|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 11, 2009 16:08:25 GMT -5
To me this thread has the most interesting and insightful posts of any I've seen on our situation and year. Thanks to all for contributing. I'd like to throw in something else I have not seen mentioned. At the beginning of the year when we were on our way to a great year, the only person on the team that was receiving accolades in the press (and on this board) was Monroe. Is it possible the rest of the team got upset at that and it influenced how they and Monroe played after that? I think this is a critical point. Greg could not or would not assert himself as a leader, whether because he is a freshman or just because it is not his style, can't say. Others may well have wanted to try to assert themselves instead, whether or not they were capable of it or ready for it. Something definitely was just not right. Hopefully the offseason and another year of maturity will help resolve this.
|
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,762
|
Post by blueandgray on Mar 11, 2009 17:02:41 GMT -5
Playing the inexperience card at this point in the season is completely bogus. St. Johns is less experienced than we are, by the way. I don't think you quite understand the "inexperience card" We didn't lose this game because of of our inexpierence, we put ourselves in position to lose this game because of it. Our inexpirience is the reason we lost all confidence 6 weeks ago. Our inexpirience is the reason we tighten up with ten minutes left to go in the game. Also, just because other teams are young inexperienced, doesn't change our team. Every team is different, and in a different position. Young teams are extrememly dangerous when they have momentum and confidence. Our inexperience would be an advantage if we had either of those coming into today. Young teams get better with every win and worse with every loss. If we had played Rutgers, Depaul or St Johns between Uconn and Pitt or sometime before our collapse, I honestly think this season would be competely different, because we would have had something to fall back on after a few tough losses. Great post Gigafan... i do hope someone gets your take to the coaching staff. Sleepy, i agree that youth and inexperience is part of the problem, but that answer alone doesn't come close to addressing all the issues. Everyone seems to be pinning our problems on inexperience... but at this point too much is being made of it. Let's face it... Austin has started 60 plus games by now, and inexperience simply does not apply to Jessie and Dajuan. I think there is a lot of truth to this "positionless players that all do the samething" analysis... and I'd add that its difficult for a true leader to emerge in that environment.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 11, 2009 21:51:24 GMT -5
I don't think you quite understand the "inexperience card" We didn't lose this game because of of our inexpierence, we put ourselves in position to lose this game because of it. Our inexpirience is the reason we lost all confidence 6 weeks ago. Our inexpirience is the reason we tighten up with ten minutes left to go in the game. Also, just because other teams are young inexperienced, doesn't change our team. Every team is different, and in a different position. Young teams are extrememly dangerous when they have momentum and confidence. Our inexperience would be an advantage if we had either of those coming into today. Young teams get better with every win and worse with every loss. If we had played Rutgers, Depaul or St Johns between Uconn and Pitt or sometime before our collapse, I honestly think this season would be competely different, because we would have had something to fall back on after a few tough losses. Great post Gigafan... i do hope someone gets your take to the coaching staff. Sleepy, i agree that youth and inexperience is part of the problem, but that answer alone doesn't come close to addressing all the issues. Everyone seems to be pinning our problems on inexperience... but at this point too much is being made of it. Let's face it... Austin has started 60 plus games by now, and inexperience simply does not apply to Jessie and Dajuan. I think there is a lot of truth to this "positionless players that all do the samething" analysis... and I'd add that its difficult for a true leader to emerge in that environment. [/quote I never said it was the cause for all of our problems. But to simply shrug it off and say its a dumb excuse and other teams we play are just as inexpeirenced is just as foolish as believing expierence is our only problem. Personally I think that a more expierienced team would have overcome some of the obstacles that trampled this years team. And some of our other flaws were compounded by our inexpierence. Also, I am not sure I quite buy the whole "positionless players" point. Everyone on this team has a position, or atleast comparitively to past JTIII teams, one of the problems is they are playing out of that position. We have a point guard thats a slasher and driver and is a good passer(Chris Wright, for those who were confused). We have a shooting guard, that drive and can shoot(hopefully will spend the offseason working on that). Summers is a SF, once he improves his handle, Monroe