AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 20, 2013 11:43:07 GMT -5
Unless and until JTIII wins an NCAA Championship or returns to the FF with his recruits and system, I fear this is a conversation that will continually repeat itself in the coming years. SS I think your right. This and next year are very important as Georgetown leaves the Big East to become the cornerstone of a new league. Our success and relevance will determine, in part, the success and relevance of the new league. Do recruits want to play in this offense? Are the princeton-type sets used in high school? Poster keep mentioning recruiting to the style of play but is the reason we have recently missed out on a multitude of big men is due to the fact they do not want to play the high post and would rather play the blocks?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 11:52:08 GMT -5
Youth and inexperience have more to do with our offensive struggles than “system”. I’m definitely not married to it but to blame it for everything is foolish in my eyes. We pressed Pitt and they almost broke the scoreboard on us. We have a young team that has 2 good scorers in Starks and Porter and if one of them struggles, we will struggle as a team.
|
|
|
Post by daymondmyles on Jan 20, 2013 12:27:33 GMT -5
I'm so sick of this nonsense about "dungeon ball" why do Balla and RDF have to come up with stupid demeaning nicknames for everything? I'd love to hear some insight on what JT3 was so mad at markel about on the last possession that led to a timeout. If it was about him not giving the ball to Otto, I'd be mad because the problem to me is that Otto shouldn't have the ball in his hands on the perimeter on that type of shot. That's where Markel needs to or penetrate and get the ball to somebody if he can't make the shot. And THAT is where this offense fails. We should be able to use markel and jabril to do that when necessary. Instead, we have them pass it on the perimeter expecting a swing or big to make a play. However, if it were about Markel not making a freaking move earlier in the shot clock, then I would side with JT3. Markel is AWFUL at knowing when to make a play. He consistently waits until too little time left so that he has one bad option or puts the ball in the hands of a big with 5 seconds or less to go on the shot clock. Of course that should have been coached into him by now. Where I will side with RDF is this system needs to adjust to get guards involved in creating opportunities by penetrating way more than it does.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 20, 2013 12:45:11 GMT -5
Here's why I use stats as part of the evaluation process. Georgetown's offense has an adjusted efficiency of about 100 for the year (100-101 is average) and USF has an adjusted efficiency of 96, slightly better than average.
For the game, GU's offensive efficiency of 106. This is not particularly good, but it's actually better than you'd expect given how the teams have performed this year.
So yeah, the offense ain't great, but it was the defense that was abnormally bad against USF. The string of threes in the second half didn't help -- but we also committed a ton of turnovers and forced almost none compared to usual.
And yet, everyone comes on here, blasting the offense as usual. Not all the criticism is wrong, but it loses a lot of credibility when it's basically LOSS = OFFENSIVE SYSTEM SUCKS and COACH IS STUBBORN and RUN BECAUSE ITS FUN, ER I MEAN BETTER!
Yeah, the offense needs to get better. Pushing the ball is a good idea. Getting Mikael off the court is probably a good idea. (Can't get the stress about Otto -- if we had someone else take the shot and he missed, the angst would be that we didn't get the ball to our best player).
But this team was slow on rotations, allowed too much penetrations, didn't block a single shot and had three steals. Ugh.
We lost on D more than we lost on O.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 20, 2013 12:53:58 GMT -5
I agree with the comment tht the defense is not receiving enough attention here as the cause for the loss. I was stunned at how passive the team was in the entire game. This may be the most significant aspect to the loss of Whittington. His length is particularly missed.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Jan 20, 2013 13:01:05 GMT -5
I think the biggest reason people are panicking about this loss is because we really havent had enough good wins this season. I can understand that. But, we shouldn't pretend like we, or for that part, most good teams in the big east, don't lose games like that every season. Winning at Rutgers and Seton Hall have been essentially coin flips for the past 6-7 years. Have we even been above .500 on the road in the past 7 years? It seems like we've won maybe 1-2 great road games per season, but mostly, we are average at best.
