|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 13:57:50 GMT -5
Post by strummer8526 on Jan 30, 2012 13:57:50 GMT -5
I don't hate Nate. I think he can and hopefully will play much better in the future. But I'm going to lose it if I see him wander aimlessly off the baseline and allow a big man to slip in behind him for a WIDE open layup. Look at the play with about 3:10 left in the game. Where is Nate going?
|
|
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 16:57:00 GMT -5
Post by NTAMM on Jan 30, 2012 16:57:00 GMT -5
The venom being aimed at Nate in this thread is ridiculous. The Hoyas a very good defensive team, I will that stats speak to that. We are coming off a very poor showing at both ends, but taking 5 minutes away from Nate is not fixing the outcome. Otto is a freshman, playing more than 30 minutes consitently seems counter-productive if you expect him to maintain his level of impact on the game. And count me in the camp that thinks Nate is probably our most physical frontcourt player and can surely handle the assignment of guarding an opposing big man better than our other options outside of Henry. I agree he has not gotten better than last year, looks slower and more tentative, but he is the only option we have. Sure, we could start Otto, but Nate is still going to get his 20 minutes a game. I also do not agree we always start slowly, it typically is after the first timeout that we have our 5-7 minute span without a FG. Is that because of Nate? I would share the blame with a few other players not playing to their ability. Outside of a few freshman and Clark, everyone else is guilty of disappearing during games. As a highly touted recruit, should Hoya fans be satisfied with Nate Lubick’s on-court performance? Yes, Nate plays hard. But, that does not translate into on-court performance. The thread is not so much tearing down Lubick or hate on him. On the contrary, it is obvious that he has underperformed over the last two years. The board was much more critical of DaJuan Summers. Yet, DaJuan’s on-court performance was exponential better than Lubick’s. Most of what has been written in this thread points out the areas where Nate is weak and needs to improve to be an impact player for the Hoya. For all the analysis of his on-court basketball skills, there has yet to be one post that contradicts the reality he is not playing well – and he has not been playing well for the past two seasons. It is up to Lubick to improve his game and shut up doubters.
|
|
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 17:30:45 GMT -5
Post by centercourt400s on Jan 30, 2012 17:30:45 GMT -5
Actually the majority of this thread, while negative, has been pretty fair. I just read through and pulled out only a couple of statements that seem over the top to me.
2 by one poster: -"Nate has been brutal from word go." -"for every assist, he throws a stupid pass trying to thread the needle to a cutter that ends up being a turnover."
2 by another: -"Nate is an absolute void on both ends of the court." -"Flat out, he stinks"
Those statements about a college athlete that is obviously giving a huge amount of effort for the team we all choose to follow are really not called for. It is possible to be critical without being nasty. That said the majority of these posts have been critical but fair.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 17:50:04 GMT -5
Post by sleepy on Jan 30, 2012 17:50:04 GMT -5
Why this board zeros in on Nate is entirely beyond me. he is forced to play almost half his minutes out of position at the 5. yes he can't shoot we didn't recruit him to shoot. he couldn't shoot at St. Marks he's changed his shot 3 times since his soph. year to try and improve. He is ther to do the dirty little things that no one in the program has been able to do the past 3 years. defensively he has been far better than adequate i would say overall pretty good even dealing with some tough matchups. Pitt for example matched up with quicker 6-5 players who torched every one. That was has much on the coach as the players complete lack of communication on the back line. and before one starts looking at individually blown defensive assignments from watching the game look a few seconds ahead to see where the initial breakdowns occured. I'm more concerned with the fact that more high profile players with more time are getting a pass after performing well below expectations for the past month.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 18:05:47 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 30, 2012 18:05:47 GMT -5
