dchoya72
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,488
|
Post by dchoya72 on Jan 10, 2021 5:43:49 GMT -5
Hes tried that with Blair and Pickett MANY times. According to the ESPN box score, Blair played 40 minutes and Pickett played 38 minutes. What message are they getting? The message:presently they are our best options, and players the coach has the most confidence in, and our anchors. That's my opinion.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 10, 2021 7:23:25 GMT -5
Yeah, it isn't a good idea for a coach to address depth issues with recruiting. I hope this was intended to be funny, as it has me rolling.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 10, 2021 7:26:35 GMT -5
According to the ESPN box score, Blair played 40 minutes and Pickett played 38 minutes. What message are they getting? The message:presently they are our best options, and players the coach has the most confidence in, and our anchors. That's my opinion. That said it was really good seeing Berger and Sibley in late, as shows Ewing’s trust in them which could likely change things up a bit. Getting this many new players going and sorting who works well together takes time.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 10, 2021 7:37:46 GMT -5
Worst part is they were mostly on horrible passes that weren't near a player. He had wide open players all around and bad passes forced them out of their ready to shoot stance and the wide open shot was lost. Need Blair in a corner and off ball, where he can do what he does well. He also led the team with 10 assists. His skillset is not as a PG, but without J. Harris there is nobody to spell D. Harris at the position. Yep. There really aren’t options, it hurts that Tyler Beard, due to COVID, took mother year and reclassed so arrives next year. While it frustrates me to no end having Blair trying to run point as he just doesn’t have skills nor understanding for it (it is hard and takes most player a couple years to rework how they see and think the game playing point, and that is if they are at the top end of capability), I am thankful he can somewhat fill the role. If Dante is on the floor he should be at point and running things as he understands it much better and sees things much better. Dante needs to pass more, but having limited touches it keeps him out of pg flow.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,352
|
Post by daveg023 on Jan 10, 2021 7:48:57 GMT -5
For what it’s worth the game was our best thus far this year from an offensive efficiency standpoint.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Jan 10, 2021 7:49:22 GMT -5
A mixed bag tonight. Obviously sucks to lose to those guys and that was clearly not anywhere close to their best team. But there were a couple of things I liked and didn't like out of us tonight. Was pleased with Berger, Wilson, and Sibley's minutes tonight. Everyone will remember the ugly airball 3 from the corner by Sibley, but I thought all 3 looked composed tonight. May have been a different story with 35k in the house, but it's still a true road game and they gave us good minutes overall in trying to make up a large first half deficit. Wilson defended and rebounded well, looked comfortable out there in getting some boards in traffic, and was under control. Berger still struggles defensively, but defenses still have to honor his shooting and it definitely created space for others. Was also happy with Bile (first time I've probably said that since Coppin). A couple really stupid fouls including fouling a 3 point shooter, but I felt like the zone almost relaxed him on the offensive end. With no immediate defender to try to iso against, he actually did a decent job surveying what was out there before making a move. Only the second game this year (SHU) he's gotten through without a turnover. If we can get him to play like that all the time and provide some outside shooting / rebounding, his 6th man type minutes might actually become justified. Senior leaders. A lot's been made of the carelessness of Blair and Pickett. They each hit a couple of tough shots, Blair had some nice looks, and I was especially encouraged by Pickett being aggressive in going to the rim (couple of dunks, a third missed one, and 8 FTs which should be the norm for him rather than the exception), but both were just so lax with ball security. They had 7 of our 12 TOs (8 if you fault Blair for Sibley's TO, which I do) and that just can't happen against a team that really isn't exerting a ton of defensive pressure. Q cannot have 1 rebound in a game. Outside of the first few minutes, he was not a factor offensively. But he likely didn't play much in the second half because he wasn't providing much of anything on the boards. There is no way Q can do that when Wilson has 3 rebs in 7 minutes. We needed to win the boards tonight and didn't, and a lot of that falls on Q. In a 5 point game, you can certainly point to the turnovers being the difference. You can also point out the points in transition. We failed to get back a few times on live ball turnovers. We also still suck at finishing our own fast breaks. Would think that a team that wants to play fast would work more on that, but it's an issue that has plagued us all year. Coaching. Mixed bag here as well, but more bad than good. Liked going with Berger vs. Dante when Dante was so ineffective tonight. Thought we had a good plan for getting shots against the zone, just had a bunch of open 3s that didn't fall. Didn't like putting Pickett in the middle of the zone; that 16 foot shot at the foul line isn't his strength and