As we've been saying, some how we need to find a way to beat some top 25-50 teams at home or the road. I still think we can.
|
|
bkhoya
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 117
|
Post by bkhoya on Jan 20, 2013 13:06:57 GMT -5
daymondmyles I agree with you 100%. I can't even get too mad at Otto for losing that ball dribbling it that far away from the basket. The little PG from South Florida appeared to swipe it a bit and he lost it. What upsets me about the approach to the game is that there should've been 3 people involved in the play, Markel, Otto and whoever's man was going to be sent to double Otto. Because I know Otto would be double teamed, I would ask Markel to get the ball before the double team comes, then flash whoever the player is that had the defender that left to double team Otto be ready to catch. So Otto would have 3 options closer to the basket instead of dribbling up to find his shot. He could try and split the double team to get off his shot, pass back out to Markel or try to get the ball to the open man who's defender left to double team him. But having Otto dribble that far away from the basket should not have been the plan.
The team needs Jabril and Markel to dribble penetrate more to losen up the tight press coverage of the defenders. Because teams know Georgetown does not have a lot of players that can dribble to create their offense that far away teams get in the shorts of the person with the ball, then sag off the other guys that are cutting to the basket to help prevent the back cuts. So now coach needs to find a counter.
I still truly believe that all the additional passes is why Georgetown always has so many turnovers. South Florida had very few because they don't make any risky passes. Collins dribbles until he finds an angle to attack or he passes out to an open man.
Nate had a turnover trying to make a backdoor cut to Otto that again was slightly deflected enough for him to lose it. Teams know it's coming so they're trying to simply put their hands out to cause any kind of deflection to break up the rhythm of the play and grabbing and holding cutters to break up the timing as well.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 20, 2013 13:49:08 GMT -5
Turnovers are part of this offense. The reason we had them under control earlier this season is because we were not actually running the offense. Historically, we have seen the Hoyas offense be a high turnover, high FG% team; neither of these held up until Whit went down and the guards came in. Yesterday, we compounded the TO problem by not defending the 3 point line. USF had many clean looks from 3.
The only guard we have that will and can consistently take into the lane is DSR. He can create a little, but he needs to get a better feel for where everyone is going to be. I really think next year, he will be a big-time player for the Hoyas. I agree the offense works best when our gaurds penetrate, they have been in the 1st half of the last few games. That is why I was disappointed with what I saw in the 2nd half where it was Otto ball, and everyone else get out of the way.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,329
Member is Online
|
Post by vv83 on Jan 20, 2013 14:28:18 GMT -5
The announcers were really pounding on the idea that the Hoyas needed to feed their star player (Otto) the ball on offense all game. Unfortunately, III seemed to listen to them! As many have pointed out, Otto functions best as part of a team oriented offense, he is not an isolation-type player. The broadcasters seemed pleased that Otto was taking most of the shots down the stretch in the game, even though this strategy was not helping Georgetown win the game, and really made little sense to anyone who truly understands Otto's game and the overall talents of the team.
That all being said, I agree with those who put the blame for the loss primarily on the defense. We have played very poorly defensively in the past three second halves (I guess the past four, you can certainly throw pitt in there, we just played poorly on D in both halves of the pitt game rather than just the second half). You would think that this would be correctable - if we can play one half of good defense, it should be largely a matter of mental focus to play a second good half of D. But part of the problem is certainly losing Whittington. He is our best defender, and is a pretty unique defensive talent because he can do so many things. Perhaps teams can figure out what we are doing on D after a half, and we have limited adjustment responses without Whittington.
|
|
|
Post by daymondmyles on Jan 20, 2013 14:32:38 GMT -5
Did you guys know Collins dribbles really low? I barely managed to refrain from breaking the TV when I saw that for the 100th time during the broadcast.
|
|
b52legend
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 453
|
Post by b52legend on Jan 20, 2013 14:36:24 GMT -5
A few thoughts on the game last night:
-- Clearly the bright spot was DSR's play. It is pretty funny that a few weeks ago many on this board were saying he deserved ZERO playing time, and now he is arguably our second best player. Tough to criticize any part of his game last night.
