|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 1, 2011 20:21:46 GMT -5
I just watched the tape of the game after seeing it in person.
Julian was only scored on as the primary defender by their post players 5 times. Mostly the problem was they were too quick for him.
Pretty much each time he's in front and they're shooting over him. He's in position they're just hitting difficult shots over him. He did not appear to be playing poor defense to my eyes. There was 1 time where freeland used his quickness to get past vaughn and banked in a shot over the help defense. I think they were more lucky than it was them dominating.
The real problem was the points off of steals we gave up. They got 16pts off of steals. We had that one real bad stretch in the second half. and then the 6pts in the last minute against the bench. Besides that the game wasn't nearly as bad as it seemed.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 1, 2011 20:26:16 GMT -5
The biggest problem on the low post was how easily they got the ball down low. They were able to back our centers down. There was a little bit of the old Hibbert problem where the refs allow the smaller guy to get position by pushing the bigger guy and when the bigger guy holds his ground he is called for a foul. Our guys have to learn to contest the pass and contest the shot without fouling.
|
|
|
Post by btb (Account Inactive) on Jan 1, 2011 20:40:41 GMT -5
"Every win is not going to be pretty and to say this was not an ugly win would be an understatement," said Hoyas coach John Thompson III. "But every league win is a damn good win."
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jan 1, 2011 20:52:17 GMT -5
Some thoughts...
1. Probably has been said a million times, but the expectations that we have this team have probably been inflated given the continued problems that we have defensively - some are not fixable over the next 3 months IMO. It is just a personnel issue that some guys are not quick laterally (among many other issues). On a core group laden with upperclassmen, if there was a way to make them better defenders, it would have been found already IMO.
2. What we can do a better job of is minimizing our risk on the defensive end. We saw some pressing today, but I don't quite get why we have basically shelved it. It allows us to chop 10 or so seconds off of the time that we have to defend in the half court, and I would think that would be valuable given our plight there - see the last 2 games.
3. We have not been able to dictate tempo in a long time and did not really do so today and certainly not against ND. Not a good sign IMO given that we are guard-centric offensively - just shows how we really need more out of our D if we want to control serious league games.
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Jan 1, 2011 21:42:58 GMT -5
Some thoughts... 1. Probably has been said a million times, but the expectations that we have this team have probably been inflated given the continued problems that we have defensively - some are not fixable over the next 3 months IMO. It is just a personnel issue that some guys are not quick laterally (among many other issues). On a core group laden with upperclassmen, if there was a way to make them better defenders, it would have been found already IMO. 2. What we can do a better job of is minimizing our risk on the defensive end. We saw some pressing today, but I don't quite get why we have basically shelved it. It allows us to chop 10 or so seconds off of the time that we have to defend in the half court, and I would think that would be valuable given our plight there - see the last 2 games. Agreed. I have my doubts about how good we would be as a pressing team, but at this point I would like to see us try something like that. As you mention, our players just aren't very good at defense and there is no sign that we are going to get better at man-to-man. I think we might as well take some chances and try out "gimmicks" like a press or a zone defense... but I highly doubt it happens.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 21:51:39 GMT -5
We probably have the worst zone defense in division one basketball right now. The problem isn't ability on defense so much as we have dumb defenders. We have been getting better though so I'm not quite sure an abandon ship is in order yet. I didn't re-watch the game but as I remember a great deal of their post points came against the 2-3 zone in the second half. Now, that is just pathetic. We possibly have the worst 2-3 zone in division one basketball. What we could/( i think we should have done last year) is go back to the 3-2 match-up zone we used for most of III's first years that hid our inability to play straight up man. Why we don't go back to that, idk. Possibly because it may expose our low-post defense, but we have been getting killed on the perimeter since we went away from it so we should still try it imo.
Although, I will say, last year this team doesn't turn this game into a blow-out in the middle of the second half. They probably lose this game, I know its DePaul, but we did some bad bad things last year. Thats progress right?
