Whats right with Nate Lubick?

[richfame]

Whats wrong with Nate? I have seen very little growth from a guy that has started as many games as he had over his career. When he first arrived all I heard is that he was the son of a coach.. Really? Id guess over his career he averages 5 pts per game and shoots 50% from the charity stripe. Whats up with that??!! Plus he always seems to have such a mean scowl on the court. Cant he take that grimace and turn it into points? Maybe he just have a sour attitude??

[Filo]

Yes, can someone send me a PM to let me know...

[HoyaSinceBirth]

Rich didn't you get the memo? We're not creating threads anymore all discussion of Georgetown basketball is happening via PM.

[seaweed]

Nate say stop the PMS - that's PM shi.... Oh wheel, you know

[HometownHoya]

It must be the lack of bananas

[RusskyHoya]

Dec 10, 2013 19:48:30 GMT -5 richfame said:

Id guess over his career he averages 5 pts per game and shoots 50% from the charity stripe. Whats up with that??!!

Why guess when you can just look up his stats?

Season Totals
SEASON MIN FGM-FGA FG% 3PM-3PA 3P% FTM-FTA FT% REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
2013-14 213 18-32 .563 0-0 .000 2-7 .286 51 15 5 5 24 14 38
2012-13 947 94-159 .591 0-5 .000 40-62 .645 173 89 25 22 91 67 228
2011-12 608 46-88 .523 3-10 .300 20-45 .444 128 66 15 10 65 29 115
2010-11 629 49-91 .538 4-17 .235 27-40 .675 113 42 9 8 77 33 129

GP is:

2013-14 - 8
2012-13 - 32
2011-12 - 33
2010-11 - 32

Career stats (as of this last game) would be:

510 total points in 105 games = 4.86 PPG

89 FTM - 154 FTA = 57.79% FT%

[FrazierFanatic]

Dec 11, 2013 0:14:32 GMT -5 RusskyHoya said:

Dec 10, 2013 19:48:30 GMT -5 richfame said:

Id guess over his career he averages 5 pts per game and shoots 50% from the charity stripe. Whats up with that??!!

Why guess when you can just look up his stats?

Season Totals
SEASON MIN FGM-FGA FG% 3PM-3PA 3P% FTM-FTA FT% REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
2013-14 213 18-32 .563 0-0 .000 2-7 .286 51 15 5 5 24 14 38
2012-13 947 94-159 .591 0-5 .000 40-62 .645 173 89 25 22 91 67 228
2011-12 608 46-88 .523 3-10 .300 20-45 .444 128 66 15 10 65 29 115
2010-11 629 49-91 .538 4-17 .235 27-40 .675 113 42 9 8 77 33 129

GP is:

2013-14 - 8
2012-13 - 32
2011-12 - 33
2010-11 - 32

Career stats (as of this last game) would be:

510 total points in 105 games = 4.86 PPG

89 FTM - 154 FTA = 57.79% FT%

So what you are saying is that his rebounds, assists, blocks and steals have gone up every year! Look, we all know that at this point Nate is what he is. He can't shoot outside of 5 feet; we would like to see him take a few more, and hopefully make a few more, to keep defenses honest. He can be a very good passer, but he tries to thread the needle too much and commits turnovers. He hustles, he bangs on defense and rebounds decently but not outstandingly. Teams with great talent need guys like Nate to do the dirty work; we have not had enough talent to allow us to be satisfied with that. I think the best we can hope for now is a little more offense, fewer forced passes, and keep doing the other things you do and contribute what you can.

Remember, Ronny Thompson was the son of a coach too. Doesn't automatically make you a star.

[hoyasaxa2003]

As a few other people have said, we sort of know what we are getting with Nate Lubick at this point. I realize he does not give us what we fully need at PF, but there are basically no players on this roster who give us everything we need at any single position. The closest we have are Starks and DSR, and thus far, Starks' shooting has been inconsistent, as has DSR's.

