rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 7:39:19 GMT -5
Based upon Kenner, where will the 3 pt. shooting come from this year? Lots of candidates but from what I can tell the only pure shooter from that distance is Cameron and he comes with defensive questions. DSR is streaky and seems best suited for the mid-range shot. Jabril is also very streaky though he showed signs of coming on last year. Bowen--not from distance. Ditto for Peak and Campbell. Copeland? White? If Smith is going to be successful in the offense the Hoyas have to be able to stretch the defense. Good question. Regarding 3's, this year's team only needs to make up for Markel's production last year. Looking at the numbers, it's not a big hole to cover as he averaged 1.7 3's made pg of 5.3 3's attempted pg for 32.6%. What needs to happen is that Reggie needs to improve his 32% (0.8 of 2.4), not good at all for a pure shooter, and for Smith and the rest of the team to improve the inside scoring so it opens up the perimeter shooters. With a little improvement from Reggie, there will be less long rebounding and opportunities for the other team to counter quickly. An improved Reggie along with Copeland, Peak, an improved Jabril and DSR should cover for Markel's production and could easily make GU a better 3-pt shooting team than last year. Campbell has a nice stroke I wouldn't be surprised if he is a plus 3pt shooter with better spacing and rhythm.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,259
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 12, 2014 7:51:49 GMT -5
Good question. Regarding 3's, this year's team only needs to make up for Markel's production last year. Looking at the numbers, it's not a big hole to cover as he averaged 1.7 3's made pg of 5.3 3's attempted pg for 32.6%. What needs to happen is that Reggie needs to improve his 32% (0.8 of 2.4), not good at all for a pure shooter, and for Smith and the rest of the team to improve the inside scoring so it opens up the perimeter shooters. With a little improvement from Reggie, there will be less long rebounding and opportunities for the other team to counter quickly. An improved Reggie along with Copeland, Peak, an improved Jabril and DSR should cover for Markel's production and could easily make GU a better 3-pt shooting team than last year. Campbell has a nice stroke I wouldn't be surprised if he is a plus 3pt shooter with better spacing and rhythm. Agree, I just think there's a logjam in front if him for minutes and he will not get much pt this year, but he's ready to be thrown in the fire if needed.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 12, 2014 7:53:08 GMT -5
News flash Henry was way worse for 3 years and now he's a legit big man lets give our guys the benefit of the doubt and see what happens, tts. On the other hand, there's Lubick.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 8:27:40 GMT -5
News flash Henry was way worse for 3 years and now he's a legit big man lets give our guys the benefit of the doubt and see what happens, tts. On the other hand, there's Lubick. We gave him the benefit of the doubt did we not?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,259
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 12, 2014 8:31:42 GMT -5
On the other hand, there's Lubick. We gave him the benefit of the doubt did we not? Last year JT3 had no choice.
|
|
JB5
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 690
|
Post by JB5 on Aug 12, 2014 8:57:27 GMT -5
While the frosh showed a good deal of promise, JT3 will likely stick with his pattern and start the season with his experienced guys starting. I expect we'll see DSR, Trawick, Cameron, Hopkins and Smith at the beginning. Copeland and Peak will get their minutes and will increase as the season goes on if they produce. For all his strong play in Kenner, Peak was notably outplayed by Trawick when they went head to head and will find less success against zone defenses than he had in summer ball. It will be a nice luxury for JT3 to be able to go with whatever combination of Trawick, DSR, Peak, Cameron, Bowen and Campbell for the perimeter spots is most effective on a given day.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 9:41:52 GMT -5
We gave him the benefit of the doubt did we not? Last year JT3 had no choice. Ok well every situation isn't going to be identical. Part of being a good coach is keeping an open mind.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Aug 12, 2014 10:18:46 GMT -5