Actually the majority of this thread, while negative, has been pretty fair. I just read through and pulled out only a couple of statements that seem over the top to me. 2 by one poster: -"Nate has been brutal from word go." -"for every assist, he throws a stupid pass trying to thread the needle to a cutter that ends up being a turnover." 2 by another: -"Nate is an absolute void on both ends of the court." -"Flat out, he stinks" Those statements about a college athlete that is obviously giving a huge amount of effort for the team we all choose to follow are really not called for. It is possible to be critical without being nasty. That said the majority of these posts have been critical but fair. Where's the thread for everyone else re: this game? That's what I want to know. Henry was as brutal on D as Nate. Jason watched as Whittington was picked, said nothing and did nothing as the cutter streaked for an easy layup except for lazily grab at the guy's jersey in one play the announcers diagrammed. And it happened more than once. Nate didn't have a good game, but the team was +1 while he was in. Jason, Hollis, Sims and Otto were anywhere from -10 to -21. Nate wasn't the difference between his +1 and say, Hollis' -14 (in just 3 more minutes) but people tagging Nate as the cause of this loss or the key member of defensive breakdowns are kidding themselves. Let's take one you didn't highlight: "He has not been playing well the last two seasons." Nate had a very good freshman year. He's had an uneven (and worse) sophomore year, but his freshman year was better than what his recruiting ranking would expect, for example. He's had some good games, some awful, and a lot of mediocre painted as awful by his detractors. He hasn't played well. He probably doesn't deserve the twenty minutes he gets right now OR the start. But he's the only one with his own thread of hate when the finger needs to point in other places -- and ones with more PT, more experience, etc. Nate Lubick's play has been a problem. But it hasn't been THE problem: Henry Sims has.
|
|
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 18:50:09 GMT -5
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on Jan 30, 2012 18:50:09 GMT -5
The team played lousy. I agree that Nate has been disappointing, but the player who really disappoints me is Hollis. This guy is an NBA player and he vanishes for enormous stretches of the game. With Jason missing from 3 and the team struggling to score, this game begged him to force the issue. Instead, he did nothing but get a few meaningless buckets at the end, which only convinced me that if he played like the upperclassman leader we need him to be for the entire game, the final result might have been different. The next 3 games are huge -- for this young team and Hollis. He needs to own them and lead these youngsters, particularly when Jason's shot isn't falling and he's burdened handling the ball because Markel cannot stay on the floor (another problem).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 18:52:05 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2012 18:52:05 GMT -5
You win as a team you lose as a team. Everybody needs to play better as a whole. There were numerous defensive breakdowns in the Pitt game, and we did not play with the type of fire and intensity it takes to beat a BE team on the road. To single out Nate or any other player as the reason for our loss is bogus IMO.
The whole team needs to play better collectively..
|
|
Eurostar
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,094
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 19:06:11 GMT -5
Post by Eurostar on Jan 30, 2012 19:06:11 GMT -5
SF and others, lets not bring down single guys on this team. Neither Nate nor Henry are the problem. There is enough blame to go around.
With regards to Henry, he is literally playing about 10x better than I expected. Theres no way you can fault Henry for the last few games problems - if anything, he is the #1 reason we are 16-4 this season. If the Henry of last year had shown up, we'd be .500 or worse.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 30, 2012 19:19:53 GMT -5
Euro,
You're right. That was poorly written. But while nearly everyone has dropped off in performance from non con to conference, Sims' dropoff has been both the biggest and the one that has affected others the most.
Its not to put it on Henry, but the difference in his effectiveness has been probably the biggest single driver.
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 19:34:10 GMT -5
Post by skyhoya on Jan 30, 2012 19:34:10 GMT -5
support the troops, they all need to step up.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,926
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 19:52:10 GMT -5
Post by NCHoya on Jan 30, 2012 19:52:10 GMT -5
Euro, You're right. That was poorly written. But while nearly everyone has dropped off in performance from non con to conference, Sims' dropoff has been both the biggest and the one that has affected others the most. Its not to put it on Henry, but the difference in his effectiveness has been probably the biggest single driver. I agree with this and it is not really a dig at Henry as much as a fact his preconference play was the biggest surprise of the season. Perhaps expecting Henry to continue his early season play once teams actually bothered to scout him was a bit unfair. But over the last few games, my biggest concern has been Hollis and his ability to disappear for long stretches. I am hoping a big game like the one coming up will bring out the best in everyone again. We tend to raise our level play with our competition, here's to hoping.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Nate
Jan 30, 2012 20:25:38 GMT -5
Post by sleepy on Jan 30, 2012 20:25:38 GMT -5
i wonder how much of this is on Henry, better scouting and taking him away or is it the staff pushing the ball into him as a vocal point especially early The biggest problem with Henry has been that once he touches the ball anywhere from the line in , is that not going anywhere except to the basket. He has become a giant black hole. Has anyone talked to him about kicking out and reposting.
