guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,605
|
Post by guru on Apr 4, 2018 22:28:20 GMT -5
Yes they did..and were still crushed by Nova. I'd rather have as our model the crusher rather than the cruhsee. Not the point. You had been whining that Gtown couldn't have a winning record and make it to the tournament with bigs like Govan and Dickerson. Meanwhile in a place called reality, teams with bigs who were much more stiff or one dimensional made it deep into the tournament. Villanova's beating them doesn't discount the fact that those teams found success with big men who don't measure up to your criteria of how big men should play in today's game. The board's always better when MCI gets bitchy
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Apr 5, 2018 8:57:15 GMT -5
I think you can still win with a big man who plays purely low post offense, and who can't create off the dribble. But you can't win with zero players who can create off the dribble - which is basically what we were trying to do last year. Mosely and Dickerson could occasionally create off the dribble, but they turned the ball over or ended up throwing up terrible shots far too often to be able to run a truly functional offense. The fact that we were able to cobble together a halfway decent offense without having this tool in our offensive toolbox is a real testament to Ewing's first year offensive coaching. He figured out how to build an offense around two good low post players who could also step out and hit a jump shot. Believe me, this is not the desired offensive structure for any team anymore. But if you surround a low post player with 3 or 4 other guys who can create off the dribble and hit the 3 - then you have the foundation of a good offense. . Hopefully Pickett will develop his dribble drive game, and McClung can adjust to BE level play quickly. Plus if we can add a real point guard before November - even better. If this happens, then Govan and Derrickson will have more space to operate down low, and their ability to step out and shoot from 3 will open up space for the drivers. Ask Kansas and Michigan how this worked out against Nova. What really stuck out to me is how these 2 teams cannot shoot from beyond the perimeter. I know people like Dick Vitale and Jay Bilas are saying the NCAA needs to move the 3pt line back, but they are really advocating a change to effect 1 team (Nova). I don't remember these guys advocating for a change when Duke with J.J.Reddick or another program would light up their opponent from the 3pt line on their way to a championship.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,386
|
Post by drquigley on Apr 5, 2018 9:07:37 GMT -5
I understand the jealousy. As I keep saying, I was around when Nova beat us in '85. I went to an Augustinian High School, most of my classmates went to Nova (safety school) and when I occasionally meet them they never forget to rub Nova's past and present successes in my face. Yes, we can probably become an NCAA tourney team using the old big man model and become competitive in the BE. But just like I'm sure many people said what's the big deal about this new horseless carriage many people on this board refuse to see the writing on the wall. Thanks to the 3 point shot (and the increased efficiency of 3 point shooters), rules changes, and the shortened shot clock the game has changed and like it or not Nova is showing the way to win big in this new environment. So like I said above, 2 years from now when Govan and Derrickson are gone, I sure hope PE has recruited to this new paradigm and our bigs can not just score in the paint - and even shoot 3's - but also can handle the ball, score off the dribble, and play defense away from the basket. Easier said than done obviously but if Nova can do it SO CAN WE!