Based upon Kenner, where will the 3 pt. shooting come from this year? Not that that isn't a fair question, but I have to point out that typically the three point shooting from Hoya players always seem to be worse in the KL. Either that or the folks tallying the shot attempts and makes over the years have just been awful at it. Typically both as a team and individuals the Hoyas seem to knock down that shot better in the real season. Also while you claim Cameron is a more pure shooter than DSR from three, the fact reamins DSR nonetheless shot the three-ball much better than Cameron last season.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Aug 12, 2014 10:19:38 GMT -5
Last year JT3 had no choice. Ok well every situation isn't going to be identical. Part of being a good coach is keeping an open mind. Sims as a junior: 14MPG, 3.6ppg, 57.8%FG%, 3.2 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.1 TOs/game, 100,1 ORTG, 17.4% usage rate Hopkins as a junior: 20 MPG, 6.0 PPG, 42.7% FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.6 TOs/game, 92.2 ORTG, 21.1% usage rate Hopkins as a junior was worse offensively than Sims was as a junior. Sims was more efficient, made a much higher percentage of his shots and didn't dominate the ball like Hopkins does. Also, Hopkins stats were worse in conference than his overall stats: 5.5 PPG, 41.7 FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.1 APG, 1.8 turnovers/game, 86.6 ORTG, 20.4% usage rate. There's no reason to think Hopkins as a senior is going to turn into Sims as a senior and there's not a lot of reason to think Hopkins is going to be able to turn into a 5th option that doesn't waste possessions by forcing bad shots and turning the ball over. Gunners like to gun. That all being said, as I feel bad running down Hopkins' game, Hopkins did go from a comically bad rebounder as a sophomore to a mediocre one as a junior, so he has shown some improvement. Maybe he can turn into Nate Lubick offensively (106.5 ORTG, 12.9% usage rate) and play better defense (mainly by continuing to improve on the glass / cutting way down on his fouling), at which point he'd be a useful player, since he'd be converting open opportunities on offense, a good defender and wouldn't be using possessions that would be better used in the hands of DSR/Trawick/Smith/the freshmen.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Aug 12, 2014 10:24:06 GMT -5
While the frosh showed a good deal of promise, JT3 will likely stick with his pattern and start the season with his experienced guys starting. I expect we'll see DSR, Trawick, Cameron, Hopkins and Smith at the beginning. Copeland and Peak will get their minutes and will increase as the season goes on if they produce. For all his strong play in Kenner, Peak was notably outplayed by Trawick when they went head to head and will find less success against zone defenses than he had in summer ball. That happened in the very first KL game Peak played in, one in which he was likely trying to find his comfort zone. You are going to judge Peak on that? A game in which he got schooled by a player who is three years his senior? And what did Peak do after that once he got his feet wet and played against other guys who are (or were if they are no longer in college) at least as good as Jabril?
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Aug 12, 2014 10:40:40 GMT -5
Ok well every situation isn't going to be identical. Part of being a good coach is keeping an open mind. Sims as a junior: 14MPG, 3.6ppg, 57.8%FG%, 3.2 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.1 TOs/game, 100,1 ORTG, 17.4% usage rate Hopkins as a junior: 20 MPG, 6.0 PPG, 42.7% FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.6 TOs/game, 92.2 ORTG, 21.1% usage rate Hopkins as a junior was worse offensively than Sims was as a junior. Sims was more efficient, made a much higher percentage of his shots and didn't dominate the ball like Hopkins does. Also, Hopkins stats were worse in conference than his overall stats: 5.5 PPG, 41.7 FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.1 APG, 1.8 turnovers/game, 86.6 ORTG, 20.4% usage rate. There's no reason to think Hopkins as a senior is going to turn into Sims as a senior and there's not a lot of reason to think Hopkins is going to be able to turn into a 5th option that doesn't waste possessions by forcing bad shots and turning the ball over. Gunners like to gun. The only thing I'll object to is referring to Hopkins as a "gunner". I know many of you like looking at that usage rate info and judging players by it, but how can anyone honestly call any player in III's offense a gunner? I don't care how few minutes he played, the dude averaged a little over 5 shots per game. So it isn't as if he was chucking up shots every other time he touched the ball. If five shots per game makes one a gunner that says more about....well you know where I'm going with this. And frankly as bad as Hopkins was on that usage and efficiency fronts I'll still take him over guys like Nate Lubick who piled up "phony" high efficiency stats over the years by never taking shots unless he found himself underneath the basket with the ball in his hands. No one ever had to guard Lubick because he wanted no part in the burden of scoring.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 10:48:11 GMT -5