is a power forward. We need a center, or atleast someone who can fill in at center, which Sims could do in a year or two with a lot of added muscle. When comparing this roster with past years the only real difference is the center position that we are lacking. To make up for it a little bit though, we do have a pointguard atleast. Last year we somehow managed to win the Big East with 4 positionless players in the starting line-up, so right now I am just not buying this arguement. Or the fact that our positionless players somehow managed to be a very good team up until halftime of the Duke game. IMO, the collapse was internal, whether it be mental or chemistry, or a combination of both and something than no one externally (meaning us outsiders of the team) will ever be able to diagnose. I also agree with those that said the teams outside shooting really hurt this year. Outside shooting is something that can be fixed and is usually improved upon in the offseason. For instance from his sophomore and junior years or freshman to sophomore I can't remember, Sapp went from a 20 something % shooter to 30 something %. Summers last year to this year made a huge jump in 3 point %. Wrights shooting improved as the year went on. Freeman, Clark, and Wright can all really improve over the offseason, especially since shooting is 90% mental and 10% mechanics. Hopefully Hollis Thompson will really help this problem too. In a way shooting is the least of our problems, as it is one of the most easily corrrectable. Re: post play, I think that point about us sacrificing the low post play of the Princeton offense in order for us to be really good at the high-post offense is valid. We didn't run any plays from below the foul line and usually we have a few. The fact that we only have one low post threat shouldn't change that because last year we only had one and we still ran them.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 11, 2009 23:47:06 GMT -5
To follow on sleepy's point:
2007
O rebounding 8 D rebounding 191 Average 100
2008
O rebounding 132 D rebounding 157 Average 145
2009
O rebounding 152 D rebounding 297 Average 225
Those are our rankings the last 3 years. Coincidentally we started a center and a power forward two years ago, a center and a small forward last year, and a power forward and a small forward this year.
We're atrocious on the glass. And our complete lack of a post presence kills our boards which in turn makes it harder to win the possession battle, which in turn makes us lose games.
And without a center this year our 4 returning three-point shooters (Wright, Sapp, Summers, and Freeman) dropped from 39% to 35%. Inside + out - inside = OUT (as in of the BET and the NCAAs).
Let's get a post player this offseason. I'd like to think we can turn one of our guys into one, but since we have a ton of open slots on this roster, get a JuCo to be sure.
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,295
|
Post by royski on Mar 11, 2009 23:54:41 GMT -5
This is an actual question: are there really JuCo's just sitting out there that have the academics and the ability to start for the Hoya's and be a legitimate low post scoring threat one on one from day one, against the Big East? If there are, why don't we ever see them?
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 12, 2009 0:10:15 GMT -5
To follow on sleepy's point: 2007 O rebounding 8 D rebounding 191 Average 100 2008 O rebounding 132 D rebounding 157 Average 145 2009 O rebounding 152 D rebounding 297 Average 225 Those are our rankings the last 3 years. Coincidentally we started a center and a power forward two years ago, a center and a small forward last year, and a power forward and a small forward this year. We're atrocious on the glass. And our complete lack of a post presence kills our boards which in turn makes it harder to win the possession battle, which in turn makes us lose games. And without a center this year our 4 returning three-point shooters (Wright, Sapp, Summers, and Freeman) dropped from 39% to 35%. Inside + out - inside = OUT (as in of the BET and the NCAAs). Let's get a post player this offseason. I'd like to think we can turn one of our guys into one, but since we have a ton of open slots on this roster, get a JuCo to be sure. Its valid that our lack of a post presense hurt our outside shooting, but I don't think it played as big a deal it as your post would lead you to believe. We got a ton of open outside shots, we just didn't knock them down. Also you can counteract the lack of another post presence with penetration that we didn't have the year before, which we did nicely this year, well in the begginning at least, which is why we still got good looks. Also re:rebounding, we seem to rebound much better with a line-up of Sims, Summers, Monroe out there. Rebounding is all about heart, and positioning, not players playing in the right position. Villanova and Marquette both have less post threats that we do yet some how they are both better rebounding teams than us.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 12, 2009 0:26:01 GMT -5
