skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Post by skyhoya on Jun 7, 2010 19:10:00 GMT -5
Hollis is 6' 8", he will spend more time at the 4 than at the 3. Jason is too good not to get 35 minutes a game.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jun 7, 2010 20:07:24 GMT -5
Summers was 6'(" yet he played the majority of his time at the 3 his freshman year, which also happened to be our best year under JTIII. Now you may end up being right, but it's certianly not ideal.
I also disagree with the notion that jason is too good not to get 35 minutes a game. I'd think of it as our bench is going to be too good for anyone to have to be playing 35 minutes a game anymore. At least that's what i'm hoping for.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,136
|
Post by RBHoya on Jun 7, 2010 21:01:26 GMT -5
Summers was 6'(" yet he played the majority of his time at the 3 his freshman year, which also happened to be our best year under JTIII. Now you may end up being right, but it's certianly not ideal. I think that was our best year under JTIII mostly because of the 2 guys playing next to Summers in the front court. Unfortunately we do not have a Green OR a Hibbert on this years team. Or even a Ewing. Definitely agree it's not ideal, but I think it'll be a necessity at times, unless we see significant improvement from Henry and/or JB. Speaking of, JB I think he's a little underestimated. He did fine in his minutes last year, only problem was that he had no offense of his own, despite the fact that he was left open for jumpers all the time. Supposedly he's a gym rat, so hopefully he's getting a ton of jumpers up this summer. If he gets the confidence to take and knock down that shot, he should be fine to play 20 mpg, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by gojeffgoroyunder7 on Jun 7, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
wholeheartedly disagree RB. We think JB did well sometimes because the kid had zero expectations. He played one or two good games (gave us good minutes against an undersized butler team), but I will remember JB constantly falling on the floor (not because he is diving for the ball---because he can't seem to stay on his feet) and us having to play 4-on -5 when we were on offense because teams picked up on the fact that he can't shoot. IF nate is who we think he is, JB will not be seeing a ton of time (definitely no more than last year). Jerrelle just tries--which is great--but he isnt that good at basketball when we are talking BIG EAST standards. I don't know if he is a good kid or not, but I do know that overall he didn't show much last year. Vee and Hollis were our 2 best freshmen.
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Jun 7, 2010 21:34:19 GMT -5
Hollis can not guard opposing 4s. I don't care how tall he is, it's just not in his skill set to guard 4s in the Big East. If he sees any sort of significant amount of time at the 4, our defense and rebounding will be awful.
As for JB, I will just say that it is very rare for players to learn how to shoot once they get to the college level. Who is the last guy you can remember who was a terrible shooter and became a good shooter while in college? It may happen every once in a long while, but it is rare.
I'm not saying that he shouldn't practice shooting this off-season, but just taking lots of shots does not improve your shot. Practicing with the wrong form doesn't help. Remember when Jeremiah Rivers was taking tons of shots over the summer after his freshman season? I believe his dad had hired somebody as well to help him with it. Well, it didn't help. He's just not a good shooter.
You can refine a good shot in college... maybe learn to get your shot off quicker, etc... but college is not the time to learn how to shoot. If you are not a good shooter already, you are in trouble.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,136
|
Post by RBHoya on Jun 7, 2010 22:14:08 GMT -5
When people at first realized that JB didn't suck, all of a sudden everybody was on his bandwagon, trying to give him nicknames etc. That was kind of a silly time. As the season went on people realized that he was basically just a stopgap, who III was playing because we needed SOMEBODY to be a third big man, and JB (who was a net 0) was better than Henry (who was a net negative).
Still, I'll take a net 0 up front. Play ok defense, grab a few rebounds, don't screw up. Last year JB had what felt like dozens of open looks from about 15 feet, and after missing a few early on, he got totally gunshy and stopped even looking to shoot. If he can add that jumper to his repertoire to the point where he's at least a threat on O and people have to guard him, he'll be ok. Sometimes there is something to be said for a guy who knows his role and doesn't screw things up. Particularly given the other alternatives, that kind of a guy may be welcomed. And since we've got a lot of talent at the 1-3 spots, who will be the primary sources of our scoring, we can live with a guy who is not an offensive dynamo but who just fills a role and doesn't make mistakes.
