hoyajmw
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,028
|
Post by hoyajmw on Mar 30, 2015 9:03:19 GMT -5
Of interest locally in DC area, JTIII was a guest this AM on the premier of the local sports talk show on 980 AM, "The Man Cave." He didn't say anything especially interesting during the time I heard him (I tuned in about half-way through), but his appearance is noteworthy because this show is being positioned as the African-American alternative to the very popular "Sports Junkies" and replaces the formerly VERY Terp-centric Andy Pollin show (which had Maryland color man Chris Knoche and Gary Williams on constantly, giving virtually no coverage/discussion ever to the Hoyas). At the conclusion of the interview today the hosts (former Post writer Jason Reid and another guy named Chris Paul -- not the player of course) implied JTIII's appearances will be a regular (maybe even weekly) part of the program. Certainly would make sense if they are trying to carve a new niche. If anyone else heard the interview from the start/I missed anything newsworthy, please chime in...
|
|
kghoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,986
|
Post by kghoya on Mar 30, 2015 14:26:13 GMT -5
He rarely says anything interesting on record.
|
|
McBricks
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
What Rocks.
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by McBricks on Mar 30, 2015 14:32:28 GMT -5
So he didn't talk about fundamentals, in-game coaching and his hatred of using timeouts to stop a run?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 15:09:36 GMT -5
Sticktoitiveness, was the topic of conversation…
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Mar 30, 2015 15:17:58 GMT -5
Sticktoitiveness, was the topic of conversation… Did he mention Josh Smith? You know, the exception who proves the rule?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Mar 30, 2015 15:54:41 GMT -5
Did he mention Bradley? Reggie?
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Mar 30, 2015 15:57:33 GMT -5
Anything about the temperature of his seat?
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Mar 30, 2015 17:14:56 GMT -5
He rarely says anything interesting on record. But he did after the EWU coach put his foot in his mouth lol
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,428
|
Post by TC on Mar 30, 2015 17:27:58 GMT -5
Any word on redshirting Govan, Derrickson, and Johnson?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Mar 30, 2015 19:08:45 GMT -5
There's really on one question to ask: was he smiling?
|
|
|
Post by hoyacane11 on Mar 31, 2015 13:54:23 GMT -5
Would rather he spend more time scrapping that terrible offense that no one else in basketball runs, and run one that actually FITS his personnel.
|
|
dense
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by dense on Mar 31, 2015 18:09:21 GMT -5
Would rather he spend more time scrapping that terrible offense that no one else in basketball runs, and run one that actually FITS his personnel. There are a good number of teams that run it.
|
|
|
Post by hoyacane11 on Apr 2, 2015 13:54:57 GMT -5
Would rather he spend more time scrapping that terrible offense that no one else in basketball runs, and run one that actually FITS his personnel. There are a good number of teams that run it. Not true, name one good team that runs that garbage.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Apr 2, 2015 14:12:05 GMT -5
There are a good number of teams that run it. Not true, name one good team that runs that garbage. You're right. No one else at any level runs our offense. It's essentially unique. It's certainly not a Princeton offense and hasn't been for a long time (although it may be again next year). But even assuming for argument's sake that we do run "that garbage"? Tons of teams -- at every level -- utilize five-out motion offenses. (Again, we haven't used one for quite some time.) John Beilein's is very similar to a pure Princeton offense. A pure flex offense is quite often five-out. So is a triangle offense. Michigan State uses a multitude of sets, but a ton of them include UCLA cuts off of a five-man at the high post -- a staple of the classic Princeton offense. In the NBA? Goodness, pure motion offenses are now back in vogue after decades in the wilderness. A lot of Atlanta sets look almost exactly like a lot of what we run. Check this one out: Obviously, they move the ball far more quickly and look snappier (they're better than we are), but it should look very familiar. Dribble handoff by a big man at the top of the circle and then he gets a bounce pass in the pinch-post back from the guard before handing off to someone who comes around his handoff-screen and penetrates. So far, that could very well be Mikael, DSR, and Peak running that action. In the meantime, there's a fake UCLA or flare cut on the backside and the screener flares out to the three-line, while the guy that would have been making the UCLA cut steps back behind another screen. That's pretty tricky -- trickier than what we do now but we used to run that exact action with Wallace and Green all the time). And we certainly have guys fake a cut and step back behind a screen constantly, right? Like on every single one of Jason Clark's three point attempts (and many of DSRs). Again, they subsequently move it a lot crisper and they have a bunch of guys that can shoot. But the set -- the principles -- are almost precisely what we do. It's ignorance -- nothing more -- that results in blind criticism of our offensive principles.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,713
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 2, 2015 14:34:01 GMT -5
Not true, name one good team that runs that garbage. You're right. No one else at any level runs our offense. It's essentially unique. It's certainly not a Princeton offense and hasn't been for a long time (although it may be again next year). Tons of teams -- at every level -- utilize five-out motion offenses. (Again, we haven't used one for quite some time.) John Beilein's is very similar to a pure Princeton offense. A pure flex offense is quite often five-out. So is a triangle offense. Michigan State uses a multitude of sets, but a ton of them include UCLA cuts off of a five-man at the high post -- a staple of the classic Princeton offense. In the NBA? Goodness, pure motion offenses are now back in vogue after decades in the wilderness. A lot of Atlanta sets look almost exactly like a lot of what we run. Check this one out: Obviously, they move the ball far more quickly and look snappier (they're better than we are), but it should look very familiar. Dribble handoff by a big man at the top of the circle and then he gets a bounce pass in the pinch-post back from the guard before handing off to someone who comes around his handoff-screen and penetrates. In the meantime, there's a fake UCLA or flare cut on the backside and the screener flares out to the three-line, while the guy that would have been making the UCLA cut steps back behind another screen (that action is a bit trickier than what we do but we use to run it with Wallace all the time). Again, they subsequently move it a lot crisper and they have a bunch of guys that can shoot. But the set -- the principles -- are almost precisely what we do. It's ignorance -- nothing more -- that results in blind criticism of our offensive principles. I think it's more the fact that JT3 very rarely has the pieces to run it properly, therefore it looks slow & stagnant.. An offensive system/philosophy is okay in any form if you have the personnel to run it..
