|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 20, 2016 22:07:45 GMT -5
If you can get a one two punch at center you do it. Villanova won the title with 6-11 245 lbs (7-3 wingspan) big boy Daniel Ocehfu. So even though people say they play small ball they needed that big man to win the title. They really didn't have an adequate backup for Ochefu and rode Ochefu during the tournament. If Ochefu's ankle injury during the tournament had been more serious or if he gotten into foul trouble, Villanova would have been in big trouble. I'm not sure why UNC didn't attack Ochefu as getting Ochefu in foul trouble would have been an easy way to win the title game. You have Govan and Hayes and throw in Agau and we really don't have to worry about foul trouble or someone getting injured at the big man spot. Only flaw in your analogy is Ochefu is good. Hayes is not. Govan can be very good as he is way more talented than Hayes but needs to develop and Hayes coming back will impede that. Why would Hayes be Ochefu? Govan is the #1 and Hayes is the backup. If Govan can't beat out Hayes this year then he's not as good as people think. But I don't see happening.
|
|
eagle54
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,471
|
Post by eagle54 on Apr 20, 2016 22:20:27 GMT -5
Only flaw in your analogy is Ochefu is good. Hayes is not. Govan can be very good as he is way more talented than Hayes but needs to develop and Hayes coming back will impede that. Why would Hayes be Ochefu? Govan is the #1 and Hayes is the backup. If Govan can't beat out Hayes this year then he's not as good as people think. But I don't see happening. That's naive in the culture our staff uses. They run a union shop when it comes to playing time which is why DSR played too much this past year. Turn the page professor and you may just surprise yourself.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,258
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 20, 2016 23:31:34 GMT -5
MCI, like you said, he wasn't getting enough touches or BE defenses were tougher... the reason: other BE teams had him marked. Like the poster said, you're not being fair with the Villanova game. Check the video because we had plenty of wide open 3s and it was a result of defenses packing it in when Bradley was playing with one guard keeping an eye on DSR.
Anyway, this is what JT3 wants and I agree that it would be awesome.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 21, 2016 9:16:55 GMT -5
While we were better with Hayes than without him, IMO he is not a difference maker. I thought he had almost as many negatives as positives. While I respect the fact that staff wants him back (They certainly know more than I do), I won't be disappointed should he not return.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Apr 21, 2016 9:17:23 GMT -5
MCI, like you said, he wasn't getting enough touches or BE defenses were tougher... the reason: other BE teams had him marked. Like the poster said, you're not being fair with the Villanova game. Check the video because we had plenty of wide open 3s and it was a result of defenses packing it in when Bradley was playing with one guard keeping an eye on DSR. Anyway, this is what JT3 wants and I agree that it would be awesome. This Villanova game was a perfect illustration about what frustrated me regarding Hayes last season. He seemed to get the vast majority of his baskets before the second timeout of a half only to be pretty much inconsequential the remainder of the half (game). And, no, defenses can’t be completely attributed to that because opportunities are going to come regardless. But I may not be able to pin this on Hayes considering this inability to exploit a big man with size and talent has been a problem plaguing III’s offense since Hibbert’s heyday. Just once I wanted to see a Gtown big man take 15 to 20 shots in a game when they had a huge mismatch advantage rather than settling for kickouts to teammates for three-point attempts. And frankly if III is never going to fully exploit such advantages when he has just one true big man with offensive skill inside the paint what is the point of having two big guys of that caliber? And it doesn’t matter what III wants if the NCAA doesn’t give it to him. In fact it would somewhat serve him right for not discovering the resource he had in Hayes until it was a bit late. But we’ll see. Personally I want Govan in the starting spot because in terms of all-around ability to score anywhere in the halfcourt he showed more on this front than any other frosh big man III has had. However if it ends up being Hayes then so be it. I just want the team to win games and it didn’t do that much of that last season even with both of these guys on the roster.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 21, 2016 9:23:44 GMT -5
Hayes should not have been playing in front of either Smith or Hopkins. If he does come back, let's hope improves by leaps and bounds. It's not impossible.
|
|
|
Post by daymondmyles on Apr 21, 2016 9:28:32 GMT -5
I'm guessing this is unlikely, but could Gtown be doing this for him but not look to keep him? That is, he could be a 5th year transfer to somewhere else?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,845
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 21, 2016 9:50:42 GMT -5
Hayes should not have been playing in front of either Smith or Hopkins. If he does come back, let's hope improves by leaps and bounds. It's not impossible. Not sure I get your point Spirit? What does Smith or Hops have to do with this?