-- The end of game coaching was terrible by JT3. We had the ball with a chance to win the game and didn't get a shot off. This after wasting two timeouts and all of the time on the clock, which still resulted in no discernible play. It was bad late game management and it left us with no chance to tie the game after we turned the ball over.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 20, 2013 15:00:22 GMT -5
Here's why I use stats as part of the evaluation process. Georgetown's offense has an adjusted efficiency of about 100 for the year (100-101 is average) and USF has an adjusted efficiency of 96, slightly better than average. For the game, GU's offensive efficiency of 106. This is not particularly good, but it's actually better than you'd expect given how the teams have performed this year. So yeah, the offense ain't great, but it was the defense that was abnormally bad against USF. The string of threes in the second half didn't help -- but we also committed a ton of turnovers and forced almost none compared to usual. And yet, everyone comes on here, blasting the offense as usual. Not all the criticism is wrong, but it loses a lot of credibility when it's basically LOSS = OFFENSIVE SYSTEM SUCKS and COACH IS STUBBORN and RUN BECAUSE ITS FUN, ER I MEAN BETTER! Yeah, the offense needs to get better. Pushing the ball is a good idea. Getting Mikael off the court is probably a good idea. (Can't get the stress about Otto -- if we had someone else take the shot and he missed, the angst would be that we didn't get the ball to our best player). But this team was slow on rotations, allowed too much penetrations, didn't block a single shot and had three steals. Ugh. We lost on D more than we lost on O. Thank you. I agree 100%.
|
|
Loyal Hoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 554
|
Post by Loyal Hoya on Jan 20, 2013 15:07:51 GMT -5
Sorry if I am being obtuse, but is the label "dungeon ball" supposed to imply that the offense feeds the ball to the post and then the ball is never seen again?
If that is the implication, that is not what I have observed in the last few games. Others have suggested that JTIII has stubbornly stuck with Hopkins despite his ineffectiveness, but again that is not what I have observed. Hopkins played only 16 minutes last night. According to Hoya Prospectus, he was in the game for 24 of 54 offensive possessions. While he was in, he used 14% of the possessions (his second lowest usage rate of the year).
It seems to me that Hopkins role has been de-emphasized even as we have been playing withou Whittington.
|
|
whipple
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 129
|
Post by whipple on Jan 20, 2013 15:29:20 GMT -5
I'll give some credit to South Florida. USF's defense was gambling and overly physical in that second-half—playing for broke, like Providence's second-half or Pitt's entire game. Defending the Princeton cuts is much easier when you don't mind getting called for a hold or reach-in foul. Not every defense is going to settle into a zone and let gtown work the perimeter. This nothing-to-lose attitude is what separates the Big East from every other conference during the regular season and was pioneered by the hoyas' toughness.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 20, 2013 15:41:23 GMT -5
Sorry if I am being obtuse, but is the label "dungeon ball" supposed to imply that the offense feeds the ball to the post and then the ball is never seen again? If that is the implication, that is not what I have observed in the last few games. Others have suggested that JTIII has stubbornly stuck with Hopkins despite his ineffectiveness, but again that is not what I have observed. Hopkins played only 16 minutes last night. According to Hoya Prospectus, he was in the game for 24 of 54 offensive possessions. While he was in, he used 14% of the possessions (his second lowest usage rate of the year). It seems to me that Hopkins role has been de-emphasized even as we have been playing withou Whittington. I use that term for the style III engages in--plodding, pattern with no purpose, no urgency, no clue how to adjust to the team he's playing--this "we do what we do" crap is stupid. So instead of using the terms I'd prefer to use, I just came up with this term to throw out there. DMyles, I use that because as a fan of this program since I was old enough to remember watching the sport, I am at a loss. I find this program unwatchable. They are boring. They are frustrating and I do not blame the players for this. Obviously nobody who is a Georgetown fan is a bandwagon fan. So it's not as if I have some unreal expectations for this program. I can accept losing-hell I'm one of the few who thought this was would be a rebuilding year but I'd also like to be entertained and most importantly see improvement. Does this team look better then they were in November/December? More annoying-why can't the staff watch film of the team in the parts of games they are aggressive, play more attacking and not so restricted and just let them go. They've stated via the media that "we want to play fast, and this system is not slow....etc......." yet the minute the conference started up-look what you get. Look