Also, rebounding is NOT about height. It is all about positioning and heart. Hollis' biggest trouble is that 4's are usually able to shoot over him, other than that I think he has done a pretty good job at the 4. The rebounding issue right now is because they are in the midst of improving their rotations on the initial shot and haven't yet gotten it down. Give it some time, they might figure it out.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,564
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jan 1, 2011 22:03:29 GMT -5
The rebounding issue right now is because they are in the midst of improving their rotations on the initial shot and haven't yet gotten it down. Give it some time, they might figure it out. Agreed - this encapsulates a lot of the problems on D right now. It should be fixable.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 1, 2011 22:08:57 GMT -5
The rebounding issue right now is because they are in the midst of improving their rotations on the initial shot and haven't yet gotten it down. Give it some time, they might figure it out. Agreed - this encapsulates a lot of the problems on D right now. It should be fixable. It's definitely fixable, and for the first time in three years I've seen improvement on it, so we'll see.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,760
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 1, 2011 22:47:37 GMT -5
You're quoting rpg numbers for a guy who plays 20 minutes against guys who play 35. That's just disingenuous.
Hollis grabs 18.5% of available D rebounds. Kyle Singler grabs 11.0%. His rpg is higher because of minutes, more opponents minutes and pace (more shots).
Hollis has done a good job on the boards.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,433
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jan 1, 2011 23:17:22 GMT -5
DePaul will be good in a year or two. They gave us problems today taking advantage of our weaknesses, plus Cleveland couldn't miss.
I too was glad that Chris and Jason sought other ways to help us, when they realized their shots weren't falling. In fact, Chris's decision to take it to the basket in the 2nd half gave us the cushion we needed to put DePaul away.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 1, 2011 23:41:48 GMT -5
You're quoting rpg numbers for a guy who plays 20 minutes against guys who play 35. That's just disingenuous. Hollis grabs 18.5% of available D rebounds. Kyle Singler grabs 11.0%. His rpg is higher because of minutes, more opponents minutes and pace (more shots). Hollis has done a good job on the boards. Miles Plumlee and Keita get less mintues then Hollis and have a higher rpg. What's your point.
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Jan 1, 2011 23:48:08 GMT -5
I watched the game today but didnt feel like posting till I gave it some thought. In some ways I thought we played aweful and uninspired. I watched the game with my wife and she was yelling the whole game about our rebounding effort and lack of D. I wasnt at the game live but the crowd seemed just as subdeud as the team. My only explanation is that Depaul is so inferior to us and we just played down to them.
All that said there were positives, any win in the big east is good. Freeman played with alot of heart and bounced back after a bad game against ND. I was happy with Vee, he made a nice three. I guess what im saying is that this was a BLAH win against a BLAH team. I really learned no more after watching this game. At times this season Ive thought we have a final four bound team, other times I think were going to get upset in the first round.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jan 1, 2011 23:54:55 GMT -5
"Really learned no more..." I couldn't agree more, but I still found it frustrating. This was one of those kinds of games where everyone said last year "we get it now." In many ways, that has not happened and maybe can't happen due to our limitations this year.