I am not quite as high on Nate as some, as far as "who we think he is". Think he could be an important piece by year end, but not expecting him to make a very big impact early, especially as he learns the flow of the offense. Typically only elite talents get big minutes early on as freshman under III--your Monroes, your Freemans, your Summers... Don't think Nate is quite on that level, and so I think he may see somewhat limited minutes early.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jun 7, 2010 22:31:52 GMT -5
Who the hell could argue the best team III put on a court was the '07 team? One of the reasons why--the versatility and SIZE of the frontline--throwing Roy, Jeff, Dajuan, Pat, and Macklin was the spot minutes guy upfront--but that is a BIG team upfront. Guards were big as well--with Sapp/Rivers and then Wallace.
The 2nd best team III had was the '06 team--another big team--full of versatile size.
Then '08 was his 3rd best team--which won on defense most of year--but also had size upfront to give a pretty record-but think the '06 team was playing better ball down stretch and fact they played well in NCAA's gives them edge in best teams debate.
Since '08-we've seen "small ball" and it's been a complete FLOP. Offensively last year it was effective--but defensively--it's stunk, sucked, blown, whatever negative adjective your prefer---but it needs to change. If Hollis is playing the PF spot--this team will struggle and be on bubble.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jun 8, 2010 0:07:40 GMT -5
Usually I disagree with the doomsday "If X, then we're terrible" predictions, but I do have to say that I think Hollis at the PF is a disaster. And I think it would also be a clear sign that something went wrong this off season/recruiting season. JV should be able to play 30 a game. Henry should be able to product SOMETHING. And Nate and Jerrelle should be factors. (Honestly, I think the X factor for this team next year is Nate.) I'm not saying Hollis can't play a few minutes a game at the 4, but if he's our everyday or our starting PF, that's not good, especially when we're already likely looking at a 3 guard lineup (I don't see Chris, Austin or JC not starting).
|
|
hoyaalf
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
I like what your doing very much. Why squirrel hate me?
Posts: 688
|
Post by hoyaalf on Jun 8, 2010 1:05:34 GMT -5
Out of left field say I this. If you trust Coach, trust him. If you don't, don't. Criticize away but don't put too much on the kids. If you trust Coach, here's something really goofy to think about. There has been named a Senior Bench Captain, initials RD. I suspect it will be he who very much helps make the notions of team, and meshing, and sacrifice clear to all the benchies. Let's not get too frothy yet. Is it five months 'til practice begins? A young man can learn a lot and grow in five months.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,427
|
Post by MCIGuy on Jun 8, 2010 1:55:19 GMT -5
Hollis is 6' 8", he will spend more time at the 4 than at the 3. Jason is too good not to get 35 minutes a game. I love Jason but I don't even think its a good idea to give Austin or Chris that many minutes per. Did Sleepy average 35 minutes? What about Charles or Michael Jackson or Mark Tillman?
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Post by skyhoya on Jun 8, 2010 5:46:04 GMT -5
Love the discussion. The bench will as always have to prove itself. I haven't seen III go to the bench very deep, because he plays his best players the most minutes. The only reason I am suggesting HT at the 4, is that we don't have anyone proven yet at the 4. Perhaps Nate will be as good as we wish he is, but III doesn't play freshmen that much, when he has other capable players who understand his system.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Jun 8, 2010 6:59:10 GMT -5
Small ball works if you have great guards.
Problem is we don't have great guards.
our previous big teams consisted of NBA players in the frontline (summers, Green, and Hibbert) and a borderline NBA player in Ewing, Jr.
when you have that quality of player, NBA talent on your roster, it helps no matter the scheme or size of the players.
what we are seeing now is that outside of Greg, who is/was NBA material on our roster?
when have some good college players, but NBA-level type guys? Not quite.
i think that is the primary difference in the reason why we were successful in the past and not now.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Jun 8, 2010 9:33:52 GMT -5
disagree vehemently.....we have two of the bestguards that III has had......and both are great college guards...there's a reason why we will have one of the three best backcourts in the nation this season....Chris and Austin are both NBA players. that being said, I agree that Hollis should never play the four under any circumstance..anyone who thinks Hollis is better off at power forward just doesn't know very much about basketball.
