SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 26, 2013 10:48:57 GMT -5
Best stretch vs Cuse came at the 4 with Moses at the 5. Huh? they played together for all of 2:46. Hopkins registered nothing that touched the box score at all. I swear you people are just trolling me now.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 26, 2013 10:50:02 GMT -5
They are going to continue to split time from here on out, no matter what any of us think. When Hopkins is playing well, he's going to stay in longer, but Moses will still spell him. When he's not, or when it might be a bad match up game for him, Moses is going to get more of the minutes. Does anyone really believe it's going to play out any differently than that? And then, hopefully, both will continue to work on their games in the off season, as will Josh Smith and Lubick, and we're going to come back with one of, if not the fiercest front line in the country in 2013-14. Agree - simple as that. But you have people that keep throwing out this +/- and line-up efficiency stuff to try and support an argument that Hopkins should barely be playing, if at all. This is a team game and we need both of those guys to contribute as best as they can whenever they can. Damn those facts and . It's a team game. Bolden should be playing 19 minutes a game and contributing the best he can.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 26, 2013 10:53:32 GMT -5
The thing is, Mikael has done an amazing job of getting open. He's often down low, in position for the easy basket, time and again. I honestly think he's just been incredibly unlucky as to how many otherwise decent shots have rimmed out on him. Yes, he definitely can finish stronger and not put the ball on the ground as often as he has, but I still think there has been some serious misfortune in terms of how the ball bounces for him. He's taken 61 layups/dunks this year. He took 29 last year. He shoots these at a rate 10%-20% lower than players like Otto and Nate (who has shot 70+% this year on these shots). He's not beyond atrocious, but it's not bad luck. He's bad at finishing. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by NTAMM on Feb 26, 2013 11:00:06 GMT -5
The comments on Mikael Hopkins have been interesting. Hopkins has displayed incremental progress in his overall game from last year. For the most part, to this point in the season, he has exceeded expectations. Many of the team's wins could not have happened without Hopkins' contributions. To this point, Hopkins has been the Hoyas' best option at the center position -- even as his height, build, and skillset is probably more suited to the power forward position. It's clear that he has put in the work and study to improve himself. Again, Hopkins' development has been a plus, for the Hoyas.
The reality for the Hoyas is that of the team's first six players (Porter, Whittington, Starks, Hopkins, Trawick, Lubick) every one of them is playing (or played) better than they did last year. Each of them has displayed significant progress in their games. Porter is the one that has taken that exponential jump to be a (first-team?) college All-American basketball player. What every coach hopes for is, at least, steady improvement in the play of his players and translating player improvements to the overall team play. This is what Hopkins has given the program.
Moses had a very good game against Syracuse. Syracuse is a physical team that likes to crash the boards. Moses was able to outrebound and out-muscle Syracuse's athletic, physical bigs. In the game, he was able to establish himself as a something the Hoyas have not seen since in some time: a strong, physical presence in the paint who demonstrated the ability to control the game on the defensive end.
Yet, Hopkins remains an indispensable big for the Hoyas for a number of reasons. He possesses the best all-around game of the post players. He is the best man-to-man defender of the Hoya's post players. He understands and executes most of the offensive sets and defensive rotations better than any of the other centers.
The key for Hopkins is to get him off early. He has had a tendency to wear down, as the game proceeds, probably due to the physicality of playing center. This is something can be resolved by better conditioning and adding more muscle. Expect Mikael Hopkins to continue to be a major contributor to the successes of the Hoyas.
