Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Mar 5, 2006 14:24:42 GMT -5
Last night I was angry. This morning when I woke up I was still angry. Now, as I read some of the more thoughtful posters (and not the pablum-pushing "support the team, you couldn't do any better so you have no right to be critical" group), I am feeling quite a bit better. FLHoya's report is particularly illuminating, and I am sorry for the bad thoughts I was having about Brandon Bowman during the radiocast, whether I articulated them here or not.
I am by no means proud of the team right now, but I have resisted the urge to start my contemplated thread on "Worst GU Losses of the Big East Era," so there is something to that. At this point, my biggest disappointment is in DFW's missed opportunity to capture the poetic spirit of Messrs. Timberlake, Fatone, Bass, Kirkpatrick, and Chasez with a more inspired headline on the front page. "Bye-bye, Bye" would have been perfect.
|
|
HealyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Victory!!!
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by HealyHoya on Mar 5, 2006 14:32:47 GMT -5
Can someone who saw the game explain how USF held our 7'2" center to 2 shots for the entire game? 4 points, 4 rebounds? 2 shots from Hibbert?
I need to vent my frustration and disappointment with Bowman, Cook and Owens. In the final regular season BE game of their careers, against one of the worst BE teams we have ever played, mired in the midst of an amazingly long losing streak, in a game that we absolutely had to have, Bowman, Cook and Owens took 6, 7 and 4 shots respectively.
Our starting 2, Cook, had 1 assist playing in this offensive scheme and fouled out! Really? That's our senior leadership.
Bowman, who scored 11 points against USF, had one of his best offensive performances in the last 3 weeks. 11 points!!! We were talking about this guy going to the NBA -- getting drafted -- at the begining of the year. 11 points in a must-win game against a 6-22 team? Huh?
Owens - 4 shots, 1 assist, 1 rebound. Really no meaningful impact. Which, of course, simply happens too often for a fifth-year senior.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not jumping off the bandwagon. When you're the 4th person in the family to go to Georgetown and you remember Ralph Dalton, Joey Brown and a cast of characters numbering in the hundreds from literally a lifetime of cheering for the Hoyas, there is no bandwagon.
But senior leadership wins games in the crunch. Senior leadership wins games in the BET. Senior leadership wins games in the NCAA's. Senior leadership, or a blatant lack thereof, lost the USF game. At this point, it's about getting it done. Coaching - sure. USF Senior Night - Ok. The end of a long season - right. Rusty after a week off - understand.
Those are all excuses. GET IT DONE! Just get it done.
And our seniors, time and time again, cannot get it done.
I love Hoya basketball. I love this team. I am worried that this team isn't built for the post-season.
I am worried about the quality of senior leadership on this team.
GET IT DONE!
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Mar 5, 2006 16:15:23 GMT -5
You think those guys are having super practices and JTIII is just "holding them back" because he likes playing a 7-man rotation. Come on, I don't think so. I don't think that was DFW's point. JT3 only plays 7 guys (DJ, Sapp and starters) No one is suggesting that the other guys are super and being held back. Rather, the argument is that during a long season there are times when depth is really important. If a player is sick, or having a bad game. If the team looks tired or unmotivated. During the BET when teams have to play 3-4 days in a row. DFW is not suggesting that we need to replace players. He is suggesting (If I read him right) that it is better for the team to give SOME minutes to lesser players to give the top 7 a rest. A few minutes per game from lesser guys can be more effective than those same minutes being played by better guys who are exhausted and therefore less effective. It also gives the coach some flexibility when guys are not performing well for whatever reason. Take Spann, as a theoretical example. He was a Top-100 recruit so he must have some skills. Would a few minutes per game from him have been useful? and would he be better prepared to get into games at this point in the season when we could really use some depth? WOuld he have helped against USF? I don't know how good Spann is -- this is only an example. But I do think it is important for a coach to develop his depth... even if those guys are not as good as the starters. They will never be as good as the starters. But that doesn't mean they couldn't contribute some useful minutes. Again, you give minutes to players who won't hurt us in the game, only help. YOu got to earn your keep. Apparently, the players who aren't playing having earned the right just to get a few minutes on the court. Pops teams were the same way. When he had a deep bench, he played a lot of players. When he didn't have a deep bench, like Mutmbo's senior year, he played a short bench. Its just how it is. If they aren't contributing in practice, then they won't contribute in the game. Its nice wishfull thinking, but the Big East conference is a reality. You got to earn your keep.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 5, 2006 16:57:17 GMT -5
Way, III said that kids are doing a great job in practice of pushing the starters--so shouldn't that mean something? Can't have it both ways and you don't run a Big East team like you did in Ivy League and one of III's weak points at Princeton was his rotation or lack of one--and so far it's been awful at Georgetown. Don't sign kids if you don't let them play early in year. If they play their way out of minutes, fine, but you have to go to them early to see if they are kids who play better in games, if they are understanding what you want from them and apply what they learn in practice to how they play. I'm not saying they should get a ton of minutes--but you shouldn't sign kids if they can't contribute at all. Hell, Egerson isn't getting any run at all and he's proven he can help/play.
