Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Feb 28, 2014 8:59:33 GMT -5
The Fox Sports broadcast referenced Markel Starks' favorite phrase, which he may or may not have been kidding when he responded, "It is what it is." This team "is what it is", too--a car wobbling its way down the schedule, a front end out of alignment, with worn out tires in the back. When the road is smooth, they can pick up speed. When it's uphill, the offense stalls. Those that bemoan the coaching ought to look at what's out there and appreciate the effort from what is arguably Georgetown's weakest team since 2003-04. The visible offensive lulls and late game mistakes are not a reflection of coaching but of fatigue--this team has been playing two guards for 36+ minutes a game since Korea and it shows. The continued overemphasis on recruiting 6-8 wing men takes its toll in seasons like this, and the other options simply can't carry this team. Lubick is a solid defender but has no confidence to shoot. Trawick can provide defense but inconsistent offense. Bowen can provide some offense but wildly inconsistent defense. Cameron has hit the freshman wall. Domingo has dropped off the map. There's not much left to work with entering March, and Starks and DSR will sputter to the finish because that's what tired players do, like it or not. If there was any encouragement down the stretch is that Georgetown will not quit, whether it's Creighton on senior night or an awkward NIT game at Comcast Center in two weeks. Bradley Hayes played beyond expectations in the game, had a block, a couple of good rebounds and one of the more confident pair of free throws you will ever see from a player with a combined 33 minutes of action in the last 58 games. But because the staff would not get him a run against Elon or High Point or Colgate, he was an easy mark for Gardner, though Hopkins wasn't going to be much better. And at this point, Hayes may be a better third option down the stretch than Ayegba, who has slid off the stat sheet with more fouls (72) than points (52). There will be plenty of time to commiserate in the off season, but put aside the nonsense that Georgetown isn't committed or that the program is in irrecoverable decline. This season is a run of bad luck and bad timing -- starting with Greg Whittington's ACL and continuing right through Josh Smith's lack of commitment and losing Jabril Trawick in a key stretch of the season when wins would have really made a difference. It is what it is. I basically agree with this, though of course in college hoops the coach is also the GM, so if you have roster construction problems it falls on the same guy. I agree there is a disturbing lack of development with our 4s and 5s. And I will just reiterate what I said a moment ago: I think the "program is in decline" attitude is a not-completely-out-of-line reaction to the fact that we're sitting in 7th place in a conference that ESPN won't cover and that is going to be won by a team that was in the Missouri Valley Conference last season. A year ago and for the past many years, we believed and could legitimately argue--at least until the NCAAs started--that we were a peer program with Louisville, Syracuse, and Connecticut. That feels really far away right now.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Feb 28, 2014 9:21:57 GMT -5
It is amazing that the refs called about 400 fouls during the game but missed but obvious foul on the last play. DSR should have converted that shot, but he was fouled without question. I understand that refs "swallow their whistle" at the end of games, but that was inexcusable. So frustrating.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2014 9:38:45 GMT -5
I don't know how you come away from last night not impressed with Hayes. I've thought he was a scrub since seeing him at Kenner, but he did as admirable a job on Gardner as was possible under the circumstances. His fronting was good -- the only one of our bigs to try to deny the interior pass -- and his footwork to defend was the best out of our bigs. His stop on Gardner with under a minute to go is what gave us the ball with a chance to win. Some of the fouls that were called on him earlier were bogus, but in-line what the general whistle-happy nature of the game. Also, Garnder is just a beast inside and is going to get his defender in foul trouble no matter what. Considering how little Hayes has played and my low expectations, yeah, I was pretty pleased with him. Let me reiterate yet again, I'm not one of those people that has used Hayes as a cause celebre all season, but any objective viewer last night would have found his work commendable. I would also get into his work on the offensive boards and the ft line, but I don't want to repeat mine and other people's earlier posts. Mostly, what this is about, as Big Dog said, is that he is an alternative to the L-H-A. I had to laugh about the three on 6-7-8-9-10 comment because it's so sadly true. I too can't remember a front court that was ever this bad, although my fandom only goes back about 15 years. And yes, Joshua Smith did wreck our season. I never really listened to the people that make negative prognostications about players for personal reasons, but the people that warned us about Joshua Smith -- and Greg Whittington, for that matter -- when we were going after him proved more right than even they could have ever imagined. Jus a program killer-- at least for this season. Really robbed Hayes of a chance to develop early in the spring. And if Hayes wanted to transfer after this season, could anyone really blame him?
