|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Dec 17, 2017 20:20:00 GMT -5
Waters is a player, but he's not a Hoya so we need to move on. MacClung will get the keys to the car. Sodom is way too raw to be a factor this year and maybe even next. Obviously, we've moved on and so had Tremont, but I think if a fan wants to respond to another fan's post about Tremont Waters, so be it. If you don't like it keep scrolling. It's simple. Yes, I'm hoping the "McClung" can get the job done and make good decisions on the ball. We will still need another point guard imo. Sodom is not a raw as you think he is. Once a coach shows he believes in his players they flourish. I respect your opinion though.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 17, 2017 20:20:16 GMT -5
Glide, you have broken the HoyaTalk record for the number of times the same point has been made in separate posts, in this case, need for a point guard. Since the number of your similar posts is now 4,387, you are the winner of the Siberian sweepstakes. Just post your debit card and PIN numbers and you are on your way. No that record will be broken by the "soft schedule" guys. Mark my words the soft schedule will be talked about everyday, all season.
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on Dec 17, 2017 20:20:54 GMT -5
Yes and if you took the time to read i am the one who posted he had 5 turnovers...and it was my sarcastic was of saying what is the point of bringing up Waters accolades in the post Cuse wrap up? Hes never playing here, we can all turn the page...
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Dec 17, 2017 20:24:21 GMT -5
Yes and if you took the time to read i am the one who posted he had 5 turnovers...and it was my sarcastic was of saying what is the point of bringing up Waters accolades in the post Cuse wrap up? Hes never playing here, we can all turn the page... Not sure about that. Read some negative things on "Relaxed Tiger" that might cause a transfer.
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Dec 17, 2017 20:26:59 GMT -5
Glide, you have broken the HoyaTalk record for the number of times the same point has been made in separate posts, in this case, need for a point guard. Since the number of your similar posts is now 4,387, you are the winner of the Siberian sweepstakes. Just post your debit card and PIN numbers and you are on your way.[/quote Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 17, 2017 20:28:06 GMT -5
Yes and if you took the time to read i am the one who posted he had 5 turnovers...and it was my sarcastic was of saying what is the point of bringing up Waters accolades in the post Cuse wrap up? Hes never playing here, we can all turn the page... Not sure about that. Read some negative things on "Relaxed Tiger" that might cause a transfer. Cliff notes?
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Dec 17, 2017 20:28:10 GMT -5
Yes and if you took the time to read i am the one who posted he had 5 turnovers...and it was my sarcastic was of saying what is the point of bringing up Waters accolades in the post Cuse wrap up? Hes never playing here, we can all turn the page... You responded to TC and so did I. I also respond to the both of you. Problem?
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Dec 17, 2017 20:32:23 GMT -5
Yes and if you took the time to read i am the one who posted he had 5 turnovers...and it was my sarcastic was of saying what is the point of bringing up Waters accolades in the post Cuse wrap up? Hes never playing here, we can all turn the page... can we?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 21:48:56 GMT -5
Syracuse is expected to finish around 10th place in the ACC standings this year. Six ACC teams are ranked this week. Pittsburgh is expected to finish dead last (15th place).
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 17, 2017 21:49:00 GMT -5
Way too many Syracuse fans there yesterday, but at least the arena was full and the intensity level was raised. I hope we continue the series in the future.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 17, 2017 22:20:12 GMT -5
[img src="http:// " alt=" "]
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 17, 2017 22:59:17 GMT -5
Rebounding numbers were very deceptive from the feel of the game as they only out rebounded the Hoyas by 1 after Derrickson fouled out and they missed most of their offensive rebound put backs. This game was a perfect example of how pre game analytics can kill you. They're one of the worst teams in the country shooting, numbers dictate playing a zone to force them to shoot over the top. The Hoyas did & Syracuse shot a season's best from distance. I actually think switching back forth from man to zone and finishing the game in man was the way to play. Yes it's easy to say this now as a Monday morning QB, but here's why I say it; Syracuse is a team with very limited depth. Make them work to get shots on Defense. Keep the pressure up and force some mistakes and turnovers. Also this wasn't a particularly skilled Syracuse team. At most they play 3 offensive threats & 2 players who don't want to touch the ball 3 feet away from the basket. In a man to man defense you can funnel the ball into a 2nd defender and force the ball to non offensive players forcing them to make decisions and shots. Also Syracuse has seen all kind of 2/3 zone looks in their own practice so they better have an idea of how to beat. The zone allowed them to rest on offense