|
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Feb 26, 2013 11:03:54 GMT -5
Damn those facts and Edited. It's a team game. Bolden should be playing 19 minutes a game and contributing the best he can. I saw Dean Oliver speak one time and he said something that I think is especially relevant to college basketball: "Individuals see a game better than numbers. But statistics see all the games." I subscribe to Pomeroy and find it very useful for a quick report on teams that I don't have time to watch, which (like many on this board, I assume) is everyone except Georgetown. But, also like many on this board, I've seen most of the minutes we've played this year. Many of the lineups with Ayegba have outperformed the lineups with Hopkins so far, but based on what I've seen I think, apparently III thinks, and many of the posters here think, that that is not causal and that Hopkins is the better player.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Feb 26, 2013 11:13:43 GMT -5
The comments on Mikael Hopkins have been interesting. Hopkins has displayed incremental progress in his overall game from last year. For the most part, to this point in the season, he has exceeded expectations. Many of the team's wins could not have happened without Hopkins' contributions. To this point, Hopkins has been the Hoyas' best option at the center position -- even as his height, build, and skillset is probably more suited to the power forward position. It's clear that he has put in the work and study to improve himself. Again, Hopkins' development has been a plus, for the Hoyas. I didn't realize people's expectations of Hopkins were so low that they could be exceeded by playing like Jeremiah Rivers with a higher usage rate. He's a good post defender. He turns the ball over a lot, and he's bad at finishing. He's a mediocre at best rebounder. Personally, I had higher expectations for him--hopefully he can improve a lot in the off season, but he has been a net negative for this team, and he would not be getting the minutes he does if the Hoyas had a better option at center.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 11:15:52 GMT -5
The comments on Mikael Hopkins have been interesting. Hopkins has displayed incremental progress in his overall game from last year. For the most part, to this point in the season, he has exceeded expectations. Many of the team's wins could not have happened without Hopkins' contributions. To this point, Hopkins has been the Hoyas' best option at the center position -- even as his height, build, and skillset is probably more suited to the power forward position. It's clear that he has put in the work and study to improve himself. Again, Hopkins' development has been a plus, for the Hoyas. I didn't realize people's expectations of Hopkins were so low that they could be exceeded by playing like Jeremiah Rivers with a higher usage rate. He's a good post defender. He turns the ball over a lot, and he's bad at finishing. He's a mediocre at best rebounder. Personally, I had higher expectations for him--hopefully he can improve a lot in the off season, but he has been a net negative for this team, and he would not be getting the minutes he does if the Hoyas had a better option at center. Do you think he is a talented player?
|
|
|
Post by wahoohoya on Feb 26, 2013 11:19:39 GMT -5
Agree - simple as that. But you have people that keep throwing out this +/- and line-up efficiency stuff to try and support an argument that Hopkins should barely be playing, if at all. This is a team game and we need both of those guys to contribute as best as they can whenever they can. Damn those facts and Edited. It's a team game. Bolden should be playing 19 minutes a game and contributing the best he can. Now you're being childish. I never suggested there wasn't merit in those statistics - just that I don't agree with the conclusion that many are making in terms of how to use those statistics - to severely limit or eliminate Hopkins playing time in favor of Moses. Simple question as somebody posed earlier in this thread - would you prefer if Hopkins wasn't on the team or never played and we had to rely solely on Nate and Moses (won't even mention Hayes or Bolden) to play the 5? I personally don't think this team would be as good in that scenario, but it's your right to disagree. We need them both to contribute, and we have to take the good with the bad with both of them. We all wish Hopkins would play better than he has been, but we shouldn't criticize him for not being ready. I think criticism of players should be reserved for when they aren't playing hard or not playing within the team concept or if they have a bad attitude - I just don't see that with Hopkins. He was fairly criticized for taking too many shots, but it doesn't appear like he is doing that anymore (at nearly the same frequency, anyway).
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Feb 26, 2013 11:57:23 GMT -5
I didn't realize people's expectations of Hopkins were so low that they could be exceeded by playing like Jeremiah Rivers with a higher usage rate. He's a good post defender. He turns the ball over a lot, and he's bad at finishing. He's a mediocre at best rebounder. Personally, I had higher expectations for him--hopefully he can improve a lot in the off season, but he has been a net negative for this team, and he would not be getting the minutes he does if the Hoyas had a better option at center. Do you think he is a talented player? I think there's definitely potential for him to turn into a good player. He has had some nice finishes, he looks like he could hit a mid-range jumper regularly and his free throw shooting has improved. He's already a good defender (albeit foul prone), and I feel like his rebounding has started to get better (he at least had the 9 boards against Marquette). But this year, he's pretty much been a mediocre to bad player. He's definitely played below what I thought he'd be able to do.