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on Apr 5, 2018 10:15:59 GMT -5
It's not like it's easy to play the way Nova plays. They have four definite future NBA players playing big minutes for them in Brunson, Bridges, Donte, and Spellman. They weren't running out a bunch of stiffs who can shoot. Move the three point line back, sure, but it's idiotic to do it because Nova was the best team in the country with the best players and they demolished everyone.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 5, 2018 10:57:24 GMT -5
Ask Kansas and Michigan how this worked out against Nova. What really stuck out to me is how these 2 teams cannot shoot from beyond the perimeter. I know people like Dick Vitale and Jay Bilas are saying the NCAA needs to move the 3pt line back, but they are really advocating a change to effect 1 team (Nova). I don't remember these guys advocating for a change when Duke with J.J.Reddick or another program would light up their opponent from the 3pt line on their way to a championship. TJI, I support moving the line back, and my reasons, at least have nothing to do with Villanova. My main concern is that the balance in the game has really gotten out of line and too heavily weighted toward three point shots. This is seen in two ways: (1) A higher percentage of total shots are three point shots. The percentage has generally had an upward trend, but it's really accelerated in recent years (and this is all of Division 1). In the 2002 season, 32.1% of shots were from three point range, and in 2018 it was 37.5%. That's a really big increase. Moving the line back in 2008 did stem that tide a bit - for several years the rate of threes went down or stayed steady in the 32-33% range before climbing to the highest ever this past season. (3) A higher percentage of making threes. This is less of a factor, in the sense that the numbers have been relatively stable, with a slight increase. In 2008, right before the line was moved, the overall rate of making threes was 35.1%. That dropped to 34.2% after the line was extended (and bottomed out at 33.9% in 2013), but it has since risen again. In 2017, players shot 35.0% on threes, and 35.1% this season. What is not found in these stats are the macro trends - because of Curry and Golden State, shooting three point shots has become more of a trend throughout basketball. I was only a kid then, but I bet in the late 1980s/1990s, high school basketball players, especially bigs, paid very little attention to threes. Even a great athelete like Michael Jordan wasn't a three point sniper. It's just not how the game was played. But, in the last several years, the NBA has moved more toward a three-point oriented game, and kids want to emulate them, and begin practicing threes from a much younger age. The end result? Players get better at them in the aggregate. I just think pushing the line out - which would likely decrease attempts and the rate of making them - would restore some balance to the game. Other interesting (but not necessarily surprising) trends: - Shooting percentage on free throws has seen a pretty strong uptick from a low of 68.7% in 2005 to a high this year of 71.4% (up from 70.4% in 2017, which was the highest ever before this season). Again, I think this reflects more of a focus on shooting for all players, including bigs, who in years past may have whiffed FTs at a higher rate because they weren't shooters. - Non-steal turnover rates have come down alot from 11.5% in 2002 to 9.7 in 2018. This tells me that ball handling, in general has improved over time. It could also reflect that the current rules favor ball handlers over defenders, and thus, it's harder for defenders to force turnovers. Also, the increase in threes cannot hurt here too - you are generally less likely to turn it over taking a three than driving to the basket. - Again, not surprising, but the offensive rebounding percentage has plummeted significantly, from a high of 36.9% in 2002, to a low of 28.7% in 2018. This reflects a more modern trend of not crashing the boards as much. - One thing I didn't expect was that the free throw rate (i.e., how often players get to the line) fell a lot this year to 33.5, the lowest since 2002 (from 35.3 in 2017). I am not sure if this is because referees are calling less fouls? (* The reason some of my ranges start in 2002 is because I got the stats from KenPom, and that's where his records start.)
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Post by saxagael on Apr 5, 2018 12:05:51 GMT -5
Ask Kansas and Michigan how this worked out against Nova. What really stuck out to me is how these 2 teams cannot shoot from beyond the perimeter. I know people like Dick Vitale and Jay Bilas are saying the NCAA needs to move the 3pt line back, but they are really advocating a change to effect 1 team (Nova). I don't remember these guys advocating for a change when Duke with J.J.Reddick or another program would light up their opponent from the 3pt line on their way to a championship. I think the 3 point line move is driven by the NIT tourney moving it to international distance. The shift in the line out a little didn't seem to impact 3 point percentage by any of the teams in NIT who lean on the 3 pointer as a core part of their game.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Apr 5, 2018 12:24:38 GMT -5