We're far from crisis/panic mode IMO, but I do think the team needs to think more about what it can do differently to make the most of what it has. Playing a half court game against ND, for example, was crazy from the start - particularly when our offense seems to be a tempo-oriented, rhythm, score in bunches kind of thing. As long as we are willing to concede half the court on D, a team with a more polished half court offense will dictate the shots/pace it wants, and we'll trade possessions instead of forcing them to have fewer quality possessions than we have through pressing, pressure D, trapping at halfcourt, and other things that we could throw at them with our athleticism at guard.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 2, 2011 0:20:43 GMT -5
You're quoting rpg numbers for a guy who plays 20 minutes against guys who play 35. That's just disingenuous. Hollis grabs 18.5% of available D rebounds. Kyle Singler grabs 11.0%. His rpg is higher because of minutes, more opponents minutes and pace (more shots). Hollis has done a good job on the boards. Miles Plumlee and Keita get less mintues then Hollis and have a higher rpg. What's your point. Plumlee is 6-10 and stays in the paint. He rebounds but does not do much else. Rebounding has not been our problem. The stats do not support your criticism of Hollis.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 2, 2011 0:50:31 GMT -5
Miles Plumlee and Keita get less mintues then Hollis and have a higher rpg. What's your point. Plumlee is 6-10 and stays in the paint. He rebounds but does not do much else. Rebounding has not been our problem. The stats do not support your criticism of Hollis. It' s not really a criticsm of Hollis as it is of JT3 playing Hollis out of position. He is not a power forward and it's going to hurt us in Big East play if it continues. It's pretty simple, dont' see why you can see that.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 2, 2011 1:15:24 GMT -5
"Every win is not going to be pretty and to say this was not an ugly win would be an understatement," said Hoyas coach John Thompson III. "But every league win is a damn good win." This is the quote of a loser. I don't think III is a loser--but people who talk like this are--and will lose. III has to address some issues very soon 1. Why is this team coming out and taking DePaul lightly? WTF has the current group accomplished? What derailed their season a year ago? What had the SR's on team PROMISING to address? It was not taking anyone lightly. If you saw this game and feel Georgetown brought an intense, ready to play effort, then please share why--because this was '10 season in a nutshell. They play like this Monday Night--they'll be blown off the court. 2. A Coach/Staff need to prepare the team for the opposition. In the initial 2 games of the Big East season--Georgetown has avoiding pressing a limited team in terms of depth/guard play (ND) and not played zone as a primary defense against a poor shooting team (DePaul). Offensive basketball is where you can do "what you do"--as you have counters for how you are defended--but a good coach has to prepare the team for the opponent and utilize a gameplan. These opening games of conference play look coached like a "newbie" on defensive end of the court. 3. Does Georgetown breakdown film? Do they know how? I mean it's one thing to watch opponents play--but do they get anything out of it--because the players sure dont' seem to follow any gameplan that suggests they understand what teams/players on opposing teams can/cannot do the past 2 games. It's really disturbing on defensive end of the court--and if it's not addressed-then the misery of losing is soon to follow. Nobody is perfect in a season. Fully understand that. Not what I am talking about either. I'm sick of a half assed effort on defense. If you don't want to play defense-then don't act shocked/disappointed when you lose games--and to teams you shouldn't be losing to. If Georgetown plays as hard as they can and loses--fine. I've yet to see the type of effort that shows any resemblance of this program learning a damn thing from the up/down season a year ago. This was a bad win. Those who don't think that is possible (which include the Head Coach)---better understand that if you tell people this performance is acceptible--the poor decision making, sloppy play, and "flip the switch" attitude will be present all season--as will a mediocre conference record. This type of game is to be expected from a young team--not a veteran team who has guys who have suffered painful lesson of not taking opposing teams without big names seriously. This team has played 4 mediocre/subpar halves of basketball since Conference play has started. What are they waiting for? MSG has bright lights and Big Monday is big stage--and SJU is ready to knoc,k the Edited out of them with physical play/aggressive athletes. They have beaten Hoyas 2 out of last 3 outings and in lone win a year ago on New Year's Eve--they pushed Hoyas in DC. Georgetown better make some adjustments in approach to game and that means from staff to players. III had done a nice job in non conference and I applaud him for doing what isn't easy--going to different way of coaching but in the conference--he's been as mediocre/lousy as the effort on the court. Do this crap and make your ticket for NIT now--because this type of effort won't win 6 games in Big East.