thought Carey would have been more effective there. We still insist on having our PGs inbound the ball on the baseline against larger defenders. Why? It caused another turnover here tonight. Ewing needs to make an adjustment and find a wing or big that can inbound the ball. I along with everyone else didn't understand the Holloway minutes (ahead of Sibley and Clark). He looked lost out there. Maybe the lead doesn't balloon to 13-15 points towards the end of the first half otherwise. Where was Clark? And again, we need to do a better job of spelling Blair/Pickett so they're not dead tired coming down the stretch of games. They're no good to us if they are just going to make fatigue-related mistakes late in games. Use the bench to get them some rest. Overall, I'm not disappointed with the effort but this team continues to show it's incapable of stringing together those few positive plays in crucial moments that are necessary to win close games. Staff isn't doing the players any favors by employing suspect substitution patterns. Need to do a better job in keeping some of the starters fresh while instilling some confidence in the frosh by properly defining their roles in the rotation. The rotations are maddening. I don't understand the "play one guy a few mins in first half and none in second and play another guy in crunch time when he didn't play at all in the first half" strategy. It doesn't make sense. If you're going to go to Berger in the 2H, get him a few mins in the 1H. Same with Sibley. Those are just two examples. I actually thought the zone offense was not creative at all. We set meaningless ball screens up top on every single possession and then set backside screens on a guard for someone to flash to the top of the key. But I don't think either action worked àt all. Ever. And it wasted time each possession. You have to do different things against the zone to beat it because they're so good at adjusting it. All they did was send another guy high in the zone so it turned into a 3-2 basically. When they did that, often we didn't even know who to screen! This game was tailor made for Berger and not so much for Harris (if the latter wasn't shooting well). So I was glad to see Pat make that move. I just would rather have seen it way earlier in the game. It was an obvious adjustment.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 10, 2021 8:39:43 GMT -5
Malcolm has 3 more years 😁 True. 7th Year Doctoral Candidate Malcolm with be a monster. Not in any way ready to give up on Malcolm. We all knew he was a skinny project that would almost certainly need a red shirt year when he came in. I thought he looked pretty decent last night, some thing to build on. If he can hit the short jumper he can be a player for us.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,495
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 10, 2021 9:43:59 GMT -5
Let’s look at the bright side.
25,000 mouth breathers didn’t get to see it in person.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Jan 10, 2021 10:21:02 GMT -5
A mixed bag tonight. Obviously sucks to lose to those guys and that was clearly not anywhere close to their best team. But there were a couple of things I liked and didn't like out of us tonight. Was pleased with Berger, Wilson, and Sibley's minutes tonight. Everyone will remember the ugly airball 3 from the corner by Sibley, but I thought all 3 looked composed tonight. May have been a different story with 35k in the house, but it's still a true road game and they gave us good minutes overall in trying to make up a large first half deficit. Wilson defended and rebounded well, looked comfortable out there in getting some boards in traffic, and was under control. Berger still struggles defensively, but defenses still have to honor his shooting and it definitely created space for others. Was also happy with Bile (first time I've probably said that since Coppin). A couple really stupid fouls including fouling a 3 point shooter, but I felt like the zone almost relaxed him on the offensive end. With no immediate defender to try to iso against, he actually did a decent job surveying what was out there before making a move. Only the second game this year (SHU) he's gotten through without a turnover. If we can get him to play like that all the time and provide some outside shooting / rebounding, his 6th man type minutes might actually become justified. Senior leaders. A lot's been made of the carelessness of Blair and Pickett. They each hit a couple of tough shots, Blair had some nice looks, and I was especially encouraged by Pickett being aggressive in going to the rim (couple of dunks, a third missed one, and 8 FTs which should be the norm for him rather than the exception), but both were just so lax with ball security. They had 7 of our 12 TOs (8 if you fault Blair for Sibley's TO, which I do) and that just can't happen against a team that really isn't exerting a ton of defensive pressure. Q cannot have 1 rebound in a game. Outside of the first few minutes, he was not a factor offensively. But he likely didn't play much in the second half because he wasn't providing much of anything on the boards. There is no way Q can do that when Wilson has 3 rebs in 7 minutes. We needed to win the boards tonight and didn't, and a lot of that falls on Q. In a 5 point game, you can certainly point to the turnovers being the difference. You can also point out the points in transition. We failed to get back a few times on live ball turnovers. We also still suck at finishing our own fast breaks. Would think that a team that wants to play fast