True test will be next year--if you think guys like Macklin, Summers, PE JR, and Rivers are coming to sit--that isn't happening. They have bigger reps coming out of HS, but will be in same place as FR this year.
One problem I have with III is that you can adjust to your talent and if that means your Bench is limited and doesn't run the system great--you change the approach when they do play--to make your team better. You stick to one thing and it doesn't work--you can't win a game and that is poor coaching. Being flexible and able to adjust is important in anything--but especially coaching and I don't see Hoyas really doing much other then running their stuff--when they are down--they walk ball up and run clock for opponents like we saw in Nova game and it's pathetic--you have to try and win the game--not run your stuff. If someone isn't hitting shots--why not let a guy who can shoot the ball come in to try and help? It's not as if it's never happened before in basketball.
So mark this area down as one I want to see III and Staff improve upon--making adjustments and learning how to maximize their roster--even when limited. It's what Coaches get paid to do and what seperates great coaches from good coaches. I think III can/will do this but he's got to prove it before he gets credit for it.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Mar 5, 2006 17:01:28 GMT -5
Pops teams were "not the same way". Pops virtually ALWAYS played a deep team even though players from 6-10 weren't anywhere near as talented as the first 5. He played them anyway because he wanted the depth, and he played very aggressive Defense with lots of pressing.
JT3 played 6 guys for much of this year, then finally expanded it to 7. He played very few guys last year. That philosophy is good for team cohesion but bad for endurance and doesn't allow for any adjustments when things aren't going well -- due to poor play, illness, foul trouble, too many games in succession or any other reason.
You can't "earn your keep" if you never get in the game. And if you have to be as good as or better than the starters to get in the game, what does that mean? That you take the place of the starters and then the team is back to the 6-7 guys again?
Last year, JT3 played a short bench because he had to. He started three frosh because he had to. THis year, he has more guys who could come in and play some minutes, but he chooses not to. He feels the best prepared and most experienced guys will give him the best performance.
It is a question of philosophy, not talent.
No one is suggesting the rest of the players (after Sapp) are as good as the first 7. But there is a team benefit to playing them anyway for depth purposes and a team cost to not having anyone to go to when the need arises.