|
|
harlemhoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 901
|
Post by harlemhoya on Feb 26, 2013 11:58:42 GMT -5
Best stretch vs Cuse came at the 4 with Moses at the 5. Huh? they played together for all of 2:46. Hopkins registered nothing that touched the box score at all. I swear you people are just trolling me now. rewind the tape
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Feb 26, 2013 12:22:04 GMT -5
I didn't realize people's expectations of Hopkins were so low that they could be exceeded by playing like Jeremiah Rivers with a higher usage rate. He's a good post defender. He turns the ball over a lot, and he's bad at finishing. He's a mediocre at best rebounder. Personally, I had higher expectations for him--hopefully he can improve a lot in the off season, but he has been a net negative for this team, and he would not be getting the minutes he does if the Hoyas had a better option at center. Do you think he is a talented player?[/blockquote]This is a good question..would Hopkins start @ Syracuse? Notre Dame? Marquette? Villanova? Butler? Florida State? Dayton?... Hey, just asking...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 12:52:50 GMT -5
Do you think he is a talented player? [/blockquote]This is a good question..would Hopkins start @ Syracuse? Notre Dame? Marquette? Villanova? Butler? Florida State? Dayton?... Hey, just asking...[/quote] I think coaches have to try to win today but also keep an eye on the future. No matter what if you want to be consistently good you have to develop players. Bigs take longer to develop so if you think a player has talent you have to let them play through mistakes. Thus the question, do you think he has talent? As for the teams listed above he would probably start on a few but get minutes on all for sure..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 12:58:35 GMT -5
Do you think he is a talented player? I think there's definitely potential for him to turn into a good player. He has had some nice finishes, he looks like he could hit a mid-range jumper regularly and his free throw shooting has improved. He's already a good defender (albeit foul prone), and I feel like his rebounding has started to get better (he at least had the 9 boards against Marquette). But this year, he's pretty much been a mediocre to bad player. He's definitely played below what I thought he'd be able to do. If you think he’s talented then you have to let him play through mistakes. Bigs take a while to develop and frankly our options are limited.. lol
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Feb 26, 2013 13:16:45 GMT -5
I think there's definitely potential for him to turn into a good player. He has had some nice finishes, he looks like he could hit a mid-range jumper regularly and his free throw shooting has improved. He's already a good defender (albeit foul prone), and I feel like his rebounding has started to get better (he at least had the 9 boards against Marquette). But this year, he's pretty much been a mediocre to bad player. He's definitely played below what I thought he'd be able to do. If you think he’s talented then you have to let him play through mistakes. Bigs take a while to develop and frankly our options are limited.. lol Thanks for the response
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Feb 26, 2013 13:18:24 GMT -5
The comments on Mikael Hopkins have been interesting. Hopkins has displayed incremental progress in his overall game from last year. For the most part, to this point in the season, he has exceeded expectations. Many of the team's wins could not have happened without Hopkins' contributions. To this point, Hopkins has been the Hoyas' best option at the center position -- even as his height, build, and skillset is probably more suited to the power forward position. It's clear that he has put in the work and study to improve himself. Again, Hopkins' development has been a plus, for the Hoyas. The reality for the Hoyas is that of the team's first six players (Porter, Whittington, Starks, Hopkins, Trawick, Lubick) every one of them is playing (or played) better than they did last year. Each of them has displayed significant progress in their games. Porter is the one that has taken that exponential jump to be a (first-team?) college All-American basketball player. What every coach hopes for is, at least, steady improvement in the play of his players and translating player improvements to the overall team play. This is what Hopkins has given the program. Moses had a very good game against Syracuse. Syracuse is a physical team that likes to crash the boards. Moses was able to outrebound and out-muscle Syracuse's athletic, physical bigs. In the game, he was able to establish himself as a something the Hoyas have not seen since in some time: a strong, physical presence in the paint who demonstrated the ability to control the game on the defensive end. Yet, Hopkins remains an indispensable big for the Hoyas for a number of reasons. He possesses the best all-around game of the post players. He is the best man-to-man defender of the Hoya's post players. He understands and executes most of the offensive sets and defensive rotations better than any of the other centers. The key for Hopkins is to get him off early. He has had a tendency to wear down, as the game proceeds, probably due to the physicality of playing center. This is something can be resolved by better conditioning and adding more muscle. Expect Mikael Hopkins to continue to be a major contributor to the successes of the Hoyas. This. And we're a much better team now than if Hop was not on the roster this season.
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Feb 26, 2013 13:40:58 GMT -5
Ok, enough, please! I relent! Mikael is the second coming of Karl Malone. Let's just stop talking about it and focus on racking up the Ws!