would work more on that, but it's an issue that has plagued us all year. Coaching. Mixed bag here as well, but more bad than good. Liked going with Berger vs. Dante when Dante was so ineffective tonight. Thought we had a good plan for getting shots against the zone, just had a bunch of open 3s that didn't fall. Didn't like putting Pickett in the middle of the zone; that 16 foot shot at the foul line isn't his strength and thought Carey would have been more effective there. We still insist on having our PGs inbound the ball on the baseline against larger defenders. Why? It caused another turnover here tonight. Ewing needs to make an adjustment and find a wing or big that can inbound the ball. I along with everyone else didn't understand the Holloway minutes (ahead of Sibley and Clark). He looked lost out there. Maybe the lead doesn't balloon to 13-15 points towards the end of the first half otherwise. Where was Clark? And again, we need to do a better job of spelling Blair/Pickett so they're not dead tired coming down the stretch of games. They're no good to us if they are just going to make fatigue-related mistakes late in games. Use the bench to get them some rest. Overall, I'm not disappointed with the effort but this team continues to show it's incapable of stringing together those few positive plays in crucial moments that are necessary to win close games. Staff isn't doing the players any favors by employing suspect substitution patterns. Need to do a better job in keeping some of the starters fresh while instilling some confidence in the frosh by properly defining their roles in the rotation. The rotations are maddening. I don't understand the "play one guy a few mins in first half and none in second and play another guy in crunch time when he didn't play at all in the first half" strategy. It doesn't make sense. If you're going to go to Berger in the 2H, get him a few mins in the 1H. Same with Sibley. Those are just two examples. I actually thought the zone offense was not creative at all. We set meaningless ball screens up top on every single possession and then set backside screens on a guard for someone to flash to the top of the key. But I don't think either action worked àt all. Ever. And it wasted time each possession. You have to do different things against the zone to beat it because they're so good at adjusting it. All they did was send another guy high in the zone so it turned into a 3-2 basically. When they did that, often we didn't even know who to screen! This game was tailor made for Berger and not so much for Harris (if the latter wasn't shooting well). So I was glad to see Pat make that move. I just would rather have seen it way earlier in the game. It was an obvious adjustment. Agree on Berger. He has defensive limitations but Dante does too. They were just shooting over the top of him all night like he wasn't there. That was probably the worst Syracuse 2-3 zone I've seen since I started following the Hoyas. Tiny guards up top with no length. No shotblockers in the back. Could get the ball into the key whenever we wanted (as long as we weren't lazy with the entry). So it didn't require a whole lot of zone offense creativity, just for our guys to make the right decisions and hit some open shots. They didn't.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 10, 2021 10:25:08 GMT -5
The rotations are maddening. I don't understand the "play one guy a few mins in first half and none in second and play another guy in crunch time when he didn't play at all in the first half" strategy. It doesn't make sense. If you're going to go to Berger in the 2H, get him a few mins in the 1H. Same with Sibley. Those are just two examples. I actually thought the zone offense was not creative at all. We set meaningless ball screens up top on every single possession and then set backside screens on a guard for someone to flash to the top of the key. But I don't think either action worked àt all. Ever. And it wasted time each possession. You have to do different things against the zone to beat it because they're so good at adjusting it. All they did was send another guy high in the zone so it turned into a 3-2 basically. When they did that, often we didn't even know who to screen! This game was tailor made for Berger and not so much for Harris (if the latter wasn't shooting well). So I was glad to see Pat make that move. I just would rather have seen it way earlier in the game. It was an obvious adjustment. Agree on Berger. He has defensive limitations but Dante does too. They were just shooting over the top of him all night like he wasn't there. That was probably the worst Syracuse 2-3 zone I've seen since I started following the Hoyas. Tiny guards up top with no length. No shotblockers in the back. Could get the ball into the key whenever we wanted (as long as we weren't lazy with the entry). So it didn't require a whole lot of zone offense creativity, just for our guys to make the right decisions and hit some open shots. They didn't. Agreed that cuse 2-3 zone lacks length, height, speeds, athleticism. I don’t think that changes till Buddy Boehimem graduates. But they do have more 3 pt shooters and fire power compared to past Cuse offenses
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,352
|
Post by daveg023 on Jan 10, 2021 10:26:57 GMT -5
I don’t think anyone is questioning how much Ewing knows about basketball or his understanding of the game. But I do think there is a big difference between coaching professionals and college kids, and that is where I’m not sure he’s tailored his approach yet after years in the NBA.
