|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 1, 2011 15:24:29 GMT -5
Dajuan started over Pat after 10 games or so as a Freshmen. I highly doubt the staff is concerned w/who has played longer for Georgetown. That was also Pat's first season with the Hoyas IIRC. Not much of a seniority problem there.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 15:26:49 GMT -5
Dajuan started over Pat after 10 games or so as a Freshmen. I highly doubt the staff is concerned w/who has played longer for Georgetown. That was also Pat's first season with the Hoyas IIRC. Not much of a seniority problem there. No Pat got moved out of the starting line-up by FREEMAN in 2007-2008, Egerson or Crawford were moved out of the starting line-up by a freshman Summers in 2007-2006.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Jan 1, 2011 15:53:21 GMT -5
How hilarious is it that we actually outrebounded them 36-35?
|
|
Highsmith
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,490
|
Post by Highsmith on Jan 1, 2011 16:00:17 GMT -5
Certainly not the prettiest win, but a win all the same. I was disappointed by Julian today--I know the comments above talk about the 4 guards/1 big guy disparity on defense, but Julian got abused one-on-one in the post MANY times by the 6'6" guy. Henry had some good moments, but had some troubles as well. It was at the point where a lineup with Benimon at the 4 and Lubick at the 5 may have been better--we needed to match the aggressiveness/physicality of the DePaul guys and Vaughn/Sims weren't doing that.
It is a bit disturbing to see how far off Clark's shot has gotten over the past few games--it was good to see him aggressively take it inside and leave the 3pt shooting for practice to get things worked out. Same goes for Chris--his outside shot has been really off. These guys are good shooters though and they will get back on track soon.
Lots of talk about changing up lineups and I kind of have to agree. As above, I was very frustrated by Vaughn today, but the one who seems to need to be out of the starting lineup is Hollis. I know lots of people here love him, and I think he can be a great player, but right now he is giving us little to nothing out there in the role he is playing. He fights hard out there, but cannot defend or rebound as a 4. His offense in most games has not been much of a factor. His biggest strength is shooting the 3, but we already have 3 guys out there (supposedly) who do that well, with Vee on the bench. If we could start the 3 guards, then put in Lubick and Vaughn to start--then use Hollis to spell Free and Clark, Vee to spell Chris and Sims to spell Vaughn and Lubick.....I think we would be in good shape. That still leaves Benimon, Starks, Moses and Bowen as other reserves and if fouls/matchups call for it, we can always go back to the "4-guard" lineup with Hollis at the 4. It would be one thing if we were counting on Hollis for a big offensive output, but we aren't--he can do at least what he is doing now by coming off the bench and playing that 3 spot in place of one of the guards--and he doesn't hurt us on the defense/rebounding end of things.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 1, 2011 16:00:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hoya81 on Jan 1, 2011 16:11:33 GMT -5
Just back from the game. In that last 8-0 spurt Sims was the difference maker. He blocked and altered shots and grabbed rebounds. I would start him at center, move Julian back to the 4 and see if he can play any better. If not, start Lubick. Would start Hollis at the 3, and sit Jason down until he stops playing like a freshman. Despite his 21, he was too big a liabilty on defense and ball protection, and he can't hit a shot from behind the arc . . . at the moment anyway.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 16:14:53 GMT -5
Just back from the game. In that last 8-0 spurt Sims was the difference maker. He blocked and altered shots and grabbed rebounds. I would start him at center, move Julian back to the 4 and see if he can play any better. If not, start Lubick. Would start Hollis at the 3, and sit Jason down until he stops playing like a freshman. Despite his 21, he was too big a liabilty on defense and ball protection, and he can't hit a shot from behind the arc . . . at the moment anyway. I agree with this completely. Jason needs to sit until he starts playing defense and a change of line-up would be beneficial I think. At the very least start playing this line-up more.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 1, 2011 16:31:37 GMT -5
Strange to see so many people calling for benching Jason, one of the true offensive sparks on the court today. He will be our prime player next year and needs to play to work out the problems he's having on defense and outside shot. Who among Lubick, Sims, Jerrelle, Vee, Markel, etc. could have gotten 21 points for us, most down the stretch of a fairly close game?
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Jan 1, 2011 16:34:22 GMT -5
While I understand what you're saying, Ed, I really think Hollis will be our best offensive player next season
|
|
|
Post by hoya81 on Jan 1, 2011 16:40:47 GMT -5
We wouldnt have needed his 21, if he had played slightly less incompetently on D. And his turnovers were of the WTF? variety. And we could have gotten a few more buckets for Chris who, especially in the first half, was clearly compensating for his decision making v. Notre Dame, and passingthe ball when he could have taken it to the hoop. We could have also got more from Hollis, but III had to sit him because he can't play defense at the 4.