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,373
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 26, 2013 14:02:41 GMT -5
We're playing C by committee this year and next. It's worked out that way.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 26, 2013 15:33:22 GMT -5
Damn those facts and Edited. It's a team game. Bolden should be playing 19 minutes a game and contributing the best he can. just that I don't agree with the conclusion that many are making in terms of how to use those statistics - to severely limit or eliminate Hopkins playing time in favor of Moses. Simple question as somebody posed earlier in this thread - would you prefer if Hopkins wasn't on the team or never played and we had to rely solely on Nate and Moses (won't even mention Hayes or Bolden) to play the 5? So, do you see the disconnect there? You don't agree that Moses should see more time but now you're asking if I think we should cut Hopkins outright? I'll be clear on my position, since every time someone posts something even mildly critical about Hopkins, it apparently means they want to cut him or think he has no talent. Here's my thoughts on Hopkins (and only my thoughts): 1. I think Moses is a better player right now and should be getting more minutes than Hopkins. I think he should be getting the lion's share of the minutes where we need 2 bigs on the floor. 2. Nate is obviously superior to Moses and Hopkins. I think our best lineup is most often Nate at center and Otto at PF. If we need to go bigger, see #1. 3. I completely reject this idea that Hopkins is a significantly better player at the 4 than at the 5. There's no logical argument and no factual evidence that he's suddenly a producer at the 4. Fives and fours require many of the same skills. 4. I appreciate that he has dialed down the # of possessions he's taken. That was always my biggest issue with Hopkins and one of Moses' big advantages. The offense has gotten much better for it. 5. I am not completely on board with the praise of Hopkins' work ethic. On the court, his rebounding is abysmal. When he's a better defensive rebounder than either of our SGs, write me. I do not see how someone 6'9" and exerting anything close to maximum effort can be such a horrifically bad rebounder. 6. I'd also point, on the work ethic side to how some of his skill set is the same as last year. He stills bobbles balls, misses layups, etc. People can point to Hank Sims for evidence of a leap later in career, but Sims admitted he developed when he started really trying. I'm not saying he doesn't go to practice. But he's not Roy Hibbert here in terms of putting in the hours. 7. I don't want him cut. I think he can improve. I just think Moses and Nate are better. And, at the end of the day, if we lose the BE Title, or in the BET or NCAA by a point or two, I'm going to look back at a guy with an abysmal +/- and wonder what could have been. We have Otto Porter. You don't waste him to keep Mikael Hopkins' confidence up. 8. The most convincing counter-argument to me is TTS. JTIII sees something I don't. I hope I'm wrong. What I was trying to say earlier was this: I don't want to actively bash the kid. He's cut back on trying to shoot every time he touches the ball. That's been huge. His minutes have been cut. That, too, has been huge. And there's a lot of folks who agree with me who basically shut up because we felt we were piling on. But I'm not the type to keep quiet when people are throwing out factual inaccuracies, ridiculous statements or proposing things that aren't a good idea. Hopkins isn't better than Nate. He hasn't improved hugely -- he's just getting less time/touches. He had one decent rebounding game. The defense is not significantly better with him on the floor. He's not been "unlucky" on missing shots. (I have no idea how anyone could think that.) So, yeah, if you congratulate Hop on a good game or say he's improved a bit or that you're fine with him still starting, etc., I'm not even going to speak up. But acting like that huge +/- disparity is nothing -- or that Moses couldn't out-rebound Hopkins with one arm -- or proposing that Hopkins should play the 4 over Nate, I'm going to say something. It's not bashing; it's just correcting inaccuracies.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on Feb 26, 2013 17:49:14 GMT -5
just that I don't agree with the conclusion that many are making in terms of how to use those statistics - to severely limit or eliminate Hopkins playing time in favor of Moses. Simple question as somebody posed earlier in this thread - would you prefer if Hopkins wasn't on the team or never played and we had to rely solely on Nate and Moses (won't even mention Hayes or Bolden) to play the 5? So, do you see the disconnect there? You don't agree that Moses should see more time but now you're asking if I think we should cut Hopkins outright? I'll be clear on my position, since every time someone posts something even mildly critical about Hopkins, it apparently means they want to cut him or think he has no talent. Here's my thoughts on Hopkins (and only my thoughts): 1. I think Moses is a better player right now and should be getting more minutes than Hopkins. I think he should be getting the lion's share of the minutes where we need 2 bigs on the floor. 2. Nate is obviously superior to Moses and Hopkins. I think our best lineup is most often Nate at center and Otto at PF. If we need to go bigger, see #1. 