These kids are not as talented as the NBA guys he coached, and I fear he expects them to execute as if they were. And when they don’t, often he points the blame at them. That is fine in the NBA, but these are 18-20 year old kids, most of whom this will be the ceiling in their basketball lives. They need a softer touch sometimes, and maybe shouldn’t be put in positions where the degree of difficulty to execute is so high.
I think this rears it’s ugly head at the end of these games where we play so tight out of fear of failing. I can’t say how Ewing treats the guys in the locker room or practices, but if his postgame quotes are any indication I think he is more often critical of the mistakes, then building them up. Perhaps a little more confidence building and a more positive approach is what this role calls for compared to what he was used to in the NBA.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Jan 10, 2021 10:30:39 GMT -5
We can debate why we lost until the cows come home, but at the end of the day we lack talent.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 10, 2021 10:35:53 GMT -5
According to the ESPN box score, Blair played 40 minutes and Pickett played 38 minutes. What message are they getting? The message:presently they are our best options, and players the coach has the most confidence in, and our anchors. That's my opinion. Yes, but no one should be playing more than 35 minutes, preferably 30 minutes, if we expect them to play effectively in mid February, while also giving minutes for new players to grow in confidence. For me, what Ewing is doing is trying to win 5 games instead of 4.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
Member is Online
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 10, 2021 10:40:43 GMT -5
Another winnable game, really wasn't impressed with Cuse but we dug ourselves a hole with some bad lineup decisions in first half and couldn't finish off the comeback - The offense was flowing really nicely for the first 6.5 minutes with the starters in. Pickett wasn't perfect from the middle of the zone by any stretch, but the ball was moving, he mostly made decent decisions to get the ball to shooters, and any possession where we showed patience resulted in a good shot
- Then we subbed Bile for Carey and it kinda fell apart for a bit. And this is not a knock on Bile, he was perfectly fine last night. It was more that (1) we took a 40% 3 pt shooter off court vs zone, (2) it moved Pickett to wing where he wasn't a threat to drive and (3) forced one of Pickett or Bile to chase a shooter on the wing which didn't work. I just don't like Bile and Pickett together on the court with a center. Bile and Pickett are both better guarding power forwards and it just doesn't leave enough dribble drive options on the court. I didnt pay for hooplens but those lineups just can't be good
- To reiterate, Bile was fine and is getting closer to being a serviceable bench player (although I do think that turnover should've been charged to Bile and not Berger at the end, he mostly made good decisions and only forced 1 shot and he chased it down himself). However, I will continue to contend it is not a good use of minutes to invest in a grad transfer with the hopes of him finding his legs as a rotation piece for one season vs. giving a freshman who is probably starting next season more minutes. If you want to play Bile at center for time thats fine, but he just can't block Sibley. It's irrational
- The rest of the substitution patterns were equally frustrating. I was generally fine w Malcolm as backup center for this one, the zone kinda lets you put a dunker on baseline who has minimal offensive responsibility and Malcolm was a better defensive matchup against Dolezaj. And Malcolm did exactly what you'd want, had a block, grabbed some boards, didn't turn it over. But...I just dont get how Sibley and Berger don't play in the first half. It's unacceptable
- I've seen plenty of teams have guys play in first half but then tighten rotation for 2nd half and not get minutes. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team consistently not play someone in first half and play them in 2nd. It's completely irrational
- The Holloway minutes honestly felt like trolling. I've tried to talk myself into optimism about the freshmen but I don't really get the upside of Holloway. He seems like an undersized power forward without explosive athleticism or perimeter skills. I just don't see where it fits long term, what's a reasonable player comp for him at BE level?
- If you're gonna keep a center on the floor against small ball, you have to dominate the paint. Q failed to do so, that's really all there is to it.
- In a shocking turn of events, if you can put 5 shooters on the floor and not sacrifice size on the defensive end, good things will happen. That Ewing didn't go small until midway through the 2nd half was frustrating, and if we had done it earlier we maybe win the game.
- I would've loved to see the lineup w Bile, Pickett, Sibley, Berger, Blair just switch every screen. The Cuse offense is really just curls and pin downs, they don't have a Hughes this year who would really make you pay for switching. Huge missed opportunity
- Schematically we really leave our guards on an island chasing players around screen. We don't switch anything, and the defender of the screener never flashes to at least delay the pass to allow trail man to recover. Sure you'd risk the screener diving to the hoop but you have to do something to help the guys chasing on the perimeter.