I understand the jealousy. As I keep saying, I was around when Nova beat us in '85. I went to an Augustinian High School, most of my classmates went to Nova (safety school) and when I occasionally meet them they never forget to rub Nova's past and present successes in my face. Yes, we can probably become an NCAA tourney team using the old big man model and become competitive in the BE. But just like I'm sure many people said what's the big deal about this new horseless carriage many people on this board refuse to see the writing on the wall. Thanks to the 3 point shot (and the increased efficiency of 3 point shooters), rules changes, and the shortened shot clock the game has changed and like it or not Nova is showing the way to win big in this new environment. So like I said above, 2 years from now when Govan and Derrickson are gone, I sure hope PE has recruited to this new paradigm and our bigs can not just score in the paint - and even shoot 3's - but also can handle the ball, score off the dribble, and play defense away from the basket. Easier said than done obviously but if Nova can do it SO CAN WE! This sounds like you are describing the needs for a player in the Princeton offense.... I think point you are missing is that Govan and Derrickson aren't bigs from the old big man model. They are bigs that fit the Nova model. They are mobile and can shoot. The part of their game they need to develop a bit more are their handles but you are never going to find a team of players that are proficient in handling the ball, scoring off the dribble, shooting, and finishing around the basket from recruiting. Unless you recruit a team of 5 and high 4 star players. The point isn't that our big men are holding us back from the Nova system, its our guards that are holding us back. The fact that you seem to be advocating or a guard oriented offense and not seeing the need for stronger guards is perplexing and nonsensical.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Apr 5, 2018 12:51:07 GMT -5
I understand the jealousy. As I keep saying, I was around when Nova beat us in '85. I went to an Augustinian High School, most of my classmates went to Nova (safety school) and when I occasionally meet them they never forget to rub Nova's past and present successes in my face. Yes, we can probably become an NCAA tourney team using the old big man model and become competitive in the BE. But just like I'm sure many people said what's the big deal about this new horseless carriage many people on this board refuse to see the writing on the wall. Thanks to the 3 point shot (and the increased efficiency of 3 point shooters), rules changes, and the shortened shot clock the game has changed and like it or not Nova is showing the way to win big in this new environment. So like I said above, 2 years from now when Govan and Derrickson are gone, I sure hope PE has recruited to this new paradigm and our bigs can not just score in the paint - and even shoot 3's - but also can handle the ball, score off the dribble, and play defense away from the basket. Easier said than done obviously but if Nova can do it SO CAN WE! This sounds like you are describing the needs for a player in the Princeton offense.... I think point you are missing is that Govan and Derrickson aren't bigs from the old big man model. They are bigs that fit the Nova model. They are mobile and can shoot. The part of their game they need to develop a bit more are their handles but you are never going to find a team of players that are proficient in handling the ball, scoring off the dribble, shooting, and finishing around the basket from recruiting. Unless you recruit a team of 5 and high 4 star players. The point isn't that our big men are holding us back from the Nova system, its our guards that are holding us back. The fact that you seem to be advocating or a guard oriented offense and not seeing the need for stronger guards is perplexing and nonsensical. This. I mean, props to Nova and all, but Nova isn't the only game in town. There is more than one way to play. They did lose 4 big East games this year. They did have a bunch of early round exits with high seeds (just last year). Yeah, it is easy to get caught up in the euphoria of other team's success, but let's keep things in perspective. You could argue that Govan and Marcus, as good as they were, might have been hampered without talented backcourt mates and wings to really utilize their skills. Just imagine the matchup problems Ewing could have created on offense with at least a serviceable backcourt, would have opened things even more for Govan and Marcus. It would put more pressure on opposing defenses. Which helps our defense in that the opposing team is at least more fatigued trying to keep up. We were an easy team to defend, outside of Marcus and Govan. Pickett improved his scoring,but couldn't take you off the dribble. Teams could relax, and cheat on D.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 5, 2018 14:03:22 GMT -5
- One thing I didn't expect was that the free throw rate (i.e., how often players get to the line) fell a lot this year to 33.5, the lowest since 2002 (from 35.3 in 2017). I am not sure if this is because referees are calling less fouls? More 3s = less fouls from penetration?
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Apr 5, 2018 14:25:05 GMT -5
- One thing I didn't expect was that the free throw rate (i.e., how often players get to the line) fell a lot this year to 33.5, the lowest since 2002 (from 35.3 in 2017). I am not sure if this is because referees are calling less fouls? More 3s = less fouls from penetration? Hmmm. Maybe one of our resident, hoyatalk, analytics experts could examine this phenomenon?
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,495
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 5, 2018 16:53:52 GMT -5
Nice to see all 10,000 members of “Nova Nation” mob downtown Philly today for their parade.
