drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,375
|
Post by drquigley on Dec 28, 2017 21:15:06 GMT -5
It is concerning that in the two games with comparable talent that we lost greatly in the second halves. Their coaches made adjustments and we didn’t respond to these adjustments effectively. It’s been a while since we outcoached our opponent, and not to rehash the previous coach, it’s comcerning to me to see that trend continue. "Comparable Talent"? Sadly we have no one on our roster who can compare to Martin or Baldwin or Battle. If we keep losing close games when, sometime in the future, we have comparable talent then I'll agree it's time to change coaches. But right now PE is doing very well playing a bad hand.
|
|
mfk24
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by mfk24 on Dec 28, 2017 21:19:05 GMT -5
It's also crazy to me that we're talking about losing second half leads being concerning when a couple months ago we didn't think we'd have these types of leads to begin with.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,399
|
Post by iowa80 on Dec 28, 2017 21:19:39 GMT -5
Despite the very mixed results of the last couple of years, some of the coaching comments show signs of expectations that are too high.. With all respect to the players who bust their butts, this is not a particularly good team from a talent perspective. I'd ask those questioning the coach where our lineup fits with other teams from, say, the Final Four forward. Even last year, we had a perimeter scorer and fine perimeter glue guy in LJ. This year our two best players don't handle the ball, and we're heavily reliant on a JUCO transfer, two freshman, and a small forward with marginal previous contributions. It's tough blowing big leads, but I at least see signs of a work in progress. I'll take progress over what I've recently seen here.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,326
|
Post by vv83 on Dec 28, 2017 22:07:42 GMT -5
It is concerning that in the two games with comparable talent that we lost greatly in the second halves. Their coaches made adjustments and we didn’t respond to these adjustments effectively. It’s been a while since we outcoached our opponent, and not to rehash the previous coach, it’s comcerning to me to see that trend continue. My take is that we don't have the personnel to respond to these kind of adjustments. Our guards can't shoot, so a sagging zone is going to give us problems. Our guards have shaky ballhandling skills, so an aggressive press from a big, athletic team is going to give us problems. What we really need to worry about is teams realizing they should play ONLY sagging zones and aggressive full court pressure against us. Because then we won't be able to build a 15-20 point lead before things get rocky. Ewing has certainly made some bad calls in these two losses (more Mosely, please!; try a zone to slow down Baldwin/MNartin) - but the main reason for these two losses is the talent limitations of our guards.
|
|
kbones17
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,186
|
Post by kbones17 on Dec 28, 2017 22:19:57 GMT -5
It is concerning that in the two games with comparable talent that we lost greatly in the second halves. Their coaches made adjustments and we didn’t respond to these adjustments effectively. It’s been a while since we outcoached our opponent, and not to rehash the previous coach, it’s comcerning to me to see that trend continue. My take is that we don't have the personnel to respond to these kind of adjustments. Our guards can't shoot, so a sagging zone is going to give us problems. Our guards have shaky ballhandling skills, so an aggressive press from a big, athletic team is going to give us problems. What we really need to worry about is teams realizing they should play ONLY sagging zones and aggressive full court pressure against us. Because then we won't be able to build a 15-20 point lead before things get rocky. Ewing has certainly made some bad calls in these two losses (more Mosely, please!; try a zone to slow down Baldwin/MNartin) - but the main reason for these two losses is the talent limitations of our guards. I agree with everything in this post but I still think we have comparable talent to both Syracuse and Butler (who aren’t very good either). We have a better center and PF, they had better wings and guards. And beyond these two games, in most of the cupcake games we built up an early lead early, then merely treaded water or gave some points back in the second half. So I am seeing a trend here that is concerning. I’m not giving up on PE or this team, and have liked a lot of what I’ve seen from PE and the direction of the program.
|
|
kbones17
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,186
|
Post by kbones17 on Dec 28, 2017 22:52:35 GMT -5
And one more thing: in the second halves our defense has been miserable. Syracuse put up 45 points, and Butler put up 51 points. Both of these teams play at a slower pace, and we absolutely could not get any stops. There’s a lot of focus-rightly-on our lack of backcourt shooting, but our defense is what really failed us.