- I know Ewing brought up the turnovers again...but that was our 2nd lowest turnover pct game all year. It wasn't really the problem. Obviously they reared their heads at bad moments but the defense was the bigger problem.
- Although man that block by Braswell leading to the Boeheim 3 was the play of the game. Blair had Bile trailing and easy drop off for dunk. Not sure if he saw him but instead of being down 2 we're down 7.
The biggest takeaway is the rotation. Again, Ewing's "best" coaching job was when he didn't have to worry about it. We can add all the pieces we want but have to be able to construct sound lineups to have a chance.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,207
|
Post by hoya9797 on Jan 10, 2021 10:41:28 GMT -5
The rotations are maddening. I don't understand the "play one guy a few mins in first half and none in second and play another guy in crunch time when he didn't play at all in the first half" strategy. It doesn't make sense. If you're going to go to Berger in the 2H, get him a few mins in the 1H. Same with Sibley. Those are just two examples. I actually thought the zone offense was not creative at all. We set meaningless ball screens up top on every single possession and then set backside screens on a guard for someone to flash to the top of the key. But I don't think either action worked àt all. Ever. And it wasted time each possession. You have to do different things against the zone to beat it because they're so good at adjusting it. All they did was send another guy high in the zone so it turned into a 3-2 basically. When they did that, often we didn't even know who to screen! This game was tailor made for Berger and not so much for Harris (if the latter wasn't shooting well). So I was glad to see Pat make that move. I just would rather have seen it way earlier in the game. It was an obvious adjustment. Agree on Berger. He has defensive limitations but Dante does too. They were just shooting over the top of him all night like he wasn't there. That was probably the worst Syracuse 2-3 zone I've seen since I started following the Hoyas. Tiny guards up top with no length. No shotblockers in the back. Could get the ball into the key whenever we wanted (as long as we weren't lazy with the entry). So it didn't require a whole lot of zone offense creativity, just for our guys to make the right decisions and hit some open shots. They didn't. A JTIII team, even a bad one, would have shredded that zone beyond recognition.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Jan 10, 2021 10:50:29 GMT -5
The rotations are maddening. I don't understand the "play one guy a few mins in first half and none in second and play another guy in crunch time when he didn't play at all in the first half" strategy. It doesn't make sense. If you're going to go to Berger in the 2H, get him a few mins in the 1H. Same with Sibley. Those are just two examples. This was my takeaway from watching the almost comeback too...I'd already planned to look back at how the rotations had been working for the freshman + Wilson. On one hand, the Sibley-Bile pairing worked: that lineup held Cuse to 3 FGs in the 6 minutes they were on the court and cut the deficit from 11 to 3 before TURNOVERFEST! began in earnest. You got the found money version of Bile on offense (he actually hit shots) and their length and mobility were disruptive defensively. On the other hand, Ewing didn't try that lineup until 8:13 left in the game. In the first half he went with Wilson and Bile in two spurts, the first of which was fine (we were +3 over about five minutes), and the second of which we went -7 in three straight possessions. Cuse added four more points in the final minutes of the half against a lineup that swapped Wilson for Holloway. I don't think Wilson-Bile was a bad combo at all--it was fine--but pretty clearly the better option ended up being Sibley-Bile, and Ewing sat on it for 32 minutes. I don't think it was just luck one lineup worked better: Sibley gives you more versatility defensively and he's at least a possible offensive option vice Wilson (who still played fine to good!). It gets to the larger issue that Ewing seems to be only playing the freshmen + Wilson in one discreet shift each, either in the first or second half of a game. Wilson's minutes tonight were broken up by a short rest, but Holloway and Sibley both played one shift only, and Berger only came back for garbage/desperation time in the final minute. You get things like Clark starting and only playing the first two minutes, then not playing for multiple games. Berger and Wilson have only been once-in-a-few games options. Sibley's only now starting to see every game minutes. I'm not sure how to view it. Being generous, Ewing's trying to slowly bring them along with minutes given their inexperience. Maybe there's some merit to this: even in decent minutes last night you clearly saw Sibley's and Berger's weaknesses. But being less generous: there's no pattern here, and you couldn't convince me right now Ewing isn't just making it up as he goes along. Guys play one game then sit a few. Berger gets put in a terrible spot late against Butler (and Holloway does tonight), then gets a more reasonable shift against Syracuse. Ewing slots Sibley into a productive lineup, but 32 minutes into a game after he tried two other less effective lineups with players from this cohort. I think a better gameplan from the staff has Sibley in during the first half by design. What I think tonight continued to show is there's merit in finding time for the freshmen, whatever the weakness, but the staff doesn't yet have a coherent plan for how to do it.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 10, 2021 10:56:59 GMT -5