Depth is important. We don't have it. We don't have it because JT3 feels it is not as important as other factors.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Mar 5, 2006 17:14:57 GMT -5
Pops teams were "not the same way". Pops virtually ALWAYS played a deep team even though players from 6-10 weren't anywhere near as talented as the first 5. He played them anyway because he wanted the depth, and he played very aggressive Defense with lots of pressing. JT3 played 6 guys for much of this year, then finally expanded it to 7. He played very few guys last year. That philosophy is good for team cohesion but bad for endurance and doesn't allow for any adjustments when things aren't going well -- due to poor play, illness, foul trouble, too many games in succession or any other reason. You can't "earn your keep" if you never get in the game. And if you have to be as good as or better than the starters to get in the game, what does that mean? That you take the place of the starters and then the team is back to the 6-7 guys again? Last year, JT3 played a short bench because he had to. He started three frosh because he had to. THis year, he has more guys who could come in and play some minutes, but he chooses not to. He feels the best prepared and most experienced guys will give him the best performance. It is a question of philosophy, not talent. No one is suggesting the rest of the players (after Sapp) are as good as the first 7. But there is a team benefit to playing them anyway for depth purposes and a team cost to not having anyone to go to when the need arises. Depth is important. We don't have it. We don't have it because JT3 feels it is not as important as other factors. Like I said before. Pops played a short bench when he had a short bench, like Mutumbo's senior year as an example. He had Lamont Morgan, Brian Kelly, and Ronnie T coming off the bench. Morgan got the most out of that bunch, but still wasn't too many minutes. I'll say it again till the cows come home. You earn your keep. Sure lets just play everybody and then get beat everygame. At least that way we will have depth. All the guys will be rested and can rest more sitting at home while everybody else is playing post-season play. While we are at it, lets just chuck the Princeton office too. And lets get a new coach. Since everything we have done up to this point to improve this much just isn't working. Last time I checked, this ain't little-league basketball where everybody has to play for the good of the game. Depth is quality more than quantity. Pops played many players when he had the quality of players. When Pascal Fleury was on the bench, he played him sparingly and as a last resort. HE didn't play him everygame just for sport. He wasn't good enough to warrant a lot of minutes and Pascal transferred. I think JTIII is doing great with his substitutions. And with his recruiting he is upgrading the talent-level of our teams for the future which is needed to get to the next level. In the next couple of years, we should have the quality depth to play a lot of players.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 5, 2006 17:45:47 GMT -5
Daymond Jackson, Dean Berry, Joe Toumou, Godwin Owinje isn't what I'd call "great depth" and III played them/gave them minutes on the last Championship Contending Georgetown team. Guys can fit roles and if you limit their minutes, fine.
I agree that people have to EARN time--but I also believe you don't recruit guys to sit--and if you do, then better off not signing them, saving ships and using them on guys you do want to play.
Again--nobody is saying that Spann/Egerson/Thornton should play major minutes--but they should at least get a look if the starters aren't having good games--just to see where they are in development and to give your other players a blow. I have a hard time believing Tay Spann can't contribute a few rebounds and some defense/fouls which is what the guys above were used for at times.
You never scrap your system--you tweak it for the talent you have. For instance, bringing in Vernon Macklin and not utilizing him running the floor is stupid. He can get up and down the floor and outrun any big man in CBB now--so you take him and limit his talents? No--you adjust to talent you have. If Josh Thornton can shoot and we're not hitting--does it hurt to bring him to help or try to see if he's hot that game? It's called coaching, not being stubborn and from what I've seen our Staff can get a bit stubborn when they are behind/losing and guys aren't hitting shots.
Making adjustments and changing things up is part of basketball--your bench can give you effective minutes if used properly--and sometimes that means you alter your approach from how the starters play.
To avoid the points being brought up is being a damn homer and blind.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Mar 6, 2006 9:55:26 GMT -5
I'm a much better coach than III. Okay, I don't attend every practice (in fact, I've not been to one) but that's beside the point. I know what's best for this team because, well, because I know. I've been following the Hoyas since about 1948, so I'm really smart and know basketball. Trust me. And I know that Spann, Eggerson, Crawford and Thornton really deserve to get some minutes because they were pretty darned good in high school and they wouldn't have been recruited if they had not been good. And I remember how well Eggerson played in the Kenner league. And Thornton, he really showed me he is the "dagger". And, what about Tyler? How can III be so stupid? Why hasn't he called me for advice? If he had called me who knows what our record would be? Surely we would have won more than 19 games and more than 10 in the Big East. Think about the good old days of Craig.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 6, 2006 10:50:51 GMT -5
Someone extend a lifetime contract to easyed. That was pretty funny.
OK, everyone settle down. Boz is here and I know you've all been waiting with baited breath to hear what I have to say.
No? Well, screw you, I'm saying it anyway. (I make up these sorts of interactions in my head to help cope with the insufferable loneliness of reality).
Judging by the broken coffee table in my apartment, I challenge anyone to prove they were more upset with this performance than I was. Yes, its true. I broke furniture. I may have to see someone about my rage-aholism.
Then, looking at what was once a coffee table, I thought to myself, "Self, where's the Krazy Glue?" And that made me think of Darrin McGavin. And I felt sad. I tried to imagine what Mr. Parker would have said following this game. The word "dadgummit" came to mind. And "filthy scaramunga." And "mundane noodle."