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Feb 28, 2014 9:45:01 GMT -5
Why do we play so much zone? The first 10 minutes of the second half were extremely difficult to watch. It is very ineffective and does not protect us from fouling and we constantly lost the only real shooter they had. Defense is the major weakness on this team and is the reason we are not at least a .500 team in conference. Of course playing generally ineffectively on the road doesn't help much. There must be a rule that all big men must commit their 5 fouls in 10 minutes of play. because we opened in man at quickly put the front line in foul trouble.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,017
|
Post by dense on Feb 28, 2014 9:57:18 GMT -5
Was Otto Porter really so phenomenal that he was able to drag this ragtag bunch of misfits to 13 wins in a far stronger conference last year? At the start of the season, I felt like the loss of Porter would at least partly be nullified by the losses of Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt, UConn, and Cincy, and we'd end up okay. But I guess not. Yes
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,017
|
Post by dense on Feb 28, 2014 10:01:42 GMT -5
I've been thinking about that comment about the front court and I can't think of a worst one...but I'm sure there has been some. I just shake my head at how Moses and Hopkins have little defensive awareness. And Lubick (i won't talk about the inbounds passes). Ok cool, JTIII, you trust players and are loyal to them, but if they're repeatedly NOT getting the job done, why start them and play them so many minutes. Talent is on the bench. By this time, I think Domingo could be a good option. Hayes too. but i ain't gonna beat a dead horse. sigh... To me, the kicker that makes this front court truly abysmal is that even once you get past the fact that when they get the ball you find yourself thinking "don't turn it over," they don't have to be guarded at all on the defensive end, they can't shoot, and they can't stop fouling in droves, you then have to sit there and realize that they are totally incapable of making free throws. This I agree with. Hopkins and Lubick are both really good team defenders but even that has not been evident this year. I think some of that has been the new rules but some has been letting their offense play spill over into defense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2014 10:03:02 GMT -5
Why do we play so much zone? The first 10 minutes of the second half were extremely difficult to watch. It is very ineffective and does not protect us from fouling and we constantly lost the only real shooter they had. Defense is the major weakness on this team and is the reason we are not at least a .500 team in conference. Of course playing generally ineffectively on the road doesn't help much. There must be a rule that all big men must commit their 5 fouls in 10 minutes of play. because we opened in man at quickly put the front line in foul trouble. Serious question: When Nate, Moses and Mikael are all sitting on the bench because they've fouled out with 10 minutes to play, does the thought go through any of their minds that they need to be doing something different? maybe moving their feet more, not reaching, restraining themselves on over the back plays, being overly-aggressive 50 feet from the basket, not challenging and giving up a layup every now and then? Do the coaches tell them any of this? It'd be one thing is this was a one-off game where the refs hosed them, but I mean this is a nightly occurrence. Sticking with this plan is the craziest in-game tactic I've seen from the staff/players in JT3's entire tenure.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,607
|
Post by guru on Feb 28, 2014 10:11:04 GMT -5
The Fox Sports broadcast referenced Markel Starks' favorite phrase, which he may or may not have been kidding when he responded, "It is what it is." This team "is what it is", too--a car wobbling its way down the schedule, a front end out of alignment, with worn out tires in the back. When the road is smooth, they can pick up speed. When it's uphill, the offense stalls. Those that bemoan the coaching ought to look at what's out there and appreciate the effort from what is arguably Georgetown's weakest team since 2003-04. The visible offensive lulls and late game mistakes are not a reflection of coaching but of fatigue--this team has been playing two guards for 36+ minutes a game since Korea and it shows. The continued overemphasis on recruiting 6-8 wing men takes its toll in seasons like this, and the other options simply can't carry this team. Lubick is a solid defender but has no confidence to shoot. Trawick can provide defense but inconsistent offense. Bowen can provide some offense but wildly inconsistent defense. Cameron has hit the freshman wall. Domingo has dropped off the map. There's not much left to work with entering March, and Starks and DSR will sputter to the finish because that's what tired players do, like it or not. If there was any encouragement down the stretch is that Georgetown will not quit, whether it's Creighton on senior night or an awkward NIT game at Comcast Center in two weeks. Bradley Hayes played beyond expectations in the game, had a block, a couple of good rebounds and one of the more confident pair of free throws you will ever see from a player with a combined 33 minutes of action in the last 58 games. But because the staff would not get him a run against Elon or High Point or Colgate, he was an easy mark for Gardner, though Hopkins wasn't going to be much better. And at this point, Hayes may be a better third option down the stretch than Ayegba, who has slid off the stat sheet with more fouls (72) than points (52). There will be plenty of time to commiserate in the off season, but put aside the nonsense that Georgetown isn't committed or that the program is in irrecoverable decline. This season is a run of bad luck and bad timing -- starting with Greg Whittington's ACL and continuing right through Josh Smith's lack of commitment and losing Jabril Trawick in a key stretch of the season when wins would have really made a difference. It is what it is. I basically agree with this, though of course in college hoops the coach is also the GM, so if you have roster construction problems it falls on the same guy. I agree there is a disturbing lack of development with our 4s and 5s. And I will just reiterate what I said a moment ago: I think the "program is in decline" attitude is a not-completely-out-of-line reaction to the fact that we're sitting in 7th place in a conference that ESPN won't cover and that is going to be won by a team that was in the Missouri Valley Conference last season. A year ago and for the past many years, we believed and could legitimately argue--at least until the NCAAs started--that we were a peer program with Louisville, Syracuse, and Connecticut. That feels really far away right now. Man, losses to Marquette really take a lot out of the Big Dog... Sorry you're so down about the future of the program, but you're acting a little hysterical. EDIT: And your derogatory reference to the Missouri Valley Conference implies that you haven't been paying attention to what's happened in college basketball over the last decade. The world is a lot flatter. It's not a great time for a down season, that's true, but there are things to be happy about going forward for this program. You just choose to see every possibility from the most negative possible perspective, it seems.