I’ve seen town busier on free coffee day at Wawa.
Nova is not a nation, it is a suburb...
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 5, 2018 19:32:54 GMT -5
Nice to see all 10,000 members of “Nova Nation” mob downtown Philly today for their parade. I’ve seen town busier on free coffee day at Wawa. Nova is not a nation, it is a suburb... You could have made it 10,001!😇
|
|
seaweed
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,670
|
Post by seaweed on Apr 6, 2018 5:26:54 GMT -5
If you have an issue with the spread of three point shooting and the game becoming a sniping contest, the answer is not moving the line back - the answer is shrinking the basket.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 6, 2018 10:31:05 GMT -5
If you have an issue with the spread of three point shooting and the game becoming a sniping contest, the answer is not moving the line back - the answer is shrinking the basket. Or getting rid of the three point shot😁😶
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Apr 6, 2018 14:34:37 GMT -5
Nate Lubick, Stephen Domingo, Reggie Cameron, Issac Copeland, Tre Campbell come to mind These players all seemed to regress and lose their shot the more they played, but Lubick is the biggest culprit as he avg. 4.9 pts/gm for his career III never recruited over him and started him for 4 years Even in both of his NCAA Tourney games Lubick never scored more than 4 pts Lubick was told not to shoot by the coaches--similar to Julian Vaughn, he was told to stay inside and let the guards take the shots. Lubick took a total of five three point attempts in is last two years, probably because he would be pulled from the game if he did. Nevertheless, he averaged over 55 percent from the field, albeit within eight feet. Also, Stephen Domingo was a shooter who was poorly recruited and the decision to enroll him a year early was stupid on many levels. He never recovered. Does this seem counter productive to you? Instead of trying to help develop Lubick's offensive game more, JTIII instead advises him not to shoot. The year before the team was able to get away with the starting PF not scoring as you had starters Henry Sims, Otto Porter, Jason Clark, Hollis Thompson in addition to Greg Whittington, DSR, Jabril Trawick and Mikael Hopkins coming off the bench and won its 1st NCAA tournament game. Next year for Big East play 4 players are gone, Sims, Thompson, Clark and Whittington (suspended). The team wins 11 games in a row and 6 by double digits. Which takes us to the last 5 gms of the season where the team went 2-3. With a philosophy of 4 vs 5 offense you basically have to play a perfect game on both ends to win. The last 5 gms of that season, Otto Porter was not setting the world on fire from the field. The FGCU game: 2nd half 31-31, 17:05 left FGCU goes on a 15-2 run to the 13:52 mark, the score is now 46-33. I point this out as Lubick was in the game during this time period. JTIII calls a timeout and puts Lubick on the bench. The lead balloons to 52-33 before the Hoyas' pace picks up and Aaron Bowen scores back to back baskets to break the drought starting at 12:12. The team loses to FGCU by 10 pts. Looking at how the game unfolded, I surmise that the period of the 15-2 run while Lubick was on the floor is where the game was lost. And to be honest during that time period it was really 3 vs 5 as Otto Porter went over 22 mins. of game time scoreless with a large chunk coming during the 15-2 run. I think the Hoyas was the better team on paper but if you have philosophy of a starter getting mins. and told to not shoot, then have another starter go cold while both are on the floor together; essentially you are playing 3 vs 5 offensively, you can't win. I know this is old news below: I think JTIII was right to bench Lubick but waited way too long to get players on the floor at all 5 positions who would be a threat to score as the Hoyas went on a 12-5 run from the 12:12 mark to the 8:55 mark which saw the lead dwindle to to 57-45, but it was a little too late. I have read the complaints on this board about the guard position, therefore do you think Ewing would employ the same offensive philosophy and we see a 4 vs 5 scoring mentality?
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Apr 22, 2018 20:29:23 GMT -5
The 2018 tournament was the first time since the 1978 tournament that the six Division I college basketball-playing schools based in the Washington, DC metropolitan area American, Georgetown, George Mason, George Washington, Howard, and Maryland – were collectively shut out of the NCAA Tournament.
|
|