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Apr 21, 2016 10:30:53 GMT -5
It seems pretty clear to me that if Jesse makes even marginal improvement over last year, Jesse getting the majority of minutes at the five is the best option for this roster to be as successful as it can be. In the hypothetical "even slight improvement" world, he's playing 25-28 MPG, looking to take three-pointers, hitting a fair number of them, and he is consistently making fifteen footers. Thus, he is a direct scoring weapon in a pick and pop situation and when he simply handles the ball at the elbow at the top of the key. Just as importantly, he is an indirect weapon, because he has to be closely guarded in those circumstances, such that LJ (and the new guards on the roster) have driving opportunities without a shot-blocker in the way. That, to me, is the BEST chance we have to be very good next year. I'm not sure that's even debatable, given the skill-set of the rest of the roster. It's really not vital that he be better in the post than he was last year, because I don't think we're going to want him spending much time down there, unless he has a mismatch.
It's reasonable to think that if BJ came back, he'd have improved some more, based on the fact that he clearly improved during his time up to now. But it's not reasonable to think that he would be taking his defender out of the lane in ways that Jesse can. Thus, we might be able to more efficiently score with him in the game next year as compared to our scoring this year, but it's doubtful we would be as efficient as we would be if Jesse got most of the minutes and had improved a bit.
Obviously, the problem is that we don't know for sure if Jesse will improve a bit. If Jesse does, and if BJ comes back and plays 20-25 MPG, we've probably made our team worse than it could be. If Jesse does improve, and if BJ comes back and only plays 10 MPG, then why on earth did BJ come back here? If Jesse doesn't improve, and if BJ comes back, well that's as good as we could do under reduced circumstances. And if Jesse doesn't improve, and BJ doesn't come back (but could have), that's obviously the worst possible result.
It's a tough one. To me, probably the best possible selfish option would be to plan on Jesse getting a bit better but hedging a bit. Perhaps you achieve that if BJ knew coming in that he was going to play only 10-15 MPG, but would be featured exclusively in those 10-15 minutes, as a showcase to a future professional option. In the best case, Jesse plays as much as he would have anyway. And BJ obviously would play more than that if Jesse regresses, had foul issues, got hurt, or the matchup demanded it. But I can't imagine BJ would agree to that, and frankly he shouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by iheartdurenbros on Apr 21, 2016 11:05:39 GMT -5
Hayes would give us another weapon. Yes, he has his weaknesses, but he was always good for some points early in games. He did become less effective as defenses adjusted. But he really can be someone who can throw teams off balance. With Govan and Akoy available to play the 5, it really can make the Hoyas a difficult team to prepare for. So, even if he plays only 10-15 minutes per game, he could have a tremendous impact -- and I think he is smart enough to realize that is what it is about.
A number of you are selling his leadership role on the team. His importance this team was so evident after his injury. The Hoyas missed his communication on the floor and he helped bolster the confidence of our younger players.
While I really think his return as a player is a real long shot, he is the type of person I would love to see involved this coming year. I don't think he wants a non-player role (nor should he). It is a shame that he was mismanaged early on.
FWIW I think the staff has done an impressive job in selling this program to recruits and current players (so far no transfers, knock on wood).
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 21, 2016 12:07:57 GMT -5
Hayes should not have been playing in front of either Smith or Hopkins. If he does come back, let's hope improves by leaps and bounds. It's not impossible. Not sure I get your point Spirit? What does Smith or Hops have to do with this? Just a quick response about not discovering Hayes earlier.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Apr 21, 2016 13:19:29 GMT -5
There is no doubt this team would be better with Hayes. He was automatic on his hook shot. The majority of teams cannot guard him one on one when he gets proper position. Next year when the defense collapses, he could kick it out to a Pryor, LJ or Mulmore and instead of taking a quick 3, they could actually dribble drive and create something even better.