|
|
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 28, 2014 10:11:15 GMT -5
because we opened in man at quickly put the front line in foul trouble. Serious question: When Nate, Moses and Mikael are all sitting on the bench because they've fouled out with 10 minutes to play, does the thought go through any of their minds that they need to be doing something different? maybe moving their feet more, not reaching, restraining themselves on over the back plays, being overly-aggressive 50 feet from the basket, not challenging and giving up a layup every now and then? Do the coaches tell them any of this? It'd be one thing is this was a one-off game where the refs hosed them, but I mean this is a nightly occurrence. Sticking with this plan is the craziest in-game tactic I've seen from the staff/players in JT3's entire tenure. When I see the fouling in the front court... I ask the question " They have to be doing this in practice"? There is no way they can be hacking every other min during the game and then in practice play foul free.. Are they being advised to do something different?? Are they being advised of the repercussions? Or is there a feeling of well there are no other options..so they can do whatever it takes to stop the man from getting to the rim.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Feb 28, 2014 10:27:31 GMT -5
What... Do you even watch his complete game? He wasn't much better in the last game bur tonight dreadful is a compliment. turnover going to the hoop please out of control with no clue he wasn't getting to the basket. His defense is well non existent if you care to really watch him in any zone situation still doesn't know where to be, turns his head and get beat continually in man guarding off the ball. Lets be honest he may be the worst passer in d1 basketball at the 2 and 3. came in at 15-6 and he went out i believe it was close to 22-22 or there abouts. For every hustle play he makes there are at least 4 wtf moves either with the ball setting or trying to set a screen i haven't yet seen him do it correctly or on defense, heck about half the turnovers he gets are the result of being out of position. And plaese don't tell me about confidence its about talent shooting, catching, handle passing and awareness he has none of it. Don't mean to attack the kid but the fact that we don't have another option at the 3 is a big reason why we're 7-9 and not 11-5 despite all the roster changes. I get it.. You dont like Aaron Bowen...even when he was putting up numbers your complaint was "Well we did not win the game"... You feel better now that u bashed him?? Don't remember "well we did not win the game" but i may have said that. Not the point. Which you clearly miss. It not a personal bash at Bowen. Its simply as unbiased as possible {and yes i admit there are clearly clouded biases that I may have towards him} observation about his complete game abilities and total contribution. The game/His game is not based on 25 min 2-7 7 points 2 steals 2 assits and should have had 2 others but Lubick missed the pass. I loved how you went after the ball out of bounds Its about his complete game which perhaps you haven't taken the purple glasses of to watch. A simple example against Prov. big effort trying to save the ball out of bounds late first half. Ball inbounded to Cotton Bowen is confused with the defensive call steps away boom Cotton hits first three. next time down again confused with a zone or man leaves him totally unchallenged and another 3. and cotton is back in the game. hits one over DSR from about 26 ft after Bowen went to the bench. Be a cheerleader for him i am when warrented but please look and understand how weak his complete game really is. Its not like he's a freshman been in the program for 4 years with half a year injured and still does not have the basic skills and BBall IQ of a decent high school freshman at ho-hum high. Watch the game and you might learn something.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Feb 28, 2014 10:32:55 GMT -5
This team is inconsistent. This coach is inconsistent. This conference is inconsistent. Hard to stay objective when the disppointments start piling up, but it is really unfortunate to see all of the wild mood swings from game to game when it comes to critiquing the players, the coach and the program. This is an imperfect team and an imperfect coach with ill-fitting pieces. Yet, the players work their tails off and I believe that the same is true of the coaching staff. There are only two players who deserve criticism for their effort/actions this season. One is no longer on the team and the other is sitting at the end of the bench in a suit. The coach gambled on Smith--in hindsight it was clearly a mistake. The coach saw the player that could have been, instead of the one that actually had played for UCLA for 2+ years. Smith was an immediate liability on the boards and a no-show on defense. Yet, at the time he was a better option at the post than the alternatives.