while swinging the ball around the perimeter and also get the feet set on their shots. Lastly after rewatch the game, the initial communication in the zone defense was good especially along the baseline but it would break down as the ball moved around the perimeter. Mosely, Blair and Pickett struggled to communicate at the top of the zone on multiple occasions which lead to several of Battles makes and the 2 threes in overtime, last one giving giving them a 4 point lead around the 2:30 mark that the Hoyas never recovered from. We actually outrebounded Syracuse in the first half, but in the second half + OT our numbers were really bad: (Second Half + OT) Georgetown: 4 offensive rebounds, 12 defensive rebounds Syracuse: 15 offensive rebounds, 11 defensive rebounds It's no surprise to me that we lost with that type of rebounding disparity, especially when you add in all those threes Syracuse hit, too. On defense, I agree with you. I would have probably turned back to man as soon as they started draining the threes, mostly because I thought our man to man defense was actually pretty effective. We were forcing Syracuse to toss up a lot of long twos in the first half, and it worked well.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 17, 2017 23:17:30 GMT -5
The fouls were adding up, so zone may have been the way to go. We should have won- the refs made a number of devastating calls at the end of the game. As for their press, Mosely got mugged a few times.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,911
|
Post by EtomicB on Dec 17, 2017 23:23:30 GMT -5
Rebounding numbers were very deceptive from the feel of the game as they only out rebounded the Hoyas by 1 after Derrickson fouled out and they missed most of their offensive rebound put backs. This game was a perfect example of how pre game analytics can kill you. They're one of the worst teams in the country shooting, numbers dictate playing a zone to force them to shoot over the top. The Hoyas did & Syracuse shot a season's best from distance. I actually think switching back forth from man to zone and finishing the game in man was the way to play. Yes it's easy to say this now as a Monday morning QB, but here's why I say it; Syracuse is a team with very limited depth. Make them work to get shots on Defense. Keep the pressure up and force some mistakes and turnovers. Also this wasn't a particularly skilled Syracuse team. At most they play 3 offensive threats & 2 players who don't want to touch the ball 3 feet away from the basket. In a man to man defense you can funnel the ball into a 2nd defender and force the ball to non offensive players forcing them to make decisions and shots. Also Syracuse has seen all kind of 2/3 zone looks in their own practice so they better have an idea of how to beat. The zone allowed them to rest on offense while swinging the ball around the perimeter and also get the feet set on their shots. Lastly after rewatch the game, the initial communication in the zone defense was good especially along the baseline but it would break down as the ball moved around the perimeter. Mosely, Blair and Pickett struggled to communicate at the top of the zone on multiple occasions which lead to several of Battles makes and the 2 threes in overtime, last one giving giving them a 4 point lead around the 2:30 mark that the Hoyas never recovered from. We actually outrebounded Syracuse in the first half, but in the second half + OT our numbers were really bad: (Second Half + OT) Georgetown: 4 offensive rebounds, 12 defensive rebounds Syracuse: 15 offensive rebounds, 11 defensive rebounds It's no surprise to me that we lost with that type of rebounding disparity, especially when you add in all those threes Syracuse hit, too. On defense, I agree with you. I would have probably turned back to man as soon as they started draining the threes, mostly because I thought our man to man defense was actually pretty effective. We were forcing Syracuse to toss up a lot of long twos in the first half, and it worked well. The zone would have been fine if the players paid more attention to detail, only Battle & Bichette(sp?) were hitting from 3 so not keeping them within reach was terrible execution.. I know they're a bad shooting "team" overall but if you take out the 2-11 Battle had against Kansas he's hit 18-44 from 3(not counting yesterday) in his other games..
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Dec 18, 2017 1:10:24 GMT -5
Rebounding numbers were very deceptive from the feel of the game as they only out rebounded the Hoyas by 1 after Derrickson fouled out and they missed most of their offensive rebound put backs. This game was a perfect example of how pre game analytics can kill you. They're one of the worst teams in the country shooting, numbers dictate playing a zone to force them to shoot over the top. The Hoyas did & Syracuse shot a season's best from distance. I actually think switching back forth from man to zone and finishing the game in man was the way to play. Yes it's easy to say this now as a Monday morning QB, but here's why I say it; Syracuse is a team with very limited depth. Make them work to get shots on Defense. Keep the pressure up and force some mistakes and turnovers. Also this wasn't a particularly skilled Syracuse team. At most they play 3 offensive threats & 2 players who don't want to touch the ball 3 feet away from the basket. In a man to man defense you can funnel the ball into a 2nd defender and force the ball