stand there and expect Reddick to do it all (which he was certainly capable of). Moreover, I never compared Gtown to Duke--I just made an analogy to a concept where seemingly good players sometimes don't play as well when there is one player that they expect to "do it all" for them. Again, why do you think the Pistons are playing better? For all of Iverson's ability to score, Piston basketball requires good ball movement and Iverson does not fit in well with the starting line-up. He is better suited for the bench group where he can do what he does best. My main point is that when you have a player that dominates the ball by taking bad shots or not moving the ball around unless he is in trouble, the rest of the team does not play to its capabilities. If Wright would run the offense, we would be REALLY good. I just don't think he is the type of patient PG this team needs. Again, I am not trying to knock him as a basketball necessarily. All of our players were stars at their respective high school programs. The difference is that they were willing to give a little for the better of the team. Wright is probably the only player that has not had to "give in." He plays Chris Wright basketball, which is fine--just not for our program. I think your misunderstanding the stat I used. It's the +/- stat. Wright doesn't just put up points. Georgetown was an average team in the Big East when he was on the floor, and a failure when he was off it. I don't think that's too bad from essentially a freshman point guard. I'll touch on Reddick briefly again. He took a lot of shots because he made a lot of shots. Who else on that team was supposed to shoot? Shelden Williams certainly got his touches. Outside of him, who really are we talking about here? You think Duke would've been a better team if JJ passed it off to Dockery and a young Paulus/McRoberts combo a little more? I don't think so. Also, I disagree with you about Wright moving the ball. I'm gonna throw out a few more "numbers" for you, so if you want to ignore them, feel free. But Chris Wright was the ONLY player on our team to have an assist rate over 20, according to Kenpom. Only Monroe was even above 15 for the team, at 19.2. But Chris was cruising along at 24.5, ranking 247th nationally. While not IDEAL, that is in line with the kind of passing expected from a standard, good starting point guard. In fact, it's the highest rate of any player for Georgetown in the JTIII era. A lot of that has to do with the fact that he has the ball in his hands and is expected to make plays. But it seems pretty clear that the problem with passing is far more due to the fact that nobody else on the team has any idea how to do it outside of Monroe, not that Chris isn't moving the ball enough. To recap by year... 2009: ARate 15-20: Greg Monroe, ARate 20+: Chris Wright 2008: ARate 15-20: Roy Hibbert, Jon Wallace, Patrick Ewing Jr., ARate 20+: Chris Wright, Jessie Sapp 2007: ARate 15-20: Jon Wallace, ARate: 20+: Jeff Green, Jessie Sapp 2006: ARate 15-20: Ashanti Cook, Darrel Owens, ARate 20+: Jon Wallace, Jeff Green. The problem isn't Chris Wright, it's that nobody else on the team has shown the ability to pass outside of Sapp and Monroe, and JTIII BADLY misused Jessie this season. There aren't enough good passers in general, and that's why the offense stagnates and why Chris sometimes has to force things. Unless his first pass is to Monroe, it's very unlikely that he's about to get a hockey assist. Given how our offense works, that's a serious serious serious problem. I do know "numbers" and I know how the +/- works. I also know that if you have a player that dominates the ball, then he can affect his +/- as well. As for JJ Reddick, I simply mentioned that the rest of the players on that team did not play up to their abilities because they were simply "watching" him. Of course he should have taken all of those shots, but that doesn't mean the players couldnt have done more (e.g. set better screens and crash the boards some more, or even try to get open). Lastly, Jessie Sapp was not used properly at all. That was one of my larger points. It is not a shock that in those stats you put up only Greg and Monroe seem to outpace the rest. That is because the other players are not incorporated into the offense like in years past. You've succeeded in proving my point. Thanks for the "numbers."
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 11, 2009 19:22:22 GMT -5
Its the players, not the system so much. We can have all the ball movement we want but if we cant hit the 3 we are toast. Every freaking successful big east team has three point specialists.
Marquette -james , mcneil and matthews lousville-Knowles, smith and williams Notre Dame- mcalarney, ayers, jackson Syracuse- Devo, rautins
If were not going to recruit good 3 point shooters then we better have lock down D and guards that will pass to the post and feed twin tower sevenfoot beasts, and win games 60 -48.. Not the route id go........
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,294
Member is Online
|
Post by royski on Mar 11, 2009 20:13:21 GMT -5
I do know "numbers" and I know how the +/- works. I also know that if you have a player that dominates the ball, then he can affect his +/- as well. As for JJ Reddick, I simply mentioned that the rest of the players on that team did not play up to their abilities because they were simply "watching" him. Of course he should have taken all of those shots, but that doesn't mean the players couldnt have done more (e.g. set better screens and crash the boards some more, or even try to get open). Lastly, Jessie Sapp was not used properly at all. That was one of my larger points. It is not a shock that in those stats you put up only Greg and Monroe seem to outpace the rest. That is because the other players are not incorporated into the offense like in years past. You've succeeded in proving my point. Thanks for the "numbers." Oh, so if a player "dominates the ball", and when he's on the floor his team is better than the other team, then that's a problem...why? And it looks to me like Jessie Sapp might've been the only player on the team not used properly. NOBODY else on the team has ever shown that they are consistently good at putting their teammates in position to score. DaJuan's ARate has been below 12 all 3 seasons. He was marginally worse this season, dropping from 11.4 to 10.2, but that's pretty negligible. Austin Freeman's never hit the 15 mark. And everyone else is new. The problem isn't the players being "incorporated into the offense" by Chris Wright. The problem is that we lost 3 very solid passers in J-Wall, Roy and Ewing Jr, and only Monroe even began to pick up the slack. Add in that Jessie didn't look for the open man this year, and you'll see why there was a stagnant offense. We don't have the pieces to move the ball effectively and find open shots. And if a team in the Big East can't find open shots and knock them down, they lose. How this is Chris Wright's fault somehow, despite being the ONLY guy on the team that found teammates for open shots is beyond me. What season were you watching exactly? The kid led the team in assists, had the best A/TO ratio, had fewer turnovers than Monroe and Summers per game despite more minutes and shot over 48% from the field from the point guard spot. It's not like he recklessly drove into traffic every play disregarding his teammates and turned the ball over. As I said, the problem with the offense is a lack of passers OUTSIDE of Wright and Monroe, not a problem with Chris himself. Jeez, the kid was one of our top two players as basically a freshman. Give him the same break that everyone gives to Monroe.
|
|