Ok well every situation isn't going to be identical. Part of being a good coach is keeping an open mind. Sims as a junior: 14MPG, 3.6ppg, 57.8%FG%, 3.2 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.1 TOs/game, 100,1 ORTG, 17.4% usage rate Hopkins as a junior: 20 MPG, 6.0 PPG, 42.7% FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.6 TOs/game, 92.2 ORTG, 21.1% usage rate Hopkins as a junior was worse offensively than Sims was as a junior. Sims was more efficient, made a much higher percentage of his shots and didn't dominate the ball like Hopkins does. Also, Hopkins stats were worse in conference than his overall stats: 5.5 PPG, 41.7 FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.1 APG, 1.8 turnovers/game, 86.6 ORTG, 20.4% usage rate. There's no reason to think Hopkins as a senior is going to turn into Sims as a senior and there's not a lot of reason to think Hopkins is going to be able to turn into a 5th option that doesn't waste possessions by forcing bad shots and turning the ball over. Gunners like to gun. That all being said, as I feel bad running down Hopkins' game, Hopkins did go from a comically bad rebounder as a sophomore to a mediocre one as a junior, so he has shown some improvement. Maybe he can turn into Nate Lubick offensively (106.5 ORTG, 12.9% usage rate) and play better defense (mainly by continuing to improve on the glass / cutting way down on his fouling), at which point he'd be a useful player, since he'd be converting open opportunities on offense, a good defender and wouldn't be using possessions that would be better used in the hands of DSR/Trawick/Smith/the freshmen. Ok I understand your position and agree with some points but numbers aren't the only story. Sure, according to you there's no reason to suggest that he'll make a jump this year but there's also nothing to suggest that he can't. He has all the tools (in fact, more than enough tools) and has been getting more comfortable with each passin year. He is very solid defensively and is good in both low post one-on-one defense and in help/weakside situations. I'm not trying to argue because you obviously have your mind set but when someone works hard for a program over the course of four years (and yes he has worked hard despite not putting everything together in an organized setting) you earn the right to an opportunity. We all know III has an MO and is gonna start him from day one so why not wait until he underperforms to start trying to determine what type of impact he can have this year. Dude is talented and a Hoya at heart. The numbers don't tell the full story the eye test will tell you that he's not a gunner, per se, he just has had a different role in the offense than some of his predecessors.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Aug 12, 2014 11:31:32 GMT -5
Speaking of Smith, is there anyone on this board who has a cousin, who has a friend, who has a sister, that works with an aunt of Smith, who has a picture of Joshua in gym shorts and jersey, taken this summer, that shows how much weight he has lost ( or gained)? I don't know...but I certainly do hope that we will soon be seeing the unveiling of the new Joshua Smith very soon.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Aug 12, 2014 11:51:53 GMT -5
News flash Henry was way worse for 3 years and now he's a legit big man lets give our guys the benefit of the doubt and see what happens, tts. I've got three years of data on Mikael. If he turns into Henry, let him do it in 15-20 min a game
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Aug 12, 2014 11:57:41 GMT -5
More than that, it doesn't matter what kind of leap Mikael makes, he doesn't provide offensive spacing. So if he's starting along with Josh up front, our offense simply won't work. When he's handling the ball on the perimeter, his defender will sag off and hinder our cutters. Josh won't have room to work on the block, either.
With that in mind, I'm praying for Copeland to be good enough to start at the four. With Josh, we need four guys around him who can either shoot the ball, or create with the ball in his hands.