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on Dec 28, 2017 22:53:08 GMT -5
Despite the very mixed results of the last couple of years, some of the coaching comments show signs of expectations that are too high.. With all respect to the players who bust their butts, this is not a particularly good team from a talent perspective. I'd ask those questioning the coach where our lineup fits with other teams from, say, the Final Four forward. Even last year, we had a perimeter scorer and fine perimeter glue guy in LJ. This year our two best players don't handle the ball, and we're heavily reliant on a JUCO transfer, two freshman, and a small forward with marginal previous contributions. It's tough blowing big leads, but I at least see signs of a work in progress. I'll take progress over what I've recently seen here. All fair points Iowa and I am asking this honestly to the board. Im not a fool, I know we dont have Nova like talent. We dont have Xavier, Seton Hall, Creighton, etc - talent. So let's say we had less talent than Cuse and Butler (not overly talented teams but I will concede that they have more) how are we getting out to 20 and 13 point leads? Ewing is a mastermind for 20 of the 40 minutes and then the other teams talent is taking over? I know its an insanely small sample size but what are the other coaches doing at halftime or heck half way through the 2nd half to adjust and we are not? Or honestly am I that blind that the lack of talent and inexperience is that glaring that we are lucky to be in these games? Again you tell me we blow a 20pt lead to Nova or Xavier I get it, i will admit a 20 point lead at home to a 2 player team that is middle of the pack in the big east at best is such a hard pill to swallow.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Dec 28, 2017 22:59:59 GMT -5
And one more thing: in the second halves our defense has been miserable. Syracuse put up 45 points, and Butler put up 51 points. Both of these teams play at a slower pace, and we absolutely could not get any stops. There’s a lot of focus-rightly-on our lack of backcourt shooting, but our defense is what really failed us. The thing nobody is mentioning is that e built the leads on Cuse and Butler because they missed a ton of wide open shots. I commented early in the Butler game thread that they were getting wide open shots they were just missing. Add that plus the fact they played half the 1st with their best player on the bench and voila we build a lead. When they start hitting those shots it's not because our defense got worse. Quite frankly our post defense is good but our perimeter D has sucked all year. That said Pat has been awful in end of game/OT situations. I'm not giving up on him and yes if this team had a lead guard it would be easier but Pat must get better. I'm not sure what our offense really is except dump it to Jessie except when we actually need to. That may come with a lead guard so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt there.
|
|
kbones17
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,186
|
Post by kbones17 on Dec 28, 2017 23:18:47 GMT -5
And one more thing: in the second halves our defense has been miserable. Syracuse put up 45 points, and Butler put up 51 points. Both of these teams play at a slower pace, and we absolutely could not get any stops. There’s a lot of focus-rightly-on our lack of backcourt shooting, but our defense is what really failed us. The thing nobody is mentioning is that e built the leads on Cuse and Butler because they missed a ton of wide open shots. I commented early in the Butler game thread that they were getting wide open shots they were just missing. Add that plus the fact they played half the 1st with their best player on the bench and voila we build a lead. When they start hitting those shots it's not because our defense got worse. Quite frankly our post defense is good but our perimeter D has sucked all year. That said Pat has been awful in end of game/OT situations. I'm not giving up on him and yes if this team had a lead guard it would be easier but Pat must get better. I'm not sure what our offense really is except dump it to Jessie except when we actually need to. That may come with a lead guard so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt there. I agree that they missed open shots in the first half, but I disagree that our defense wasn’t worse in the second half. We got basically no turnovers, allowed their best two players to take all of the shots, and didn’t block out on the few misses that Baldwin and Martin had. It was clear for the last fifteen minutes that they were getting any shot they wanted and we really do anything different scheme-wise to try to stop it from happening.
|
|
kbones17
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,186
|
Post by kbones17 on Dec 28, 2017 23:30:18 GMT -5
It would be interesting to track our second half scoring differential in BE play. Clearly if we go 5-13 or something similar it will be in the negative, but if we are consistently losing second half’s it would be a bad sign in my opinion.
|
|
dchoya72
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,488
|
Post by dchoya72 on Dec 29, 2017 6:00:34 GMT -5
Patience grasshopper. LOL....People must be allowed to make snd overcome mistakes. Both the coaches and player. I hope Jonathan Wallace is able to help these guys with their shooting, particularly Jagan. They have to put up hundreds of shots per day at gamespeed.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Dec 29, 2017 8:14:55 GMT -5
Does anyone really think we are twenty points better than Butler? That we ought to roll Syracuse by double digits?