Hayes's contribution also goes beyond measurable stats, he was one of the few "voices" on the court last season. The communication on defense was awful without Hayes and III mentioned this in his post games. I like Govan, but those 6 games without Hayes were a clear indictment that he was not ready to be a starter and be the anchor they needed.
The staff deserves significant blame here. Given his high school performance, this kid was a project and redshirt candidate from day 1. Bradley needed that extra year to grow his game. Shame he only had one season to show it. Forget the Hoyas, I really hope this works out for Hayes because it could position him better for the future, but it is a longshot at best.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 13:22:06 GMT -5
Quick comment.
Hayes made a substantial leap in his game from previous years. Isn't it possible that he may improve even more next year?? Everyone appears to be judge him on what he did this year without considering what he might do next year if he puts in the work.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Apr 21, 2016 14:56:29 GMT -5
I think Bradley deserves another year for the 3 years his behind had to endure sitting on those pines. I am not sure the team would be better with Hayes, but he certainly has grown by leaps and bounds in his confidence level and his ability to shoot the hook shot. I am either way on this one.
|
|
|
Post by triplehoya09 on Apr 21, 2016 15:43:04 GMT -5
Any idea on a timetable of when the request would be granted/denied?
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 21, 2016 16:35:59 GMT -5
It seems pretty clear to me that if Jesse makes even marginal improvement over last year, Jesse getting the majority of minutes at the five is the best option for this roster to be as successful as it can be. In the hypothetical "even slight improvement" world, he's playing 25-28 MPG, looking to take three-pointers, hitting a fair number of them, and he is consistently making fifteen footers. Thus, he is a direct scoring weapon in a pick and pop situation and when he simply handles the ball at the elbow at the top of the key. Just as importantly, he is an indirect weapon, because he has to be closely guarded in those circumstances, such that LJ (and the new guards on the roster) have driving opportunities without a shot-blocker in the way. That, to me, is the BEST chance we have to be very good next year. I'm not sure that's even debatable, given the skill-set of the rest of the roster. It's really not vital that he be better in the post than he was last year, because I don't think we're going to want him spending much time down there, unless he has a mismatch. It's reasonable to think that if BJ came back, he'd have improved some more, based on the fact that he clearly improved during his time up to now. But it's not reasonable to think that he would be taking his defender out of the lane in ways that Jesse can. Thus, we might be able to more efficiently score with him in the game next year as compared to our scoring this year, but it's doubtful we would be as efficient as we would be if Jesse got most of the minutes and had improved a bit. Obviously, the problem is that we don't know for sure if Jesse will improve a bit. If Jesse does, and if BJ comes back and plays 20-25 MPG, we've probably made our team worse than it could be. If Jesse does improve, and if BJ comes back and only plays 10 MPG, then why on earth did BJ come back here? If Jesse doesn't improve, and if BJ comes back, well that's as good as we could do under reduced circumstances. And if Jesse doesn't improve, and BJ doesn't come back (but could have), that's obviously the worst possible result. It's a tough one. To me, probably the best possible selfish option would be to plan on Jesse getting a bit better but hedging a bit. Perhaps you achieve that if BJ knew coming in that he was going to play only 10-15 MPG, but would be featured exclusively in those 10-15 minutes, as a showcase to a future professional option. In the best case, Jesse plays as much as he would have anyway. And BJ obviously would play more than that if Jesse regresses, had foul issues, got hurt, or the matchup demanded it. But I can't imagine BJ would agree to that, and frankly he shouldn't. I think both of them will improve on defense simply because we won't have DSR, Tre Campbell and Cameron (The Defensive Sieve) as the primary defenders guarding the perimeter for the majority of the game. Alot of times guards/swingmen would blow by them forcing Hayes or Govan to leave their man (who got an easy basket) or picking up the foul. I don't think Hayes will ever be a great or even good defender (which is why it took him so long to get PT) but if you can surround him with length/athleticism and plus defenders then he becomes less of a liability on that end while also being able to seal off his man or gran his own defensive rebounds. Govan actually was able to block some shots last year so I expect his defense to improve even more.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 21, 2016 19:45:44 GMT -5