JT III is neither the great coach his defenders claim , nor the bad coach others see after close losses. He has not had a good year. As one of the highest paid coaches in the nation, he is fair game when he and his team underperform. I get that and have no reluctance to criticize his game management, short rotation, recruiting failures and failures to develop some of the players on the team. But at some point reality must overcome emotion and Hoya fans must acknowledge that he cannot perform miracles. Just a year ago, he won the toughest conference in the nation with a team that had one star player surrounded by the same players he has this season. Take away the "glue" that was Porter and it all comes apart as we can see this year. He is also trying to recruit to an institution that cares about academics--even for its atheletes-- and will suspend a star. He is recruiting to a school with horrible facilities, minimal student support and no campus arena. He is recruiting to a conference that has been playing to many empty seats on a new television network that still prizes practice laps on a speedway more than it does college basketball. He has many challenges and it seems ridiculous to read some of the judgments being passed based upon a single disappointing season. He is an imperfect coach, but still the right fit for this program.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on Feb 28, 2014 10:35:25 GMT -5
Tough loss. Really frustrating since we had two very good chances to win at the end. Kind of epitomizes our entire season -- fought hard, but just not good enough to get it done. Random thoughts, ala Larry King:
- Thought DFW's recent post here was very good. - The frontcourt's lack of development and uncanny ability to pick up fouls is beyond frustrating. - I don't see this team winning the next two games, so I don't have my hopes up for anything. But I don't agree with some of the really pessimistic and negative posts about JTIII and the future. It's a bad year, but I can deal with it. If we don't get back in the groove next year or the year after, then, yes, we have a problem. If this recruiting class is allowed to play and lives up to the hype, then we should be fine. - The fact that a former MVC team may win the Big East is a good thing -it means the conference made a smart move. Didn't see too many complaints when Louisville joined the Big East and did well.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Feb 28, 2014 10:35:48 GMT -5
Hayes used his body to play position defense. Gardner still powered past him a couple of times, but Bradley has the size to effectively defend. Moses and Hopkins seem to feel that "good defense" means trying to block or alter every shot - also why they are poor rebounders, since block attempts get them out of position. Hayes still seems a little slow, but he clearly is working his butt off in practice and was ready when he had the chance. If he can play the way he did last night, he is better than Moses - and with Moses and Lubick gone next year, Bradley should get his chance, so I don't think he is going anywhere.
|
|
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 28, 2014 10:39:55 GMT -5
I get it.. You dont like Aaron Bowen...even when he was putting up numbers your complaint was "Well we did not win the game"... You feel better now that u bashed him?? Don't remember "well we did not win the game" but i may have said that. Not the point. Which you clearly miss. It not a personal bash at Bowen. Its simply as unbiased as possible {and yes i admit there are clearly clouded biases that I may have towards him} observation about his complete game abilities and total contribution. The game/His game is not based on 25 min 2-7 7 points 2 steals 2 assits and should have had 2 others but Lubick missed the pass. I loved how you went after the ball out of bounds Its about his complete game which perhaps you haven't taken the purple glasses of to watch. A simple example against Prov. big effort trying to save the ball out of bounds late first half. Ball inbounded to Cotton Bowen is confused with the defensive call steps away boom Cotton hits first three. next time down again confused with a zone or man leaves him totally unchallenged and another 3. and cotton is back in the game. hits one over DSR from about 26 ft after Bowen went to the bench. Be a cheerleader for him i am when warrented but please look and understand how weak his complete game really is. Its not like he's a freshman been in the program for 4 years with half a year injured and still does not have the basic skills and BBall IQ of a decent high school freshman at ho-hum high. Watch the game and you might learn something. Georgetown - Marquette 1/20/14 Game Discussion
Post by sleepy on Jan 23, 2014 at 1:07pmI am not insulting Aaron and give him credit where due. I have never blamed him for the lack of team success but would point out that a player of his ability within the system doesn't fit most of the time. To those who have contantly harped about give him more time based upon his stats please watch the game as a whole. How an offense and defense is contructed and run and his role in it and it is very clear. Despite the fact that Caprio scares me, on offense his passing screening and movement opened up shots and lanes against MU that hadn't been around since Jabril went out. Yes i would have liked to see more of Aaron in a off/def switch late in the game and in OT that lies on III. BTW we have lost 3 of 4 with those stats. They are pretty worthless numbers. It all about how you play the whole game. Please watch it.