What we saw was comparable teams claw back in the second half. That is a lot different than, say, the 2001 Maryland-Dook game in which a ten-point lead was blown in the last minute. It was not end of game management that cost us these games; they were just close games that we lost. In overtime. It is frustrating, but it is no reason for fans to nitpick our coaching staff.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,641
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 29, 2017 8:22:34 GMT -5
Agree. Games ebb and flow. You know an opponent will make a run at some point in a game. You can't nurse a 20 point first half lead. With both Butler and Syracuse, we were the home team that got off to a strong start. In the end, we lack players that can close out tight games. How confident are we with the ball in our guards hands down 1 with 10 seconds on the clock?
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by bostonfan on Dec 29, 2017 8:45:40 GMT -5
Agree. Games ebb and flow. You know an opponent will make a run at some point in a game. You can't nurse a 20 point first half lead. With both Butler and Syracuse, we were the home team that got off to a strong start. In the end, we lack players that can close out tight games. How confident are we with the ball in our guards hands down 1 with 10 seconds on the clock? I think we need to give these players, and this coach, a chance to grow and learn. They have shown flashes of being a good team for extended periods, but have not shown that killer instinct that lets them put teams away. I believe we will continue to see improvements, and some more bumps in the road, over the next month or so as this team continues to grow. The real test will be, is this team, and it's individual players, better at the end of this year than it was early on. Changing a program and a culture takes time and is not always pretty but I think it is moving in the right direction. There were times over the last few years, even during some wins, that this team was almost unwatchable because of the way they played. This team has had two really disappointing losses lately, but it is a much more exciting and entertaining team to watch. The wins will come as the confidence and trust in each other improves.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,326
|
Post by vv83 on Dec 29, 2017 8:47:09 GMT -5
My take is that we don't have the personnel to respond to these kind of adjustments. Our guards can't shoot, so a sagging zone is going to give us problems. Our guards have shaky ballhandling skills, so an aggressive press from a big, athletic team is going to give us problems. What we really need to worry about is teams realizing they should play ONLY sagging zones and aggressive full court pressure against us. Because then we won't be able to build a 15-20 point lead before things get rocky. Ewing has certainly made some bad calls in these two losses (more Mosely, please!; try a zone to slow down Baldwin/MNartin) - but the main reason for these two losses is the talent limitations of our guards. I agree with everything in this post but I still think we have comparable talent to both Syracuse and Butler (who aren’t very good either). We have a better center and PF, they had better wings and guards. And beyond these two games, in most of the cupcake games we built up an early lead early, then merely treaded water or gave some points back in the second half. So I am seeing a trend here that is concerning. I’m not giving up on PE or this team, and have liked a lot of what I’ve seen from PE and the direction of the program. Good point, our overall talent matches up OK with teams like Syracuse and Butler. In our conference, we probably match talent levels with everyone except Nova, Xavier, Seton Hall, and maybe Creighton (although I think they win more with scheme/execution than talent much of the time). Everyone else, we are in the ballpark talent-wise. But the problem is that so little of our talent is at the guard position, and the guard position is a lot more important in modern basketball than the frontcourt. Our big east rivals are more balanced, or are unbalanced in favor of guards over frontcourt. You can win with a weak frontcourt and really good guards; it is a lot tougher to win with weak guards and a really good frontcourt, as these last two games have demonstrated. So I think we are still at a disadvantage, even though the overall talent levels are comparable. The key to winning this year is, I think, for Mosely and Blair to improve enough that they can be the primary guards. They have the most upside to their skill set, and give us the best chance to compete in the conference. Additionally, Ewing needs to keep developing schemes that get the ball to the big guys inside. He has done a very good job of this, it is why we were able to get to OT against the two real teams we played. But in the second half of both games, we failed to work the ball inside, and fell apart. Much of that was due to D adjustments (press and sagging zone), but some of it was the guards losing the discipline of working to get the ball to the bigs. We knew this year would be rough. Coming close in these two games gave us a taste of what it will be like when we are good again, but it also raised expectations. We probably should be realistic, however. The guards on this team are just not good enough for us to consistently beat good teams, even though our overall talent level is pretty competitive.