Another winnable game, really wasn't impressed with Cuse but we dug ourselves a hole with some bad lineup decisions in first half and couldn't finish off the comeback - The offense was flowing really nicely for the first 6.5 minutes with the starters in. Pickett wasn't perfect from the middle of the zone by any stretch, but the ball was moving, he mostly made decent decisions to get the ball to shooters, and any possession where we showed patience resulted in a good shot
- Then we subbed Bile for Carey and it kinda fell apart for a bit. And this is not a knock on Bile, he was perfectly fine last night. It was more that (1) we took a 40% 3 pt shooter off court vs zone, (2) it moved Pickett to wing where he wasn't a threat to drive and (3) forced one of Pickett or Bile to chase a shooter on the wing which didn't work. I just don't like Bile and Pickett together on the court with a center. Bile and Pickett are both better guarding power forwards and it just doesn't leave enough dribble drive options on the court. I didnt pay for hooplens but those lineups just can't be good
- To reiterate, Bile was fine and is getting closer to being a serviceable bench player (although I do think that turnover should've been charged to Bile and not Berger at the end, he mostly made good decisions and only forced 1 shot and he chased it down himself). However, I will continue to contend it is not a good use of minutes to invest in a grad transfer with the hopes of him finding his legs as a rotation piece for one season vs. giving a freshman who is probably starting next season more minutes. If you want to play Bile at center for time thats fine, but he just can't block Sibley. It's irrational
- The rest of the substitution patterns were equally frustrating. I was generally fine w Malcolm as backup center for this one, the zone kinda lets you put a dunker on baseline who has minimal offensive responsibility and Malcolm was a better defensive matchup against Dolezaj. And Malcolm did exactly what you'd want, had a block, grabbed some boards, didn't turn it over. But...I just dont get how Sibley and Berger don't play in the first half. It's unacceptable
- I've seen plenty of teams have guys play in first half but then tighten rotation for 2nd half and not get minutes. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team consistently not play someone in first half and play them in 2nd. It's completely irrational
- The Holloway minutes honestly felt like trolling. I've tried to talk myself into optimism about the freshmen but I don't really get the upside of Holloway. He seems like an undersized power forward without explosive athleticism or perimeter skills. I just don't see where it fits long term, what's a reasonable player comp for him at BE level?
- If you're gonna keep a center on the floor against small ball, you have to dominate the paint. Q failed to do so, that's really all there is to it.
- In a shocking turn of events, if you can put 5 shooters on the floor and not sacrifice size on the defensive end, good things will happen. That Ewing didn't go small until midway through the 2nd half was frustrating, and if we had done it earlier we maybe win the game.
- I would've loved to see the lineup w Bile, Pickett, Sibley, Berger, Blair just switch every screen. The Cuse offense is really just curls and pin downs, they don't have a Hughes this year who would really make you pay for switching. Huge missed opportunity
- Schematically we really leave our guards on an island chasing players around screen. We don't switch anything, and the defender of the screener never flashes to at least delay the pass to allow trail man to recover. Sure you'd risk the screener diving to the hoop but you have to do something to help the guys chasing on the perimeter.
- I know Ewing brought up the turnovers again...but that was our 2nd lowest turnover pct game all year. It wasn't really the problem. Obviously they reared their heads at bad moments but the defense was the bigger problem.
- Although man that block by Braswell leading to the Boeheim 3 was the play of the game. Blair had Bile trailing and easy drop off for dunk. Not sure if he saw him but instead of being down 2 we're down 7.
The biggest takeaway is the rotation. Again, Ewing's "best" coaching job was when he didn't have to worry about it. We can add all the pieces we want but have to be able to construct sound lineups to have a chance.