But then I thought of the Bumpus hounds, and major awards, and cans of Simonize, and soap poisoning, and killer icicles. And I started to feel just a little bit better.
The point is...A Christmas Story is still a great movie.
Now, doesn't that make you feel better? I thought it would.
If you're wondering if there is a serious point here, then shame on you. But OK, fine. Here it is. Georgetown had no business losing this game. No business! (thank you, Clint Howard) But they lost it. They fell right into the trap and missed too many backdoor layups to get out of it.
But if they dwell on this game, they will lose to ND. So I hope they move on from this loss just as quickly as possible. Now moving on the way I do is probably not a good idea (and possibly is indicative of some sort of psychotic schism), but move on nonetheless. Yes, there's probably something in there you can learn from (LIKE GUARDING THE THREE DAMMIT!), but better yet, just pretend it didn't happen. Get to NY, get ready for ND and let's see if we can make it to UConnn on Friday. Nothing good will come of re-living this game.
Not that I'm criitcizing everyone here for all the fretting. That's what the board is for and if I had been online over the weekend, believe me, I would have been weaving a tapestry of obscenities that would still be hanging in a cloud over the Potomac.
But I'm not going to think about that game one second longer. Time to beat the Irish.
Thus concludes another utterly pointless, worthless and mysteriously pathetic post from the mind of Boz. Someday, the authorities are going to pull these things for use as evidence. But until that day comes...Go Hoyas!
|
|
VelvetElvis
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
pka MrPathetic
Posts: 934
|
Post by VelvetElvis on Mar 6, 2006 10:57:09 GMT -5
III never coached Dean, Joe, Daymond, etc.
I am a relatively new poster but I have been viewing the board since the days of Craig. I don't have the post count to rival most of the people on the thread which may shoot holes in my credibility. Having said that, I do think that for the most part this particular discussion smells of chicken little.
It isn't like we were the only team to lose stinkers last week. higher ranked teams were going down left and right...Memphis, Pitt, WVU etc. Hopefully someone in McD is instilling a sense of urgency in the team. A loss wouldn't be a death knell but no one wants to limp into the 1st Rd. I think that we can come out of this week with 2 possibly 3 wins under our belts.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Mar 6, 2006 11:40:47 GMT -5
I wanted to wait a few days before I posted to make sure I didn't say something inaccurate, or rip on Bowman like I tended to do this season. After having a day to pretend this game didn't happen, and then having day to deal with reality, I find myself a little more optimistic.
We did not have an embarrassing loss before this game the entire season. EVERY team has an embarrassing loss, and we would get one too. If it wasn't on Saturday would it have been in the BET, would it have been the first round of the NCAA's perhaps? At least we got our one and hopefully only stinker out of the way so we can regroup and win a couple in NYC before the NCAA's. Here's to win #20 on Wednesday!
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on Mar 6, 2006 14:43:41 GMT -5
...I would have been weaving a tapestry of obscenities that would still be hanging in a cloud over the Potomac. Although I agree with the general point of your post, Boz (I am sure you are now saying "Holy crap, I didn't even have a point and this dude's agreeing with it"). However, given the quote above, your point is minor compared to the more significant fact that I believe you may be on your way to becoming the Poet Laureate of HoyaTalk.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 6, 2006 15:07:57 GMT -5
"What are you running for? Cell president?" "No, I....they have that!?"
But seriously, does that title come with a stipend of any sort?
No, but really seriously, I knew I was overreacting when I was screaming at Rich Chivotkin, telling him to shut the hell up. That is somewhat akin to blasphemy, I think.
(yes, it was that moment, not the moment when I broke my own furniture -- which makes me think I am well on my way to something, but Poet Laureate ain't it).
I really just had to take a deep breath and realize it's still been a damn good season, and with any luck and a return to form, it's a season that's far from being over.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Mar 7, 2006 17:38:34 GMT -5
Stupid fact (I think) that pops into my head as I'm in my 10th hour at work: We beat Dook when they were 17-0, and we lost to USF when they were on an 0-17 stretch run.
|
|