|
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by smokeyjack on Dec 29, 2017 8:53:59 GMT -5
Again you tell me we blow a 20pt lead to Nova or Xavier I get it, i will admit a 20 point lead at home to a 2 player team that is middle of the pack in the big east at best is such a hard pill to swallow. Exactly my issue.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Dec 29, 2017 9:29:42 GMT -5
Definitely should have thought about going zone. Isn’t Orr the bench coach he should have mentioned it or something I haven’t seen the guy say more than 5 words Ah, finally the silliest post of the whole thread. Remind me, how close to the bench do you sit, that you see every interaction among the staff? Even from my couch, limited to TV shots, I have seen Patrick conversing with Orr, Kirby and the other assistants multiple times during every game.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,351
|
Post by calhoya on Dec 29, 2017 9:52:43 GMT -5
I agree with everything in this post but I still think we have comparable talent to both Syracuse and Butler (who aren’t very good either). We have a better center and PF, they had better wings and guards. And beyond these two games, in most of the cupcake games we built up an early lead early, then merely treaded water or gave some points back in the second half. So I am seeing a trend here that is concerning. I’m not giving up on PE or this team, and have liked a lot of what I’ve seen from PE and the direction of the program. Good point, our overall talent matches up OK with teams like Syracuse and Butler. In our conference, we probably match talent levels with everyone except Nova, Xavier, Seton Hall, and maybe Creighton (although I think they win more with scheme/execution than talent much of the time). Everyone else, we are in the ballpark talent-wise. But the problem is that so little of our talent is at the guard position, and the guard position is a lot more important in modern basketball than the frontcourt. Our big east rivals are more balanced, or are unbalanced in favor of guards over frontcourt. You can win with a weak frontcourt and really good guards; it is a lot tougher to win with weak guards and a really good frontcourt, as these last two games have demonstrated. So I think we are still at a disadvantage, even though the overall talent levels are comparable. The key to winning this year is, I think, for Mosely and Blair to improve enough that they can be the primary guards. They have the most upside to their skill set, and give us the best chance to compete in the conference. Additionally, Ewing needs to keep developing schemes that get the ball to the big guys inside. He has done a very good job of this, it is why we were able to get to OT against the two real teams we played. But in the second half of both games, we failed to work the ball inside, and fell apart. Much of that was due to D adjustments (press and sagging zone), but some of it was the guards losing the discipline of working to get the ball to the bigs.
We knew this year would be rough. Coming close in these two games gave us a taste of what it will be like when we are good again, but it also raised expectations. We probably should be realistic, however. The guards on this team are just not good enough for us to consistently beat good teams, even though our overall talent level is pretty competitive. Agree with this with perhaps one modification. I think that while the guards on the team are not yet at the level of the better teams in the BE, there is a big difference between talent and composure/focus. Talent or the lack thereof has nothing to do with the careless pass, the lazy pass, the loss of focus on defense or forcing a pass or driving recklessly into the lane. That is more about discipline, which can be taught and drilled into even a lesser-skilled guard. I think you nailed it with Creighton--they are rarely the most talented team on the court in their big games, but they are disciplined and well-drilled and always competitive. Of course the Hoyas are not 20 points better than Butler or 13 better than Syracuse--that is about talent. But being spotted a 13/18 point lead at home in the second half against either of those teams and not being able to hold on by at least 1 is also about composure and focus. Ewing is trying. He was all over the kids. I expect that these losses will be avoided in February or March with the coach pushing these games as learning experiences. Just not ready yet to blame these two particular losses on the talent gap.
|
|
|
Post by iheartdurenbros on Dec 29, 2017 10:28:19 GMT -5
Definitely should have thought about going zone. Isn’t Orr the bench coach he should have mentioned it or something I haven’t seen the guy say more than 5 words Ah, finally the silliest post of the whole thread. Remind me, how close to the bench do you sit, that you see every interaction among the staff? Even from my couch, limited to TV shots, I have seen Patrick conversing with Orr, Kirby and the other assistants multiple times during every game. In general most posts about sideline demeanor are silly. For the record, the assistants are pretty active during games, talking to each other and players. PE has commented that he selected assistants who could teach him about college game, more specifically about zone defenses. It was not a complete surprise to see the Hoyas switch to zone (during Syracuse, was it?) I expect that to be an aspect of the game that we will see as PE becomes more comfortable. If nothing else, this suggests that he values the input of his assistants. He just needs to internalize what they are teaching him.
|
|
|
Post by veilside21 on Dec 29, 2017 10:43:48 GMT -5
a coach can only do so much its the player's will that win them games... we didnt have any player as willful as martin nor baldwin ... as good as govan is he isnt going to be effective if he doesnt get a good pass not of our guards are good passers. we underrate martin so hard its not even funny anymore.
|
|