Also re:rebounding, we seem to rebound much better with a line-up of Sims, Summers, Monroe out there. Rebounding is all about heart, and positioning, not players playing in the right position. Ding, ding, ding. A lineup of Sims, Summers, and Monroe IS as close as we could get to a lineup with players in the right positions. That's why it's better. Yeah we could be a smaller athletic team that crashes the glass. But it's not ALL about heart. And even if it were, I'd like a backup plan to relying on Austin and Dajuan getting a passion for boards.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 12, 2009 0:52:23 GMT -5
Also re:rebounding, we seem to rebound much better with a line-up of Sims, Summers, Monroe out there. Rebounding is all about heart, and positioning, not players playing in the right position. Ding, ding, ding. A lineup of Sims, Summers, and Monroe IS as close as we could get to a lineup with players in the right positions. That's why it's better. Yeah we could be a smaller athletic team that crashes the glass. But it's not ALL about heart. And even if it were, I'd like a backup plan to relying on Austin and Dajuan getting a passion for boards. Wasn't Summers our leading rebounder last year? I don't know why everyone forgets that. He obviously can and has rebounded better than what he does now, I think he just needs to focus on it some more. Also, I am not sure how adding ANY new player would put us with a better line-up position wise than Sims, Summer, and Monroe. If Sim's can add a lot more muscle and develop a few back to the basket moves during the offseason, that seems like almost our ideal froncourt. I mean, sure maybe if we found a Dejuan Blair or Hansborough lying around somewhere, we could have the perfect team, but thats not happening. I think instead of focusing on what we "need" we should focus on what we have. Honestly, I think we have all the pieces to become a very good team, heck we were a very good team up until late January. Do I think we need to improve? Oh yes, but do we need to give-up with this group and completely start from scratch like many here have suggested?(not neccissarily you Giga, but many others) Definitely, definitely not. I think this is a case where we need to make some adjustments and changes in some areas, but stick with it and stick together in others.
|
|
pws
Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by pws on Mar 12, 2009 1:44:37 GMT -5
Does anyone think our inability to break a press has an adverse impact on the functioning of our offense? It seems like once we get the ball over half-court, we are struggling to get set until there are 18-20 seconds left on the shot clock.....not much time to probe for the best shot, or set up a backdoor play.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 12, 2009 6:45:26 GMT -5
Ding, ding, ding. A lineup of Sims, Summers, and Monroe IS as close as we could get to a lineup with players in the right positions. That's why it's better. Yeah we could be a smaller athletic team that crashes the glass. But it's not ALL about heart. And even if it were, I'd like a backup plan to relying on Austin and Dajuan getting a passion for boards. Wasn't Summers our leading rebounder last year? I don't know why everyone forgets that. He obviously can and has rebounded better than what he does now, I think he just needs to focus on it some more. Also, I am not sure how adding ANY new player would put us with a better line-up position wise than Sims, Summer, and Monroe. If Sim's can add a lot more muscle and develop a few back to the basket moves during the offseason, that seems like almost our ideal froncourt. I mean, sure maybe if we found a Dejuan Blair or Hansborough lying around somewhere, we could have the perfect team, but thats not happening. I think instead of focusing on what we "need" we should focus on what we have. Honestly, I think we have all the pieces to become a very good team, heck we were a very good team up until late January. Do I think we need to improve? Oh yes, but do we need to give-up with this group and completely start from scratch like many here have suggested?(not neccissarily you Giga, but many others) Definitely, definitely not. I think this is a case where we need to make some adjustments and changes in some areas, but stick with it and stick together in others. We don't have to give up one anyone but to respond to you and royski, what's the hurt in looking for a JuCo big body? We have the spots; that's clear. If we don't get an offensive ready Big East starter (best case) even the other end of the spectrum which would be a big guy to kick the crap out of our front line guys in practice, helps immensely in preparation.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Mar 12, 2009 8:33:11 GMT -5
I don’t buy the “positionless players” theory because a lot of it can be explained by inexperience. As an example, people on this board (and around the country) throw around DeJaun Blair as an example of a great player… but honestly, how many people feared playing him last year when he was initially perceived as just an overweight freshman? Sure he was decent but he wasn’t the god-like figure he is today, just a year later. A year can make a huge difference in a player and a team and a lot of our problems due to “positionlessness” (to coin a word), will probably disappear next season as guys more fully understand their roles and gain confidence that they and the team can succeed in them.