So basically you are saying play the freshman to develop them for next year except for Holloway, he’s been anointed trash and we should get rid of him
|
|
|
Post by bornhoya on Jan 10, 2021 11:16:52 GMT -5
I don’t think anyone is questioning how much Ewing knows about basketball or his understanding of the game. But I do think there is a big difference between coaching professionals and college kids, and that is where I’m not sure he’s tailored his approach yet after years in the NBA. These kids are not as talented as the NBA guys he coached, and I fear he expects them to execute as if they were. And when they don’t, often he points the blame at them. That is fine in the NBA, but these are 18-20 year old kids, most of whom this will be the ceiling in their basketball lives. They need a softer touch sometimes, and maybe shouldn’t be put in positions where the degree of difficulty to execute is so high. I think this rears it’s ugly head at the end of these games where we play so tight out of fear of failing. I can’t say how Ewing treats the guys in the locker room or practices, but if his postgame quotes are any indication I think he is more often critical of the mistakes, then building them up. Perhaps a little more confidence building and a more positive approach is what this role calls for compared to what he was used to in the NBA. This and seems like he doesn’t want to change it
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
Member is Online
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 10, 2021 11:17:54 GMT -5
Another winnable game, really wasn't impressed with Cuse but we dug ourselves a hole with some bad lineup decisions in first half and couldn't finish off the comeback - The offense was flowing really nicely for the first 6.5 minutes with the starters in. Pickett wasn't perfect from the middle of the zone by any stretch, but the ball was moving, he mostly made decent decisions to get the ball to shooters, and any possession where we showed patience resulted in a good shot
- Then we subbed Bile for Carey and it kinda fell apart for a bit. And this is not a knock on Bile, he was perfectly fine last night. It was more that (1) we took a 40% 3 pt shooter off court vs zone, (2) it moved Pickett to wing where he wasn't a threat to drive and (3) forced one of Pickett or Bile to chase a shooter on the wing which didn't work. I just don't like Bile and Pickett together on the court with a center. Bile and Pickett are both better guarding power forwards and it just doesn't leave enough dribble drive options on the court. I didnt pay for hooplens but those lineups just can't be good
- To reiterate, Bile was fine and is getting closer to being a serviceable bench player (although I do think that turnover should've been charged to Bile and not Berger at the end, he mostly made good decisions and only forced 1 shot and he chased it down himself). However, I will continue to contend it is not a good use of minutes to invest in a grad transfer with the hopes of him finding his legs as a rotation piece for one season vs. giving a freshman who is probably starting next season more minutes. If you want to play Bile at center for time thats fine, but he just can't block Sibley. It's irrational
- The rest of the substitution patterns were equally frustrating. I was generally fine w Malcolm as backup center for this one, the zone kinda lets you put a dunker on baseline who has minimal offensive responsibility and Malcolm was a better defensive matchup against Dolezaj. And Malcolm did exactly what you'd want, had a block, grabbed some boards, didn't turn it over. But...I just dont get how Sibley and Berger don't play in the first half. It's unacceptable
- I've seen plenty of teams have guys play in first half but then tighten rotation for 2nd half and not get minutes. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team consistently not play someone in first half and play them in 2nd. It's completely irrational
- The Holloway minutes honestly felt like trolling. I've tried to talk myself into optimism about the freshmen but I don't really get the upside of Holloway. He seems like an undersized power forward without explosive athleticism or perimeter skills. I just don't see where it fits long term, what's a reasonable player comp for him at BE level?
- If you're gonna keep a center on the floor against small ball, you have to dominate the paint. Q failed to do so, that's really all there is to it.
- In a shocking turn of events, if you can put 5 shooters on the floor and not sacrifice size on the defensive end, good things will happen. That Ewing didn't go small until midway through the 2nd half was frustrating, and if we had done it earlier we maybe win the game.
- I would've loved to see the lineup w Bile, Pickett, Sibley, Berger, Blair just switch every screen. The Cuse offense is really just curls and pin downs, they don't have a Hughes this year who would really make you pay for switching. Huge missed opportunity
- Schematically we really leave our guards on an island chasing players around screen. We don't switch anything, and the defender of the screener never flashes to at least delay the pass to allow trail man to recover. Sure you'd risk the screener diving to the hoop but you have to do something to help the guys chasing on the perimeter.
- I know Ewing brought up the turnovers again...but that was our 2nd lowest turnover pct game all year. It wasn't really the problem. Obviously they reared their heads at bad moments but the defense was the bigger problem.
- Although man that block by Braswell leading to the Boeheim 3 was the play of the game. Blair had Bile trailing and easy drop off for dunk. Not sure if he saw him but instead of being down 2 we're down 7.