to non offensive players forcing them to make decisions and shots. Also Syracuse has seen all kind of 2/3 zone looks in their own practice so they better have an idea of how to beat. The zone allowed them to rest on offense while swinging the ball around the perimeter and also get the feet set on their shots. Lastly after rewatch the game, the initial communication in the zone defense was good especially along the baseline but it would break down as the ball moved around the perimeter. Mosely, Blair and Pickett struggled to communicate at the top of the zone on multiple occasions which lead to several of Battles makes and the 2 threes in overtime, last one giving giving them a 4 point lead around the 2:30 mark that the Hoyas never recovered from. We actually outrebounded Syracuse in the first half, but in the second half + OT our numbers were really bad: (Second Half + OT) Georgetown: 4 offensive rebounds, 12 defensive rebounds Syracuse: 15 offensive rebounds, 11 defensive rebounds It's no surprise to me that we lost with that type of rebounding disparity, especially when you add in all those threes Syracuse hit, too.On defense, I agree with you. I would have probably turned back to man as soon as they started draining the threes, mostly because I thought our man to man defense was actually pretty effective. We were forcing Syracuse to toss up a lot of long twos in the first half, and it worked well. Yeah I Know the team was out rebounded by 10 in the 2nd half and overtime but I still contend it wasn't as big of a deal as the numbers would lead you to believe. I'm going to play your numbers game with you hoyasaxa2003 to show you why the rebounding disparity in the 2nd half not only wasn't the reason but had very little impact on the Hoyas lost on Saturday. After Mosely made a pair of free throws to give the squad it's biggest lead of the game of 53-40 with 10:58 remaining, from that point on and through overtime the Hoyas were only out rebounded 16-12. The Hoyas were out rebounded by Cuse 10-4 in the opening 9 minutes of the 2nd half while increasing their lead +9 to a game high 13 points. This is another reason why you can't say numbers dictate outcomes of games. Did Syracuse get some timely rebounds that hurt, absolutely but I don't think a 4 rebound difference with a 13 point lead cost the Hoyas the game. Do you? The game was lost on the anomaly of them having a significantly good night (especially for them) from behind the arc while the Hoyas had a significantly poor game from 3 point range. That alongside some poor execution in handling the press and shot selection was what lead to blowing a 13 point lead.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 18, 2017 4:51:29 GMT -5
The fouls were adding up, so zone may have been the way to go. We should have won- the refs made a number of devastating calls at the end of the game. As for their press, Mosely got mugged a few times. Zone is basically a way to protect Govan and keep him out of foul trouble.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,911
|
Post by EtomicB on Dec 18, 2017 8:12:19 GMT -5
We actually outrebounded Syracuse in the first half, but in the second half + OT our numbers were really bad: (Second Half + OT) Georgetown: 4 offensive rebounds, 12 defensive rebounds Syracuse: 15 offensive rebounds, 11 defensive rebounds It's no surprise to me that we lost with that type of rebounding disparity, especially when you add in all those threes Syracuse hit, too.On defense, I agree with you. I would have probably turned back to man as soon as they started draining the threes, mostly because I thought our man to man defense was actually pretty effective. We were forcing Syracuse to toss up a lot of long twos in the first half, and it worked well. Yeah I Know the team was out rebounded by 10 in the 2nd half and overtime but I still contend it wasn't as big of a deal as the numbers would lead you to believe. I'm going to play your numbers game with you hoyasaxa2003 to show you why the rebounding disparity in the 2nd half not only wasn't the reason but had very little impact on the Hoyas lost on Saturday. After Mosely made a pair of free throws to give the squad it's biggest lead of the game of 53-40 with 10:58 remaining, from that point on and through overtime the Hoyas were only out rebounded 16-12. The Hoyas were out rebounded by Cuse 10-4 in the opening 9 minutes of the 2nd half while increasing their lead +9 to a game high 13 points. This is another reason why you can't say numbers dictate outcomes of games. Did Syracuse get some timely rebounds that hurt, absolutely but I don't think a 4 rebound difference with a 13 point lead cost the Hoyas the game. Do you? The game was lost on the anomaly of them having a significantly good night (especially for them) from behind the arc while the Hoyas had a significantly poor game from 3 point range. That alongside some poor execution in handling the press and shot selection was what lead to blowing a 13 point lead. The lead could have been 16 or 18 instead of 13 if Gtown had done a better job on the boards during this stretch, if the lead got to 16 instead of 13, Gtown wins in regulation.. As Syracuse made their run, they started making shots which means less OB's for them to get plus Gtown was turning the ball over so that's less DB's to be had also so it doesn't surprise me that Gtown was close to them board wise towards the end of the game.. The rebound factor was very big in this game imo..