|
|
gunny
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 559
|
Post by gunny on Jan 2, 2011 1:19:10 GMT -5
You can not play Vaughn and Sims together. They are both a liability on the offensive end. Neither is a threat from outside of 5 feet and defenders would sag off of the man who is outside the paint. The difference between Monroe/Vaughn and Sims/Vaughn is that Monroe had offense ability outside 5 feet. Lubick has moments where he shows some ability (3 pointer against ND and nice dunk against DePaul), but commits fouls at a high rate. You can not have Benimon out there as he never looks to shoot outside 5 feet. He is worse offensively than Sims or Vaughn. I do not see a PF on this roster who can play major minutes right now.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 2, 2011 1:46:27 GMT -5
You can not play Vaughn and Sims together. They are both a liability on the offensive end. Neither is a threat from outside of 5 feet and defenders would sag off of the man who is outside the paint. The difference between Monroe/Vaughn and Sims/Vaughn is that Monroe had offense ability outside 5 feet. Lubick has moments where he shows some ability (3 pointer against ND and nice dunk against DePaul), but commits fouls at a high rate. You can not have Benimon out there as he never looks to shoot outside 5 feet. He is worse offensively than Sims or Vaughn. I do not see a PF on this roster who can play major minutes right now. How is Vaughn/Sims any different offensively than Sims/Nate or Vaughn/Nate, or Sims/Jerrelle or Vaughn/Jerrelle? The issue is offensive liability. And it shouldn't be foul issues either because there is no reason at least not try it. And also, to address RDF, I agree with most of what you said. However you brought up "flip the switch attitude". Last year we didn't have a switch to flip and this game certainly wouldn't have ended in a comfortable win. So, if you're looking for improvement, there it is. In addition to that the most concerning thing about the game to me was that it didn't look like an effort issue at all. I think we might really be as bad as we have looked the last two games. The last four halves of basketball have completely erased any memory of good basketball from this team in my mind and thats scary. In fact, right now I am so convinced we are THAT bad, there isn't a team in the Big East I think we are better than. So far in the Big East season we have one guy who can score/shoot(freeman) that we barely get the ball too, and team that can't play defense. No offense, no defense thats a recipe for Big East success. Watch out Cuse, we're coming for that title. And in regards to the zone, we are way to dumb of a team defensively to play zone. IMO, it was a good decision by III not to go to it because ours is horrible. They scored on it at will when we went to it in the second half it was that bad. However, it is III's fault that our zone IS that bad in the first place, but thats been an issue for idk how many years so, oh well, we'll deal with it. It's also a product of personal as we are too small to play an effective zone in the first place. The only line-up that should be in a 2-3 is one that makes Thompson a SF and plays two bigs. Otherwise its a completely useless even if played well(which it wouldn't be because we don't know how to play it).
|
|
OldHoyafan
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,387
|
Post by OldHoyafan on Jan 2, 2011 2:49:03 GMT -5
Could not see this game but followed it on Yahoo. You can add me to the RDF camp of concerned fans. For the past 3 years this team has been led by the two senior guards Freeman and Wright. What has been a constant in that tenure is the unpredictaility of the team, i.e., they can beat anyone in the league and they can lose to anyone in the league. For the past two years the fate of this team has been held hostage by the attitude of the big three(Monroe,Freeman and Wright). If they collectively felt like the opposition deserved their best efforts on offense and defense, then they brought an intense effort that most times led to victories. If they collectively felt the oppsition was not worthy of their best efforts on offense and defense then the team would struggle and sometimes lost. Unfortunately JT3 has pooh poohed that attitude by making statements like today, i.e., not a pretty game but a good win. He has not called anyone out (not his style) nor has he sit them down the next game and started someone else. Therefore Wright, Clark and Freeman know that they are going to start every game barring an injury. There is no one else on this team more talented than Wright and Freeman and when they showcase that talent in offensive and defensive intesity from minute one of the game thru minute 40 of the game the Hoyas are a fun team to watch win or lose, but when they give you spurts throughout game and only show the real talent intesity towards the end of the game then they are not so easy to watch. We all know JT3 can coach offense, and we know from the team of Hibbert,Green, PE,JR, Wallace and Sapp which led the nation in defense for most of that year that he can coach defense. So why is the defense of this team so inconsistant? I think it is the reluctance of JT3 to trade defense for offense. Vaughn has given the Hoyas a fair replacement for the skill set of Macklin, but he is not a defensive presense that will strike fear in opponents. He