Is Hopkins a better choice to be paired with Smith? Probably, but we still need Nate Lubick to play given that our depth isn't really huge. It doesn't seem that JTIII is going to give Hopkins 35 minutes a game, which necessitates Lubick playing. It would be good for him to take some more shots, and for his free throw shooting to improve (that's one area where I feel like repetition and practice could actually make a difference).

I realize that Nate Lubick hasn't developed as some of you would have liked, and given his high school rankings, I think all of us probably expected him to develop a bit more, but it is what it is. Lubick has really served a crucial role on this team over the last few years, and I am appreciative of that.

In 2010-2011, Lubick provided rebounding and toughness we had been lacking otherwise (and he kept Benimon's time on the floor limited). In 2011-2012, he was basically our only serviceable big guy aside from Henry Sims. In 2012-2013, he was at times our most consistent big guy, and he played a lot of time at center when we played small (which helped substantially because of Hopkins' lack of offensive efficiency last year). Lubick has been a very solid player for us for his career - maybe not a superstar, but he's made a lot of contributions that aren't flashy, but were important nonetheless.

[Deleted]

Dec 11, 2013 10:43:42 GMT -5 hoyasaxa2003 said:

As a few other people have said, we sort of know what we are getting with Nate Lubick at this point. I realize he does not give us what we fully need at PF, but there are basically no players on this roster who give us everything we need at any single position. The closest we have are Starks and DSR, and thus far, Starks' shooting has been inconsistent, as has DSR's.

Is Hopkins a better choice to be paired with Smith? Probably, but we still need Nate Lubick to play given that our depth isn't really huge. It doesn't seem that JTIII is going to give Hopkins 35 minutes a game, which necessitates Lubick playing. It would be good for him to take some more shots, and for his free throw shooting to improve (that's one area where I feel like repetition and practice could actually make a difference).

I realize that Nate Lubick hasn't developed as some of you would have liked, and given his high school rankings, I think all of us probably expected him to develop a bit more, but it is what it is. Lubick has really served a crucial role on this team over the last few years, and I am appreciative of that.

In 2010-2011, Lubick provided rebounding and toughness we had been lacking otherwise (and he kept Benimon's time on the floor limited). In 2011-2012, he was basically our only serviceable big guy aside from Henry Sims. In 2012-2013, he was at times our most consistent big guy, and he played a lot of time at center when we played small (which helped substantially because of Hopkins' lack of offensive efficiency last year). Lubick has been a very solid player for us for his career - maybe not a superstar, but he's made a lot of contributions that aren't flashy, but were important nonetheless.

Correctamundo. All of it.

My answer would have been "He can't shoot", but this is more nuanced.

[SFHoya99]

Dec 10, 2013 19:48:30 GMT -5 richfame said:

Whats wrong with Nate? I have seen very little growth from a guy that has started as many games as he had over his career. When he first arrived all I heard is that he was the son of a coach.. Really? Id guess over his career he averages 5 pts per game and shoots 50% from the charity stripe. Whats up with that??!! Plus he always seems to have such a mean scowl on the court. Cant he take that grimace and turn it into points? Maybe he just have a sour attitude??

Nate's undoubtedly been one of the larger disappointments of our recent recruiting classes -- he was actually pretty highly rated, was pretty decent off the bat and hasn't improved at the rate that most of our players do.

I actually think being the son of a coach actually is something that should make you expect a profile like that -- sons of coaches should be ahead of other players in the skills and mental game coming out of high school -- they are more prepared -- and therefore may actually have less upside.

That all said, while Nate's had a slow start, we're looking at a pretty small sample size here. Everyone is lauding Hopkins' improvement, but from an efficiency standpoint, what Hopkins is doing now is what Nate's been doing his whole career. So even with the lack of development, he's still been efficient on offense if not a threat and a valuable team defender.