Mikael does neither
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 12, 2014 11:58:38 GMT -5
News flash Henry was way worse for 3 years and now he's a legit big man lets give our guys the benefit of the doubt and see what happens, tts. I've got three years of data on Mikael. If he turns into Henry, let him do it in 15-20 min a game The idea that Sims was awful as a junior is a fiction created by many of the people on HoyaTalk. In reality, Sims made a pretty significant jump after his sophomore year and his junior year. Clearly, he was better as a senior, but he also was a pretty solid player backing up Vaughn in his junior year, as well. Mikael Hopkins' junior year was simply not as good as Sims. Could he make a jump? I certainly hope so, but unlike Sims who showed improvement in his junior year, Hopkins really only showed improvement on rebounding and he got worse with fouling.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Aug 12, 2014 11:58:36 GMT -5
Only way I want Mikael starting is at the five, where he's the guy on the block. If he's starting at the four, our offense is in trouble, period
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Aug 12, 2014 12:00:49 GMT -5
I've got three years of data on Mikael. If he turns into Henry, let him do it in 15-20 min a game The idea that Sims was awful as a junior is a fiction created by many of the people on HoyaTalk. In reality, Sims made a pretty significant jump after his sophomore year and his junior year. Clearly, he was better as a senior, but he also was a pretty solid player backing up Vaughn in his junior year, as well. Mikael Hopkins' junior year was simply not as good as Sims. Could he make a jump? I certainly hope so, but unlike Sims who showed improvement in his junior year, Hopkins really only showed improvement on rebounding and he got worse with fouling. Not fiction at all. Between the missed lay-ups, the silly fouls, the brick hands and the turnovers, offensively he's awful. Now he's a much better player on the defensive end, but him on offense is not getting us anywhere
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Aug 12, 2014 12:02:19 GMT -5
I have always been and continue to be dumbfounded by the negativity that surrounds Hopkins. By no means is he a star, and like most players, he has some obvious weaknesses in his game, but his play seems to bother many fans on some deeper level that I will never understand.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,351
|
Post by calhoya on Aug 12, 2014 12:04:59 GMT -5
Sims as a junior: 14MPG, 3.6ppg, 57.8%FG%, 3.2 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.1 TOs/game, 100,1 ORTG, 17.4% usage rate Hopkins as a junior: 20 MPG, 6.0 PPG, 42.7% FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.6 TOs/game, 92.2 ORTG, 21.1% usage rate Hopkins as a junior was worse offensively than Sims was as a junior. Sims was more efficient, made a much higher percentage of his shots and didn't dominate the ball like Hopkins does. Also, Hopkins stats were worse in conference than his overall stats: 5.5 PPG, 41.7 FG%, 4.9 RPG, 1.1 APG, 1.8 turnovers/game, 86.6 ORTG, 20.4% usage rate. There's no reason to think Hopkins as a senior is going to turn into Sims as a senior and there's not a lot of reason to think Hopkins is going to be able to turn into a 5th option that doesn't waste possessions by forcing bad shots and turning the ball over. Gunners like to gun. The only thing I'll object to is referring to Hopkins as a "gunner". I know many of you like looking at that usage rate info and judging players by it, but how can anyone honestly call any player in III's offense a gunner? I don't care how few minutes he played, the dude averaged a little over 5 shots per game. So it isn't as if he was chucking up shots every other time he touched the ball. If five shots per game makes one a gunner that says more about....well you know where I'm going with this. And frankly as bad as Hopkins was on that usage and efficiency fronts I'll still take him over guys like Nate Lubick who piled up "phony" high efficiency stats over the years by never taking shots unless he found himself underneath the basket with the ball in his hands. No one ever had to guard Lubick because he wanted no part in the burden of scoring. So true MCI. Hopkins at least gave us a chance to put points on the board, though he often missed his shots from close range. In contrast, Lubick for all his value actually hurt the team with his refusal to take the open shot on many occasions. Hopkins has not yet lived up to his potential, and perhaps as a result people have devalued him because the end result has thus far not matched the potential. However, his flaws were much more noticeable because of the lack of depth last year in the 4-5 positions. A full year of Smith and the presence of Whittington and/or Porter would have changed his role completely. Offensive shortcomings would not have been magnified.
|
|