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Apr 2, 2015 14:38:34 GMT -5
You're right. No one else at any level runs our offense. It's essentially unique. It's certainly not a Princeton offense and hasn't been for a long time (although it may be again next year). Tons of teams -- at every level -- utilize five-out motion offenses. (Again, we haven't used one for quite some time.) John Beilein's is very similar to a pure Princeton offense. A pure flex offense is quite often five-out. So is a triangle offense. Michigan State uses a multitude of sets, but a ton of them include UCLA cuts off of a five-man at the high post -- a staple of the classic Princeton offense. In the NBA? Goodness, pure motion offenses are now back in vogue after decades in the wilderness. A lot of Atlanta sets look almost exactly like a lot of what we run. Check this one out: Obviously, they move the ball far more quickly and look snappier (they're better than we are), but it should look very familiar. Dribble handoff by a big man at the top of the circle and then he gets a bounce pass in the pinch-post back from the guard before handing off to someone who comes around his handoff-screen and penetrates. In the meantime, there's a fake UCLA or flare cut on the backside and the screener flares out to the three-line, while the guy that would have been making the UCLA cut steps back behind another screen (that action is a bit trickier than what we do but we use to run it with Wallace all the time). Again, they subsequently move it a lot crisper and they have a bunch of guys that can shoot. But the set -- the principles -- are almost precisely what we do. It's ignorance -- nothing more -- that results in blind criticism of our offensive principles. I think it's more the fact that JT3 very rarely has the pieces to run it properly, therefore it looks slow & stagnant.. An offensive system/philosophy is okay in any form if you have the personnel to run it.. Oh, I agree. I actually think it's somewhat miraculous our offenses have been as competitive as they have with the offensive pieces we've had over the last five years (I include 12-13 in that mix). At any one time, how many "complete" (i.e., shoot and penetrate...or post and shoot) guys have we had on the floor together? And, for that reason, I think the last several years we've actually moved far away from what he'd really like to do in an ideal world. But we've still been pretty darned good. That's part of my point. Not only is the criticism of an offense we haven't run in the past several years, but also the general criticism of the offensive principles is idiotic.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,713
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 2, 2015 14:46:16 GMT -5
I think it's more the fact that JT3 very rarely has the pieces to run it properly, therefore it looks slow & stagnant.. An offensive system/philosophy is okay in any form if you have the personnel to run it.. Oh, I agree. I actually think it's somewhat miraculous our offenses have been as competitive as they have with the offensive pieces we've had over the last five years (I include 12-13 in that mix). And I think the last several years we've actually moved far away from what he'd really like to do in an ideal world. That's part of my point. Not only is the criticism of an offense we haven't run in the past several years, but also the general criticism of the offensive principles is idiotic. We have to be honest and admit the team tries to run it a lot.. does it change up depending on who the go to folks are, sure but it's still being run.. The staff doesn't even bother to change up the signals, we still see the spin dribble at the top of the key way too much for my liking.. You're right though saying the system is garbage is wrong..
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 2, 2015 14:54:52 GMT -5
There are a good number of teams that run it. Not true, name one good team that runs that garbage. If you won't even admit that teams in college basketball and the NBA run similar offenses, then no one on this board is going to respect your opinion, which appears to be garbage.
|
|
dense
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by dense on Apr 2, 2015 14:55:10 GMT -5
I'd like to thank aleutian for typing that out. Because the Atlanta Hawks was gonna be the example I was gonna use first to say at our level how about the team dominating the NBA.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Apr 2, 2015 15:11:55 GMT -5
Oh, I agree. I actually think it's somewhat miraculous our offenses have been as competitive as they have with the offensive pieces we've had over the last five years (I include 12-13 in that mix). And I think the last several years we've actually moved far away from what he'd really like to do in an ideal world. That's part of my point. Not only is the criticism of an offense we haven't run in the past several years, but also the general criticism of the offensive principles is idiotic. We have to be honest and admit the team tries to run it a lot.. does it change up depending on who the go to folks are, sure but it's still being run.. The staff doesn't even bother to change up the signals, we still see the spin dribble at the top of the key way too much for my liking.. You're right though saying the system is garbage is wrong.. We often start the same way, which is something many teams do so that opposing teams don't instantly know what set they're in. And we almost always try to spread the defense out before we actually start the action we're trying to run -- something the 35 second clock permits but the 24 second clock doesn't. So, a lot of times the first 10 seconds of our half-court offense looks exactly the same every time down the floor and year to year. I know some people are frustrated by that because it can seem like a waste of time, but why not try to get an easy look or mismatch by spreading the floor at the outset? In any event, I think from there it changes a lot. For sure, though, we're always going to run a motion-based offense. And if that's not someone's cup of tea, well, so be it.
|
|