what you saw in 2nd Half against Providence/USF. Why? Why can't they just let players play and adjust to how they play best? It's just more frustrating for me as a fan who grew with the program and at the height of popularity in the sport. Georgetown operated as an elite program. They changed how sport was covered, the venues that hosted the tournament, and kids everywhere wanted to play for them. Going from that to what I see now and more painfully hear from several elite recruits and their families, sucks. Nobody likes how they play. They are selling something that isn't in demand and even worse don't seem to care to adjust to fit what they do. It's not rocket science, just look at what guys do well/don't do well, adjust, and most of all--let them have some fun. Does this team look like they have fun when they play? No. Do they make the games fun to watch for you? That is something each individual can answer but several fans have alluded to "this isn't fun to watch". So something has to change and as a fan that doesn't think a coaching change at the top is needed, just be nice to see those adjustments made. Maybe I'm given III too much credit--maybe he's incapable of letting go of his preferred way of playing or seeing what needs to be done. The opportunity was there and maybe it's past him by--he got the program back to Final 4, won Big East titles, and had the #1 recruit in country sign. Since then--it's gone on downward cycle and last year really had me hopeful that he was returning to what worked for him and he'd really push to being more aggressive and then the momentum changed the minute Kirby left. Instead of Broadus and Kirby--you get one of them with 2 guys who are mid to low major caliber recruiters and the talent on this team is filled with role players--many whom obviously don't have a role or have yet to find what they can do. Just seems like this is more of an '09 team with less talent then last year and that shouldn't be happening.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Jan 20, 2013 18:01:55 GMT -5
I think it's more of a mental thing than anything. This can be a top 15 team - especially with Whit. They'll get this thing rolling here soon.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Jan 20, 2013 18:21:50 GMT -5
I think losing to USF sucks, but losing on the road happens in the BE. And I give more credit to an incredible streak of luck in outside shooting by USF than others do. That required us to be incredibly good to overcome that. We weren't, for all the reasons everyone is pointing to. But a lot of good teams would have failed to overcome that barrage - which, btw, also helped keep USF 's turnovers down.
It was a bad loss, but I disagree strongly with anyone who says it's a bad program under jt3. Last year's team was successful and great fun to watch, overperforming expectations. Year before last was very good and fun until Chris broke his hand. (Also, Austin was never the same after getting sick.)
We 're not a consistent top - 10 team, true. But that's a lot to expect. This may turn out to be a down year, but I don't think it's a down program.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 20, 2013 21:01:34 GMT -5
Last year's team was one of the more enjoyable teams I have followed. Not a lot was expected from those guys, but the seniors were determined to LEAD and committed to getting better. To me, they outplayed the 09-10 and 10-11 more talented Hoya teams and played with passion, hustle and surprising ability. That team played in the same system for the same coach as this team. So I am not giving up on the program or coach like it sounds like some are contemplating. I cannot be that short-sighted.
A confluence of events have led to this down year with Adams incapable of playing and no senior class. Every team has years like this except the very elite - Texas and West Virginia are in midst of worse seasons and they have two of what many consider great coaches. So it happens to everyone. JT3 is not awful because of this one season, but I agree there are issues in recruiting that should be addressed, and maybe staff changes would help that and get new ideas inside the program.
What I will be hoping to see is a team that fights to the end, unlike the 2009 team which I think kind of wilted as the season slogged on. That is how I will ultimately judge this flawed team.
|
|
hoyazeke
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,818
|
Post by hoyazeke on Jan 20, 2013 21:08:21 GMT -5
There are a lot of problems with our team but the two biggest in my opinion are a lack of a true low post scoring option and the lack of someone that can score in isolation. Why are you calling a iso play for Otto? Our best option in iso is Markel. The play should have been getting the ball to Kel or DSR and letting them create something for Otto, Brilly, or DSR/Kel(whichever one isnt running the play). Even if Otto doesn't lose the ball he isn't creating a good clean look for himself.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Jan 20, 2013 21:43:50 GMT -5
Just a tough, wrenching gut blow. This one really hurts! no doubt, it puts a real wrinkle in things as far as March is concerned.
|
|