For whatever reason, 21 points aside, Jason is not concentrating on what he's doing, not making the smart play and not making sufficient effort on D. He may not have great lateral speed, but I know he can play D. I've seen it. That you never know if he will or won't bring it requires the coaches to intervene in an unmistakable way.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 16:44:21 GMT -5
Strange to see so many people calling for benching Jason, one of the true offensive sparks on the court today. He will be our prime player next year and needs to play to work out the problems he's having on defense and outside shot. Who among Lubick, Sims, Jerrelle, Vee, Markel, etc. could have gotten 21 points for us, most down the stretch of a fairly close game? It's not all about scoring and points Ed. It was fine when Jason was botching defensive assignments when he was knocking down 3's but now.... he needs to sit more. I think the issue is that the game may not have been fairly close had we been playing a bigger line-up with everyone in their natural positions from the start. I don't think anyone's advocating keeping Jason out of the end of games, just that we would be better if we started with a different line-up or played a different line-up more frequently.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Jan 1, 2011 16:58:38 GMT -5
While Jason was 0-3 from 3 and had 4 TO's, he was 9-12 from 2, which is quite effective. He took the ball to the hole really well. As well, while I agree his defense could have been better, overall it was not as bad as many portray it. Just about everyone's defense could have been better today. Jason and Chris will shoot the ball better than they have the last couple of games. They've shown that they can shoot. Sometimes, shots just don't fall. Everyone could have played better today. I'll take a BE win, no matter how ugly, any day.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 1, 2011 17:01:34 GMT -5
Just back from the game. In that last 8-0 spurt Sims was the difference maker. He blocked and altered shots and grabbed rebounds. I would start him at center, move Julian back to the 4 and see if he can play any better. If not, start Lubick. Would start Hollis at the 3, and sit Jason down until he stops playing like a freshman. Despite his 21, he was too big a liabilty on defense and ball protection, and he can't hit a shot from behind the arc . . . at the moment anyway. I agree with this completely. Jason needs to sit until he starts playing defense and a change of line-up would be beneficial I think. At the very least start playing this line-up more. When did Julian ever play the 4? I don't see him playing very well away from the paint on offense
|
|
|
Post by bigelephant on Jan 1, 2011 17:24:58 GMT -5
Nate's gorilla dunk on the backdoor from Free was a thing of beauty but that's basically all he did positive in 11 minutes - no boards. Sims got the Mo going in the end and was the reason we coasted.
Looking more an d more like an 11-7 or even 10-8 unless we turn it around quick. Game showed up our deficiencies/problems in a big and clear way but we won so I'll take it - Not disgruntled but far from gruntled ( tip of the hat to Tony K)
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 1, 2011 17:37:36 GMT -5
You guys are all nuts!
Julian has always been the 5. Henry and Julian are both only comfortable at the 5 right now.
There was an impressive number of people at the game today. easily over 10,000.
But the crowd did not take this game seriously, so the team didn't either no one was cheering until halfway through the second half when the crowd realized of crap we could actually lose this game. Once we brought the noise it was game over. I blame the silent crowd for our lack out preparedness in this game. They should know better, but it's gotta be hard to get pumped up in a crypt.
It was sloppy I trust we can tighten it up and be better.
Very good to see our big 3 put the ball on the deck and take it the whole to get points. That's what they need to do.
I don't know why everyone was upset about Julian's play. They scored a lot but they were all banked in jump hooks. What is he supposed to do to stop that. He played good positional defense and rebounded the ball. He almost had a double double he just needed one more point. Julian played fine.
We played sloppy and it was unacceptable to play that poorly and turn the ball over that much. Gotta grab the ball gave them 4 team offensive reboudns by failign to grab the ball. you take away those 4 and we're even on the boards.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath. We're fine. We're going to continue to be fine. Let's not get crazy.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 17:41:26 GMT -5
If Greg and Vaughn could play together so can Henry and Vaughn and thats all I'm saying. Why III hasn't tried to play them together this season I will never understand.
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Jan 1, 2011 17:41:51 GMT -5
I don't know why everyone was upset about Julian's play. They scored a lot but they were all banked in jump hooks. What is he supposed to do to stop that. He played good positional defense and rebounded the ball. He almost had a double double he just needed one more point. Julian played fine. Julian got absolutely abused today. Can't make any excuses for him.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Jan 1, 2011 17:51:15 GMT -5
I think Hollis and to a lesser extent Jason are the weak links right now. Julian actually played quite well for much of the game - he made #33 irrelevant with good positioning and denial. He was also by far our best rebounder. Henry had his moments, especially late but also looked lost on occasion; I like him better off the bench. Jason did get his offense going in the second half, but his outside shooting has largely vanished. Actually, that's true of everyone not named Austin Freeman.
I think it would be interesting to see a lineup with Hollis at the 3, but I don't know that he's better than Jason right now. Replacing Hollis with Nate seems the best bet to me if a change is to be made, which it probably isn't.
Austin and especially Chris saved the game for us - DePaul did the most damage with Chris out of the game and, when he came back in, he basically took the game over until we had a working margin again. I have hopes for Markel in the long run but he just isn't there yet. Vee seems ready for much bigger minutes, but JT3 doesn't have confidence in him at PG, meaning his minutes would have to come from Austin (not going to happen) or Jason.
The game was affected by fouls, I thought - 3 of our bigs and 3 of theirs had four or more fouls. In the first half we were called for twice as many as they were. The block/charges seemed inconsistently called to me, but that's hardly new in NCAA basketball.
DePaul is going to win some BE games this year. Purnell is a good coach.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 1, 2011 17:57:14 GMT -5
I think that the point is that other than Henry in the 2nd half there was no defensive presence in the post. Depaul is not even close to having the most imposing big players that we will see this year. I have less of a problem with Jason and Chris not hitting their outside shots than others-that will happen. However, the one thing this team has is guard depth and when Jason is not hitting or Chris is not hitting it is time to let Vee get more significant miutes--or move Hollis to the 3 and let him take some shots.
On another note, Markel seemed lost against the pressure defense and overall our ballhandling was sloppy.
The issue that needs an immediate fix is rebounding. We get one shot and opponents--no matter how small--seem to get alot of offensive rebounds.
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Jan 1, 2011 17:58:03 GMT -5
I said after the Temple game that once we got into the thick of the conference schedule that playing Hollis at the 4 would kill us defensively and on the boards and today was a perfect example of why small ball is a bad idea.
I like Hollis but and think he will eventually be a good player but he's playing out of position and doesn't do enough offensively to garner the praise I see heaped on him on this board sometimes. He's a solid shooter but other than that, he doesn't consistently bring anything else to the table on either side of the ball.
|
|