You have never said anything positive about Aaron Bowen... Even down play his positive stats/games. Ignore other players in the starting lineup who are struggling to point him out. This one post is just 1 among others... Don't know why u single him out and ignore other players but u do. At least you admit you are biased towards him...that is a start.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 28, 2014 10:47:40 GMT -5
Like almost everybody on our bench not named Starks or DSR (and maybe Trawick, if he can continue his post-jaw break performance), Bowen is a flawed role player who has some strengths and weaknesses. Bowen has had some good games and some bad ones. Last night happened to be on the bad end of the spectrum. I am okay with that - Bowen has improved this year, and he has given us some needed contributions at some key times, but I also recognize that by his nature he is an inconsistent player and his performance will vary game to game.
I don't think it's helpful to obsess over Bowen's game-to-game stats. It just shows he's an inconsistent player, but that does not mean he doesn't have a positive role to play on the team.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Feb 28, 2014 10:49:51 GMT -5
If you think Sleepy ignores other players who don't produce, you haven't been playing attention!
Aaron has a positive effect once every 2 or 3 games. It can be the difference in a win - or ONE of the differences in a loss, along with non-productivity by our other role players.
It wasn't the missed 3's that got to me last night, or even the defensive lapses on the only shooter Marquette had; it was the spin move into the paint followed by a 5-foot jumper that was 2 feet short.
|
|
Dhall
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by Dhall on Feb 28, 2014 10:56:36 GMT -5
I have to give credit to Hoyatalkers - 33 pages of discussion and analysis on this game. How about this: Marquette has better players than Georgetown, and so do most of the rest of the teams in the Big East (which explains our losing record).
Next year, we have more talent if the freshmen are as good as touted, but we might have as many or more losses as that talent adjusts to play at the college level. Realistically, this program is at least two years away from being where we want it to be. Save your energy and just be patient for that, because there's nothing that can change it.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,996
|
Post by EtomicB on Feb 28, 2014 11:01:24 GMT -5
Hayes used his body to play position defense. Gardner still powered past him a couple of times, but Bradley has the size to effectively defend. Moses and Hopkins seem to feel that "good defense" means trying to block or alter every shot - also why they are poor rebounders, since block attempts get them out of position. Hayes still seems a little slow, but he clearly is working his butt off in practice and was ready when he had the chance. If he can play the way he did last night, he is better than Moses - and with Moses and Lubick gone next year, Bradley should get his chance, so I don't think he is going anywhere. All it took was 11 minutes of playing time to sway you huh Frazier? Welcome aboard my friend, welcome aboard.. I'll be honest he competed much better than I thought he would which really begs the question of what took so long for JT3 to play him? I really liked how vocal he was on D too. The kid is still very raw and he'll have up & downs like most young players but he has a good upside that should have been explored long before last night..
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 28, 2014 11:03:58 GMT -5
Why do we play so much zone? The first 10 minutes of the second half were extremely difficult to watch. It is very ineffective and does not protect us from fouling and we constantly lost the only real shooter they had. Defense is the major weakness on this team and is the reason we are not at least a .500 team in conference. Of course playing generally ineffectively on the road doesn't help much. There must be a rule that all big men must commit their 5 fouls in 10 minutes of play. because we opened in man at quickly put the front line in foul trouble. The criticisms of zone are befuddling to me. We had 18 fouls across 53 minutes of "big man" play. We were playing Aaron Bowen much of the game at PF. And we weren't staying on Thomas even when we were in man.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,996
|
Post by EtomicB on Feb 28, 2014 11:04:02 GMT -5
I have to give credit to Hoyatalkers - 33 pages of discussion and analysis on this game. How about this: Marquette has better players than Georgetown, and so do most of the rest of the teams in the Big East (which explains our losing record). Next year, we have more talent if the freshmen are as good as touted, but we might have as many or more losses as that talent adjusts to play at the college level. Realistically, this program is at least two years away from being where we want it to be. Save your energy and just be patient for that, because there's nothing that can change it. Give it up Dhall, the great majority of this thread was used for in game discussions... Take your snarkiness somewhere else..
|
|