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,508
|
Post by bostonfan on Dec 18, 2017 8:32:56 GMT -5
Yeah I Know the team was out rebounded by 10 in the 2nd half and overtime but I still contend it wasn't as big of a deal as the numbers would lead you to believe. I'm going to play your numbers game with you hoyasaxa2003 to show you why the rebounding disparity in the 2nd half not only wasn't the reason but had very little impact on the Hoyas lost on Saturday. After Mosely made a pair of free throws to give the squad it's biggest lead of the game of 53-40 with 10:58 remaining, from that point on and through overtime the Hoyas were only out rebounded 16-12. The Hoyas were out rebounded by Cuse 10-4 in the opening 9 minutes of the 2nd half while increasing their lead +9 to a game high 13 points. This is another reason why you can't say numbers dictate outcomes of games. Did Syracuse get some timely rebounds that hurt, absolutely but I don't think a 4 rebound difference with a 13 point lead cost the Hoyas the game. Do you? The game was lost on the anomaly of them having a significantly good night (especially for them) from behind the arc while the Hoyas had a significantly poor game from 3 point range. That alongside some poor execution in handling the press and shot selection was what lead to blowing a 13 point lead. The lead could have been 16 or 18 instead of 13 if Gtown had done a better job on the boards during this stretch, if the lead got to 16 instead of 13, Gtown wins in regulation.. As Syracuse made their run, they started making shots which means less OB's for them to get plus Gtown was turning the ball over so that's less DB's to be had also so it doesn't surprise me that Gtown was close to them board wise towards the end of the game.. The rebound factor was very big in this game imo.. Rebounding for the Hoyas is going to have to be a complete team effort all season. Jessie and Marcus have both become better on the glass, but Pickett struggles because of his lack of overall strength at this point. Against a team like Syracuse with multiple guys who hit the offensive glass they really need to have the guards come back and help on the glass. That can be tough for a team that is trying to get out and run and have it's guards release down the floor, but they are going to have to make sure they secure the rebound first. I thought the overall defense was really good for most of the game, they seemed to be very active, physical and make the extra effort plays to compete on the defensive end. While the Cuse made some big threes against the zone late that really hurt, I think the zone can, and will, be an effective defense at times this season. Finishing games is a hard thing for younger players, and guys who have not had much success at this level lately. Hopefully this is a learning experience and they improve moving forward. They need to trust each other and the systems the staff is giving them and build some confidence that they can close out tough games. They are not going to blow out any teams in the Big East, so finding a way to play a complete 40 minute game and finish off games where they are in a position to win is going to be a big thing this season.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Dec 18, 2017 10:21:35 GMT -5
This had the feel of Maryland game the last two years. I think if JTIII were still here, we would be losing our minds. Let's be clear, Cuse isn't good. Battle got hot and hit tough shots and the 5th on Marcus was ridiculous. That press was primed to be passed on to the mid-court and away for a break just about every time. We didn't move off those corners quick enough though and Mulmore's instincts aren't great on the press break. I thought our best bet was Jamarko or Kaleb and to pass over the press.
Hopefully it is a learning experience and we can get the next two and then surprise at the beginning of the Big East. Butler at home, at Marquette & Depaul and home to Creighton are all games we can win. 3-1 in that run and suddenly we have life.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 18, 2017 11:14:00 GMT -5
Yeah I Know the team was out rebounded by 10 in the 2nd half and overtime but I still contend it wasn't as big of a deal as the numbers would lead you to believe. I'm going to play your numbers game with you hoyasaxa2003 to show you why the rebounding disparity in the 2nd half not only wasn't the reason but had very little impact on the Hoyas lost on Saturday. After Mosely made a pair of free throws to give the squad it's biggest lead of the game of 53-40 with 10:58 remaining, from that point on and through overtime the Hoyas were only out rebounded 16-12. The Hoyas were out rebounded by Cuse 10-4 in the opening 9 minutes of the 2nd half while increasing their lead +9 to a game high 13 points. This is another reason why you can't say numbers dictate outcomes of games. Did Syracuse get some timely rebounds that hurt, absolutely but I don't think a 4 rebound difference with a 13 point lead cost the Hoyas the game. Do you? The game was lost on the anomaly of them having a significantly good night (especially for them) from behind the arc while the Hoyas had a significantly poor game from 3 point range. That alongside some poor execution in handling the press and shot selection was what lead to blowing a 13 point lead. Was rebounding the reason we lost? That's impossible to stay for sure, of course, but giving your opponents more shots (via the offensive rebounds) in a close game never helps - regardless of when those rebounds happen. Given that we went to overtime, arguably a lot of things could have been the difference. But, if we weren't outrebounded 10-4 in the opening 9 minutes of the second half, we would have almost certainly gotten more shots off in that period (and Syracuse would have had fewer shot attempts), so if Syracuse scores one less basket or we get one of our own, we arguably win in regulation. In an overtime game, you can always point to anything that could have changed the game - turnovers, missed layups, missed defensive assignments, threes that almost go in but don't (I seem to recall one from either Kaleb or Derrickson that almost went in, but rimmed out). So could we have won without rebounding better? Absolutely. Less turnovers and we probably win, too. On the positive side, the only Big East team even close to as good at offensive rebounds as Syracuse is Seton Hall. Xavier is pretty good too, and DePaul, actually, too. But otherwise, the rest of the Big East doesn't excel at rebounding on the offensive end, at least.
|
|