But he isn't playing well right now. He's not generating the assists he did last year and he's turning the ball over more, primarily. The addition of Josh Smith seems to have marginalized him even more out of the offense (not necessarily a bad thing), but if he's going to touch the ball even less now, he needs to get the turnovers down. Only Nate, Aaron, Trawick and Moses are above a 20 TO Rate right now -- without their turnovers, this team is actually pretty good at holding onto the ball. Now read those names again and aside from Trawick, they really shouldn't be causing our TOs.

[bigelephant]

I am as disappointed as any when Nate takes a holiday on offense. And I agree about his lack of improvement in his weak areas BUT, FWIW - I think the team playes better and is more balanced when he is in. Try to watch what he does when he doesn't have the ball. Also, he has improved in the blocks with the jump hook, which is a nice asset. He has lost weight ?19#. He is definitely quicker, faster, and I think he jumps a little higher. But he is getting knocked around under the basket a little more. I'm glad we have him and he has given us 3 good years so far. The trouble is we all want him to do much better, and he is what he is. A couple of games ago he took exactly 1 shot. That sort of stuff is why people are so frustrated.

Lets also be fair - If we didn't have Nate, we would have lost to Colgate.

[Deleted]

Nate’s Nate at this point but he needs to be more aggressive when he gets it in the post. He’s pretty reliable down there just doesn’t ask for it enough...

[CAHoya07]

Simple answer: he's still the leading rebounder on this team, and he has ceded a lot of his offensive looks to Josh Smith.

While I see the argument for Hopkins getting more minutes than him, Nate's still a valuable, albeit limited, member of this team, and we need him to perform if we're going anywhere this season.

[hoyasaxa2003]

Dec 11, 2013 16:10:20 GMT -5 @yaboynyp said:

Nate’s Nate at this point but he needs to be more aggressive when he gets it in the post. He’s pretty reliable down there just doesn’t ask for it enough...

He is especially effective when he is not double teamed. Given that Josh Smith now commands all the attention down low, it should be a little bit easier for Nate Lubick. Of course, when other teams play zone against us, they generally clog the paint, which would limit Lubick's chances. And if the other team is playing man-to-man, then Smith is clearly the better option.

[michaelgrahmstylie]

Wow, how fickle we are.

Last year it was the Hopkins bashing. This year it's Nate. Has nate cost us a game this year? Does the team have a winning streak of five games right now? Isn't it JT'3's decision who gets to start or not? You guys are acting as if we have not been getting meaningful contribution from Nate. Also, remember, a player's value to a team cannot always be judged by stats.

[rockcityhoya]

Eh - stats typically are a good measure of a players success, and a great baseline to compare a players improvement. Take it as you will, but Nate is basically giving us the same contribution that he gave us as a freshman. I personally think that he adds a lot, but you cant ignore the fact that he hasn't improved much.

[richfame]

Dec 11, 2013 17:20:51 GMT -5 michaelgrahmstylie said:

Wow, how fickle we are.

Last year it was the Hopkins bashing. This year it's Nate. Has nate cost us a game this year? Does the team have a winning streak of five games right now? Isn't it JT'3's decision who gets to start or not? You guys are acting as if we have not been getting meaningful contribution from Nate. Also, remember, a player's value to a team cannot always be judged by stats.

You may be taking this way to seriously. It is a forum to discuss the team isnt it? I think many posters had great points regarding Lubicks play thus far in his career. Hes a hard worker and a tough kid. Hes probably a very nice guy and teammate. The problem is he is exactly the same player from second 1 as a freshmen. I personally dont see a ton of growth. Actually I see him trying to thread the needle more and more and actually making worse passes.. Anyways..