3. I completely reject this idea that Hopkins is a significantly better player at the 4 than at the 5. There's no logical argument and no factual evidence that he's suddenly a producer at the 4. Fives and fours require many of the same skills. 4. I appreciate that he has dialed down the # of possessions he's taken. That was always my biggest issue with Hopkins and one of Moses' big advantages. The offense has gotten much better for it. 5. I am not completely on board with the praise of Hopkins' work ethic. On the court, his rebounding is abysmal. When he's a better defensive rebounder than either of our SGs, write me. I do not see how someone 6'9" and exerting anything close to maximum effort can be such a horrifically bad rebounder. 6. I'd also point, on the work ethic side to how some of his skill set is the same as last year. He stills bobbles balls, misses layups, etc. People can point to Hank Sims for evidence of a leap later in career, but Sims admitted he developed when he started really trying. I'm not saying he doesn't go to practice. But he's not Roy Hibbert here in terms of putting in the hours. 7. I don't want him cut. I think he can improve. I just think Moses and Nate are better. And, at the end of the day, if we lose the BE Title, or in the BET or NCAA by a point or two, I'm going to look back at a guy with an abysmal +/- and wonder what could have been. We have Otto Porter. You don't waste him to keep Mikael Hopkins' confidence up. 8. The most convincing counter-argument to me is TTS. JTIII sees something I don't. I hope I'm wrong. What I was trying to say earlier was this: I don't want to actively bash the kid. He's cut back on trying to shoot every time he touches the ball. That's been huge. His minutes have been cut. That, too, has been huge. And there's a lot of folks who agree with me who basically shut up because we felt we were piling on. But I'm not the type to keep quiet when people are throwing out factual inaccuracies, ridiculous statements or proposing things that aren't a good idea. Hopkins isn't better than Nate. He hasn't improved hugely -- he's just getting less time/touches. He had one decent rebounding game. The defense is not significantly better with him on the floor. He's not been "unlucky" on missing shots. (I have no idea how anyone could think that.) So, yeah, if you congratulate Hop on a good game or say he's improved a bit or that you're fine with him still starting, etc., I'm not even going to speak up. But acting like that huge +/- disparity is nothing -- or that Moses couldn't out-rebound Hopkins with one arm -- or proposing that Hopkins should play the 4 over Nate, I'm going to say something. It's not bashing; it's just correcting inaccuracies. Kind of dramatic, no? But thanks for being the crusader for truth and justice battling all the pro-Hopkins forces of evil. Seriously, though, I think you are guilty of what you are complaing about -- every time someone posts something even mildly critical postive about Hopkins, it apparently means they want to cut him or think he has no talent have him to take over Otto's role as the go-to guy on the team.
|
|
|
Post by wahoohoya on Feb 26, 2013 18:01:09 GMT -5
SF - I never said Moses shouldn’t get more time. I actually said the opposite – that he has earned more minutes – and at the expense of Hopkins.
Bottom line – the tone of this thread was pretty much “He sucks, but let’s cut him some slack because he’s trying and is a good teammate”. But then you changed that, because you couldn’t stand a few posts that were complimentary (perhaps unfairly, I'll admit) of his contributions. And the tone became – “He sucks. Period.”.
Look – I’ll go back on what I said – Hopkins deserves criticism. He should be playing better. He lacks the focus needed to finish and hold on to the ball. He may or may not be giving his all in terms of trying to get rebounds, but if you watch the games, you’ll notice that he often contributes by giving his teammates a better shot at grabbing those boards by sealing off his man (whereas Moses often rips the ball out of his teammates hands - a quality you want to see in a center). I realize I might be grasping there so don’t slam me for that one, but defensive rebounding is a team statistic. But overall, Hopkins has been making a positive contribution to this team. Certainly not as great as any of us would like, but I take offense to those posts which suggest we would be better off if he never played. You might not have ever said that or meant to imply that, but other posters certainly have.
I would hope any objective person would agree that it was straight up ridiculous for Hopkins to be receiving all of the blame for us not being up at halftime against Cuse. I don’t care what his +/- was, but it wasn’t Hopkins fault that everybody else not named Otto was missing every shot they took. Literally. I believe Hopkins had the only other field goal that half. Not saying that suggests Hopkins had a good game. But it absolutely does suggest that he shouldn’t be blamed for everything that went wrong in that half.
Let me end by saying I don’t think Moses is flat out the better option than Hopkins at this point. I certainly think Moses is better in spots, but not better in all spots. That’s just my opinion. I sure hope Moses continues to play as well as he did against Cuse – we’ll need that to make a run. But let’s not pretend he has been that solid all season – his play has been wildly inconsistent as well. But admittedly that could be a function of limited playing time.
|
|