The reasons for the bad performance this season are many, but they are simple:
- Inexperience/immaturity - Bad outside shooting - Bad rebounding - Killer schedule - Empty scholarship slots
The ingredients are there right now for a good team, maybe not a national title threat but a good solid team. With another year under their belts and a couple of new faces to increase our bench strength we should be fine next year.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 12, 2009 10:50:21 GMT -5
Esherick was an awful coach, but like then, I do think the anti-Esherick sentiment was way overboard. He was a poor game coach. Few players developed under him. He didn't really seem to have to have a strategy (perhaps why his in game tactics were so poor). He couldn't recruit with the big boys. That said, Esherick actually was pretty good at spotting the diamonds in the rough. He spotted a bunch of guys early who blew up too big for him to compete. He grabbed quite a few underrated guys. He just couldn't keep them or get the most out of them. I don't think he's anywhere near III in terms of coaching, but he could identify talent. Not that this is really at the core of the discussion in this thread, but I wanted to react to this to clear up what I consider to be a frequent misunderstanding (though I'm not suggesting SF's post is guilty of this): I think there's a fair line to draw between people who actually despised Craig Esherick himself and directed serious venom at him, and people who were appalled at the idea repeatedly advocated by many that replacing him as head coach would be a bad idea and that Georgetown was where it was because of an arena problem and a lack of facilities (or any of a zillion other proffered excuses) and that no head coaching change would have any impact on that. To me, it wasn't that Esherick had zero positives so much as it was abundantly clear that his negatives dramatically outweighed those positives and that the program was going nowhere under his stewardship; it was therefore astonishing to me that some people apparently believed that Esh was doing the best job anyone could under the circumstances. Considering that within 3 years of making a change the Hoyas were in the Final Four for the first time in 23 years, I'd say history has proven that those people were very, very wrong.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Mar 12, 2009 21:31:20 GMT -5
Enough about JuCo players. I'm not aware of a single school with Georgetown's academic reputation who plays that game (I could be missing something). And, as much as I love Hoya basketball, our academic reputation is far more important.
Do we have reason to think that Henry can bulk up significantly? He seems to have a very slender frame.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,783
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 12, 2009 21:35:00 GMT -5
Yes, Jerome Williams is a horrible representative of our school.
How about the coaching staff evaluates every person on their personal merits, instead of making blanket statements about anyone?
Henry can bulk up a little, but more importantly, Henry just needs to be on the court.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Mar 12, 2009 23:21:26 GMT -5
Yes, Jerome Williams is a horrible representative of our school. Yeah, and a guy like Matt Causey would have been totally unqualified for Georgetown by that standard.... Screw the JUCOs and their shadiness.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,783
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 13, 2009 10:59:32 GMT -5
Huh?
You're not recruiting a school, you're extending an offer to a kid.
|
|
joey0403p
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,586
|
Post by joey0403p on Mar 13, 2009 12:50:11 GMT -5
I must be totally lost...we had open scholarship slots this year?
I was under the impression that we would lose sapp this year and hollis would take his place (all else staying the same). We have an open slot for next year?
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,295
|
Post by royski on Mar 13, 2009 12:54:34 GMT -5
I must be totally lost...we had open scholarship slots this year? I was under the impression that we would lose sapp this year and hollis would take his place (all else staying the same). We have an open slot for next year? We didn't come close to using all of our scholarships this season. Macklin and Rivers transferred, and weren't replaced by new recruits.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Mar 13, 2009 22:13:25 GMT -5
I thought we recruited Causey as a freshman - am I remembering wrong? I *was* a big Jerome Williams fan, though.
I don't have a problem with a JuCo guy if there is some reason other than character or academics why he isn't in a 4-year school. I do want Georgetown to have better-than-average students, compared to what other schools have, and I don't want to compromise that to "grab a big body" for our basketball team.
I don't disagree about Henry's potential. I was just responding to several comments in various threads that were premised on his adding some bulk and muscle in the offseason. I'm not sure that's realistic, but he has good potential regardless.
|
|