[tashoya]

I don't think anything is wrong with Nate. What's wrong, clearly, have been our expectations or, more clearly, our evaluations of the kid. He's been asked to play a lot of different roles. To fill a lot of gaps based on the deficiencies of the team from year to year. He wasn't ever going to be a superstar but that kid has filled a lot of gaps for the teams he's been a part of. He's not going to light up the stat sheet. But he is going to help in the ways that he can. Scoring, clearly, isn't one of them. Though, to be honest, his form on the hooks are plenty good to do a bit more of that. From his side of things, how would you see it? We're thin at the five. Can you put on a bit of weight and try to play the 4 and the 5 at the expense of mobility? Sure coach. We're thin at the 4 but you might still have to play some five but be quicker on D... can you drop weight and try to fill those roles? Sure coach. Can you try to facilitate back cuts when the offense is stagnating? Sure coach. Can you be a decent inbounder because we suck at that? Sure coach. Can you provide a spark on the glass and on loose balls? Sure coach. Can you be a leader on the floor with your effort and your commitment to the system that we run? No problem coach.

I'm not saying there aren't good points being made. I'm just not sure that his value is being fully realized and that, maybe, expectations were too high to begin with. I think he has more dunks than anyone on the squad in his time as a Hoya (Josh is leading this year) so that should say something too. In any case, Nate is a guy that is easy to cheer for and, while it's not eye-popping, he has improved. He does a lot of things that don't get much attention well. He also, like everyone who gives a crap about what they're doing, tries to do too much sometimes. Good. I like that quality. There are reasons he gets the minutes he gets and it's not just because there aren't more "talented" guys on the team. It's just so damn tantalizing to think what his game could look like if he had a reliable mid-range jumper. Personally, I'd like to see that more for Nate than for the team but, as others have mentioned, it would help the team tremendously. Anyway, I agree with some of what hoyasaxa2003 said and, intuitively, really do agree with most of what SFHoya said with regard to being a coach's son.

[bigelephant]

tashoya - nailed it!

[cosmopolitanhoya]

Dec 11, 2013 23:38:12 GMT -5 tashoya said:

I don't think anything is wrong with Nate. What's wrong, clearly, have been our expectations or, more clearly, our evaluations of the kid. He's been asked to play a lot of different roles. To fill a lot of gaps based on the deficiencies of the team from year to year. He wasn't ever going to be a superstar but that kid has filled a lot of gaps for the teams he's been a part of. He's not going to light up the stat sheet. But he is going to help in the ways that he can. Scoring, clearly, isn't one of them. Though, to be honest, his form on the hooks are plenty good to do a bit more of that. From his side of things, how would you see it? We're thin at the five. Can you put on a bit of weight and try to play the 4 and the 5 at the expense of mobility? Sure coach. We're thin at the 4 but you might still have to play some five but be quicker on D... can you drop weight and try to fill those roles? Sure coach. Can you try to facilitate back cuts when the offense is stagnating? Sure coach. Can you be a decent inbounder because we suck at that? Sure coach. Can you provide a spark on the glass and on loose balls? Sure coach. Can you be a leader on the floor with your effort and your commitment to the system that we run? No problem coach.

I'm not saying there aren't good points being made. I'm just not sure that his value is being fully realized and that, maybe, expectations were too high to begin with. I think he has more dunks than anyone on the squad in his time as a Hoya (Josh is leading this year) so that should say something too. In any case, Nate is a guy that is easy to cheer for and, while it's not eye-popping, he has improved. He does a lot of things that don't get much attention well. He also, like everyone who gives a crap about what they're doing, tries to do too much sometimes. Good. I like that quality. There are reasons he gets the minutes he gets and it's not just because there aren't more "talented" guys on the team. It's just so damn tantalizing to think what his game could look like if he had a reliable mid-range jumper. Personally, I'd like to see that more for Nate than for the team but, as others have mentioned, it would help the team tremendously. Anyway, I agree with some of what hoyasaxa2003 said and, intuitively, really do agree with most of what SFHoya said with regard to being a coach's son.

Honestly, I find him only a slightly better version of Benimon 2.0. They both could not score and turned the ball a lot, but people described them as doing a lot of "intangibles" that are not shown on stat sheet.