It seems pretty clear to me that if Jesse makes even marginal improvement over last year, Jesse getting the majority of minutes at the five is the best option for this roster to be as successful as it can be. In the hypothetical "even slight improvement" world, he's playing 25-28 MPG, looking to take three-pointers, hitting a fair number of them, and he is consistently making fifteen footers. Thus, he is a direct scoring weapon in a pick and pop situation and when he simply handles the ball at the elbow at the top of the key. Just as importantly, he is an indirect weapon, because he has to be closely guarded in those circumstances, such that LJ (and the new guards on the roster) have driving opportunities without a shot-blocker in the way. That, to me, is the BEST chance we have to be very good next year. I'm not sure that's even debatable, given the skill-set of the rest of the roster. It's really not vital that he be better in the post than he was last year, because I don't think we're going to want him spending much time down there, unless he has a mismatch. It's reasonable to think that if BJ came back, he'd have improved some more, based on the fact that he clearly improved during his time up to now. But it's not reasonable to think that he would be taking his defender out of the lane in ways that Jesse can. Thus, we might be able to more efficiently score with him in the game next year as compared to our scoring this year, but it's doubtful we would be as efficient as we would be if Jesse got most of the minutes and had improved a bit. Obviously, the problem is that we don't know for sure if Jesse will improve a bit. If Jesse does, and if BJ comes back and plays 20-25 MPG, we've probably made our team worse than it could be. If Jesse does improve, and if BJ comes back and only plays 10 MPG, then why on earth did BJ come back here? If Jesse doesn't improve, and if BJ comes back, well that's as good as we could do under reduced circumstances. And if Jesse doesn't improve, and BJ doesn't come back (but could have), that's obviously the worst possible result. It's a tough one. To me, probably the best possible selfish option would be to plan on Jesse getting a bit better but hedging a bit. Perhaps you achieve that if BJ knew coming in that he was going to play only 10-15 MPG, but would be featured exclusively in those 10-15 minutes, as a showcase to a future professional option. In the best case, Jesse plays as much as he would have anyway. And BJ obviously would play more than that if Jesse regresses, had foul issues, got hurt, or the matchup demanded it. But I can't imagine BJ would agree to that, and frankly he shouldn't. I think both of them will improve on defense simply because we won't have DSR, Tre Campbell and Cameron (The Defensive Sieve) as the primary defenders guarding the perimeter for the majority of the game. Alot of times guards/swingmen would blow by them forcing Hayes or Govan to leave their man (who got an easy basket) or picking up the foul. I don't think Hayes will ever be a great or even good defender (which is why it took him so long to get PT) but if you can surround him with length/athleticism and plus defenders then he becomes less of a liability on that end while also being able to seal off his man or gran his own defensive rebounds. Govan actually was able to block some shots last year so I expect his defense to improve even more. Since LJ averaged far more minutes than Reggie (and Tre for that matter), I am puzzled as to why you did not include him in the defensive perimeter deficiencies.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 21, 2016 20:17:51 GMT -5
I think both of them will improve on defense simply because we won't have DSR, Tre Campbell and Cameron (The Defensive Sieve) as the primary defenders guarding the perimeter for the majority of the game. Alot of times guards/swingmen would blow by them forcing Hayes or Govan to leave their man (who got an easy basket) or picking up the foul. I don't think Hayes will ever be a great or even good defender (which is why it took him so long to get PT) but if you can surround him with length/athleticism and plus defenders then he becomes less of a liability on that end while also being able to seal off his man or gran his own defensive rebounds. Govan actually was able to block some shots last year so I expect his defense to improve even more. Since LJ averaged far more minutes than Reggie (and Tre for that matter), I am puzzled as to why you did not include him in the defensive perimeter deficiencies. Cause LJ is a good defender. Fouling was an issue under the new rules but in terms of defending people were not blowing by him.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 21, 2016 21:19:39 GMT -5
"Good defender" is stretching it. Certainly more athletic than DSR or Reggie or even Tre, but LJ does not do much with that athleticism on the defensive end. His problem is losing his guy, not getting blown by.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 21, 2016 21:32:14 GMT -5
"Good defender" is stretching it. Certainly more athletic than DSR or Reggie or even Tre, but LJ does not do much with that athleticism on the defensive end. His problem is losing his guy, not getting blown by. According to Sean Miller, he was considered the best defender on the Team USA championship team and the reason he started his freshman year was because III loved his defense, so I would say he is a good defender.
|
|