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Post by skyhoya on Jun 8, 2010 9:48:39 GMT -5
I didn't say Hollis was a better off as a four, he's a three, but he won't get PT there. III played him at the four last year towards the end of the season when JV couldn't play and JB was too clumsy. Can HT play defense at the four, seriously no! I just don't see JC getting much bench time. III always plays his best players, one way or another.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,373
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 9, 2010 10:57:24 GMT -5
Joining the discussion late:
Starting five: Chris, Clark, Austin, JV and Henry. Within three minutes: Hollis comes in. By March: Nate will be starting and JT3 will be shuffling players in and out to confuse and tire opponents a la JT2. We have too much of a bench not to do it.
|
|
|
Post by gtowndynasty on Jun 9, 2010 11:24:10 GMT -5
Hollis is 6' 8", he will spend more time at the 4 than at the 3. Jason is too good not to get 35 minutes a game. WTH!!!! If Jason is too good not to get 35 mpg, then what will Chris and Austin merit by your standard, because they are better than Jason and that is not even debatable! Thus if Jason is getting that time, that means the bench is not playing at all, which would definitely lead to disaster. We have depth now, moreso than we have ever had, so JC wont be seeing 35mpg. And Hollis most certainly wont be at the 4 too long. While Ill concede he will be amongst the 5 most experienced initially, the goal has to be to get Nate/Moses up to speed so that they can absorb those minutes because as others have said, HT is not a 4, nor can he guard the 4. In all honesty, he is a 3 but he is closer to a 2 than he is a 4...
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jun 9, 2010 12:11:39 GMT -5
This is going to be a year long debate as to what generates the best team: the best five players or the more traditional lineup.
As of this moment, that's either an incredibly small lineup (Clark, Wright, Freeman, Thompson, Vaughn) or an inexperienced one (say, Wright, Freeman, Thompson, Sims/Lubick, Vaughn) that puts Jason Clark on the bench and relegates the other guards (Sanford and Starks) to minimal minutes this year.
Until Sims, Abraham and Lubick show what they can do, the discussion is nice to have but can hardly be anywhere near definitive.
|
|
|
Post by thehandicapper on Jun 9, 2010 15:42:23 GMT -5
News flash fellas: Jason Clark is the 3rd best player on the team, period.
I find it funny that people are suggesting Clark come off the bench this year to play a more traditional line up with Thompson at SF. Clark is a mainstay in the starting line up and all Georgetown fans should be glad. Jason is only going to get better each year. I have watched him play in the WCAC to Kenner to Georgetown and each year he has raised his level of play.
Hollis's time will come and in 2011 he will be a starter along side Jason, but for now he can come off the bench. Clark, Austin, Chris, and Julian are all locks to start next season. The PF spot will be competitive. Jason, Austin, and Chris will see the most significant minutes next season and will carry the scoring load.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jun 9, 2010 15:58:20 GMT -5
When you are the 3rd best player on a team that has a record of 39-26 in your career--that's not great.
Every spot should be open and your minutes are based on what you do--not what you did. Specifically on DEFENSE--which has no excuse to not be better based on fact the roster will have full 13 scholarship players.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jun 9, 2010 17:47:39 GMT -5
When you are the 3rd best player on a team that has a record of 39-26 in your career--that's not great. Every spot should be open and your minutes are based on what you do--not what you did. Specifically on DEFENSE--which has no excuse to not be better based on fact the roster will have full 13 scholarship players. And that's why it's a discussion. Jason may very well be the third best player on the team, but very few teams can run out a team wildly undersized and win (or a team without ballhandling, etc). There's a balance, and most of it will depend on the level of performance the bigs can get to. They have the positional advantage so they don't have to be as good as Jason is at being a guard to deserve the PT. But they are a long way off.
|
|