The biggest takeaway is the rotation. Again, Ewing's "best" coaching job was when he didn't have to worry about it. We can add all the pieces we want but have to be able to construct sound lineups to have a chance.
So basically you are saying play the freshman to develop them for next year except for Holloway, he’s been anointed trash and we should get rid of him Do you honestly not think there's a difference in pedigree and upside between Sibley and Holloway? You didn't think it was odd that Holloway got in the game before Sibley? I never said to get rid of him, please don't put words in my mouth. I questioned where his long term role is in the rotation and am open to hearing a player comp that makes sense for him where I could see him developing.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 10, 2021 11:17:55 GMT -5
Another winnable game, really wasn't impressed with Cuse but we dug ourselves a hole with some bad lineup decisions in first half and couldn't finish off the comeback - The offense was flowing really nicely for the first 6.5 minutes with the starters in. Pickett wasn't perfect from the middle of the zone by any stretch, but the ball was moving, he mostly made decent decisions to get the ball to shooters, and any possession where we showed patience resulted in a good shot
- Then we subbed Bile for Carey and it kinda fell apart for a bit. And this is not a knock on Bile, he was perfectly fine last night. It was more that (1) we took a 40% 3 pt shooter off court vs zone, (2) it moved Pickett to wing where he wasn't a threat to drive and (3) forced one of Pickett or Bile to chase a shooter on the wing which didn't work. I just don't like Bile and Pickett together on the court with a center. Bile and Pickett are both better guarding power forwards and it just doesn't leave enough dribble drive options on the court. I didnt pay for hooplens but those lineups just can't be good
- To reiterate, Bile was fine and is getting closer to being a serviceable bench player (although I do think that turnover should've been charged to Bile and not Berger at the end, he mostly made good decisions and only forced 1 shot and he chased it down himself). However, I will continue to contend it is not a good use of minutes to invest in a grad transfer with the hopes of him finding his legs as a rotation piece for one season vs. giving a freshman who is probably starting next season more minutes. If you want to play Bile at center for time thats fine, but he just can't block Sibley. It's irrational
- The rest of the substitution patterns were equally frustrating. I was generally fine w Malcolm as backup center for this one, the zone kinda lets you put a dunker on baseline who has minimal offensive responsibility and Malcolm was a better defensive matchup against Dolezaj. And Malcolm did exactly what you'd want, had a block, grabbed some boards, didn't turn it over. But...I just dont get how Sibley and Berger don't play in the first half. It's unacceptable
- I've seen plenty of teams have guys play in first half but then tighten rotation for 2nd half and not get minutes. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team consistently not play someone in first half and play them in 2nd. It's completely irrational
- The Holloway minutes honestly felt like trolling. I've tried to talk myself into optimism about the freshmen but I don't really get the upside of Holloway. He seems like an undersized power forward without explosive athleticism or perimeter skills. I just don't see where it fits long term, what's a reasonable player comp for him at BE level?
- If you're gonna keep a center on the floor against small ball, you have to dominate the paint. Q failed to do so, that's really all there is to it.
- In a shocking turn of events, if you can put 5 shooters on the floor and not sacrifice size on the defensive end, good things will happen. That Ewing didn't go small until midway through the 2nd half was frustrating, and if we had done it earlier we maybe win the game.
- I would've loved to see the lineup w Bile, Pickett, Sibley, Berger, Blair just switch every screen. The Cuse offense is really just curls and pin downs, they don't have a Hughes this year who would really make you pay for switching. Huge missed opportunity
- Schematically we really leave our guards on an island chasing players around screen. We don't switch anything, and the defender of the screener never flashes to at least delay the pass to allow trail man to recover. Sure you'd risk the screener diving to the hoop but you have to do something to help the guys chasing on the perimeter.
- I know Ewing brought up the turnovers again...but that was our 2nd lowest turnover pct game all year. It wasn't really the problem. Obviously they reared their heads at bad moments but the defense was the bigger problem.
- Although man that block by Braswell leading to the Boeheim 3 was the play of the game. Blair had Bile trailing and easy drop off for dunk. Not sure if he saw him but instead of being down 2 we're down 7.
The biggest takeaway is the rotation. Again, Ewing's "best" coaching job was when he didn't have to worry about it. We can add all the pieces we want but have to be able to construct sound lineups to have a chance.
So basically you are saying play the freshman to develop them for next year except for Holloway, he’s been anointed trash and we should get rid of him I am clearly not enough of a basketball savant to fully analyze Holloway's entire future based on 3 minutes.
|
|