Theres a fine line between looking to carry your team and at times shooting it right out of it. Gotta give him credit though for the effort its more than we have gotten from our future nba draft pick.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Nate
Jan 31, 2012 9:54:37 GMT -5
Post by bmartin on Jan 31, 2012 9:54:37 GMT -5
Henry's big games against Memphis and Alabama in the nonconference schedule came when he was able to get Black and Green in foul trouble and then feast on their weaker subs. It also helped that those teams did not double him so he had room to make low post moves. Big East teams do more game planning and are more familiar with what Georgetown does. They aren't letting Henry get deep position so he is taking hook shots about two feet too far from the hoop. Nate's defender can come in and double Henry because no one is afraid to leave Nate unguarded.
It also doesn't help Henry that the guards are not good passers off the dribble so when he does get good position the passes often are too late or a little off target and the defense recovers and contests his shots.
|
|
|
Nate
Jan 31, 2012 13:13:13 GMT -5
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 31, 2012 13:13:13 GMT -5
A good point - we are very, very deliberate passing down low, which gives the defense plenty of time to shift and adjust not only to the guy receiving the pass, but also to the passing lanes back out. We need to be quicker in every aspect of the offense, from passing to cutting to coming off of picks to going up strong to shoot. That quickness SHOULD be developing by this point in the season.
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Nate
Jan 31, 2012 13:35:06 GMT -5
Post by skyhoya on Jan 31, 2012 13:35:06 GMT -5
these are college kids, just support them. if they succeed, then they will be better than the wizards
|
|
|
Nate
Feb 1, 2012 8:12:54 GMT -5
Post by bigelephant on Feb 1, 2012 8:12:54 GMT -5
Does anyone remember in the Rutgers game at the end when Nate made a great steal and fired a full court pass to Otto, who tied the game at that point? Without that, would we have beaten Rutgers?
|
|
skyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,496
|
Nate
Feb 1, 2012 9:02:08 GMT -5
Post by skyhoya on Feb 1, 2012 9:02:08 GMT -5
go vanilla, tonite, big game
|
|
whipple
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 129
|
Nate
Feb 1, 2012 10:47:32 GMT -5
Post by whipple on Feb 1, 2012 10:47:32 GMT -5
Nate buys into the system, so he gets minutes. Simple as that--but way to hand deliver the scouting report on Nate to Calhoun, guys!
You are all worse than JTIII, who takes him out after any missed shot. Let the kid shoot sometimes, it'll open up the floor, I promise.
Or just tell the BE that Nate doesn't have a green light to shoot and the D can slough off and clog up the holes to his other options.
I vote to Unleash Nate. Set him up to succeed, or just appreciate his job as the garbage man.
|
|
|
Nate
Feb 1, 2012 11:14:21 GMT -5
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 1, 2012 11:14:21 GMT -5
I don't think any of us hate Nate. We all want him to succeed. And I think we're all in agreement that he's not the only one on the team who needs to step up their game. Criticizing his play does not equate to scapegoating him for all of our failures.
Nate will succeed if he does his job as the garbage man. A garbage man doesn't have any plays run for him, but rebounds (and gets the occasional putback for a score or foul), gets loose balls and plays tough defense. We need him to do these things, not to make him a go-to option on the offensive end. If he goes scoreless but gets rebounds and draws a couple loose ball fouls on the other team's frontline or by drawing charges, he will have had a productive game.
He's been able to do this in several games so far this year, but it hasn't been anywhere close to consistent. That's what we need from him.
|
|
Madgesdiq
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,434
|
Nate
Feb 1, 2012 13:15:17 GMT -5
Post by Madgesdiq on Feb 1, 2012 13:15:17 GMT -5
Not sure you can attribute the complete breakdown in being able to defend the back screen in the Pitt game solely on Nate.
|
|