may block a few shots but his footwork often gets him behind his man and often has him out of position and too far away from driving guards or forwards to make a stop. Henry is a better choice to start but his starting must be coupled with a legitimate big forward, and the only one the Hoyas have now is Nate. Now that sacrifices some offense Vaughn may give and a lot of outside shooting Clark or Thompson would give, but I think it would make your defensive intensity more stable. The 3 guard lineup is effective if you can play all your games against slower guards but in the BE unless you have 3 guards who can all handle the ball and have the footwork to stay in front of their man then it will not work. Freeman and Clark are very good 2 guards but don't have great handles like Wright. They also are not very quick laterally so their defense can create holes for the defense that a center like Vaughn can't cover. Moses is nine games behind the rest of the team, and I don't expect him to be the next Dikembe, but I do believe in the ability of JT2 to judge defensive pressense potential and if he thinks this kid has it then I would like to see the kid get a chance. If he gives up two straight layups or misses two straight layups then pull him but at least give him the chance at PT that Bennimon got last year.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 2, 2011 3:30:56 GMT -5
Could not see this game but followed it on Yahoo. You can add me to the RDF camp of concerned fans. For the past 3 years this team has been led by the two senior guards Freeman and Wright. What has been a constant in that tenure is the unpredictaility of the team, i.e., they can beat anyone in the league and they can lose to anyone in the league. For the past two years the fate of this team has been held hostage by the attitude of the big three(Monroe,Freeman and Wright). If they collectively felt like the opposition deserved their best efforts on offense and defense, then they brought an intense effort that most times led to victories. If they collectively felt the oppsition was not worthy of their best efforts on offense and defense then the team would struggle and sometimes lost. Unfortunately JT3 has pooh poohed that attitude by making statements like today, i.e., not a pretty game but a good win. He has not called anyone out (not his style) nor has he sit them down the next game and started someone else. Therefore Wright, Clark and Freeman know that they are going to start every game barring an injury. There is no one else on this team more talented than Wright and Freeman and when they showcase that talent in offensive and defensive intesity from minute one of the game thru minute 40 of the game the Hoyas are a fun team to watch win or lose, but when they give you spurts throughout game and only show the real talent intesity towards the end of the game then they are not so easy to watch. We all know JT3 can coach offense, and we know from the team of Hibbert,Green, PE,JR, Wallace and Sapp which led the nation in defense for most of that year that he can coach defense. So why is the defense of this team so inconsistant? I think it is the reluctance of JT3 to trade defense for offense. Vaughn has given the Hoyas a fair replacement for the skill set of Macklin, but he is not a defensive presense that will strike fear in opponents. He may block a few shots but his footwork often gets him behind his man and often has him out of position and too far away from driving guards or forwards to make a stop. Henry is a better choice to start but his starting must be coupled with a legitimate big forward, and the only one the Hoyas have now is Nate. Now that sacrifices some offense Vaughn may give and a lot of outside shooting Clark or Thompson would give, but I think it would make your defensive intensity more stable. The 3 guard lineup is effective if you can play all your games against slower guards but in the BE unless you have 3 guards who can all handle the ball and have the footwork to stay in front of their man then it will not work. Freeman and Clark are very good 2 guards but don't have great handles like Wright. They also are not very quick laterally so their defense can create holes for the defense that a center like Vaughn can't cover. Moses is nine games behind the rest of the team, and I don't expect him to be the next Dikembe, but I do believe in the ability of JT2 to judge defensive pressense potential and if he thinks this kid has it then I would like to see the kid get a chance. If he gives up two straight layups or misses two straight layups then pull him but at least give him the chance at PT that Bennimon got last year. Right now I just feel that anyone who is thinks this game was solely a product if effort and intensity issues is overestimating the abilities of this team. We simply just aren't that good. We have one guy who can score at the moment and no one who can play defense. The issues on defense are much more complicated than effort. Going into Big East play I felt good about this team, because while their defense was horrid, I thought at least their offense would save them. Now that we have regressed so much on offense the last two games, I'm scared. We've had no offensive identity and look like team playing without Monroe in the middle. IDK what happened, but they better turn it around by Monday or we will be in for a long long season.
|
|