|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 22, 2023 17:51:15 GMT -5
I have never understood the gripes about coaching salaries generally. Every single member of HoyaTalk, if he or she could negotiate a raise for their salary, above what some perceive as their market value, would take the money all day long, especially if they could guarantee it over 5-6 years. The market bears what the market bears. There are always coaches who are arguably "underpaid" and some "overpaid." But, the blame or responsibility for that falls on the people hiring them, not the coaches themselves. Did DeGioia make a really bad choice in extending Ewing? Of course, but I have always defended Ewing on that from his perspective. It's absolutely not his fault that DeGioia made a boneheaded move.
Right now, Hurley's deal looks great, he won a championship, etc. I happen to think he's a really good coach (one Georgetown should not have overlooked in 2017), and he did win a championship, so I think his salary is fair.
As for Cooley, I realize there are going to people talking about his salary every time the team stumbles or every time people think we are underperforming, not doing as well a St. John's, etc. But keep in mind, it's not Cooley's fault. Now, granted, salaries do create some level of expectations, but really, if Cooley kept his Providence salary, rather than the raise at Georgetown, would it materially change expectations? Has anybody ever said "We just lost first round of the NCAAs/missed the NCAA's entirely, but our coach makes $1 million, so I am cool with that?" No. That might be the type of thing an administrator says, but not fans.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 21, 2023 15:04:11 GMT -5
First, to keep this on track, I am very excited about Sorber joining us eventually, and I feel pretty confident he will. Obviously, things happen, but I also think Cooley is a very different person than Ewing was. He's way more charismatic, and he's got his fingers on the pulse of his guys in ways that Ewing simply never did. Of course, over time, Cooley will lose players, just as he'll recruit (or dare I say, poach) players from other schools. At least we know Cooley is playing the game.
Second, the negativity is absolutely because of the past regime. Keep in mind that Hoyas fans only know the transfer portal/NIL era while Ewing was the coach of the Hoyas. During that 6 year period, we had a sum total of three guys who lasted four years--Jahvon Blair (who graduated), Pickett (who may have graduated, still unclear), and Malcom Wilson (who was tossed from a scholarship to make room for transfers, but then got it back). Those three are also the only ones who lasted 4 years (and even of his younger players, Mutomobo is the only one who could last 4 years, and who know sif Mutombo would have stayed without his father's connection to the university). That's truly an abysmal record and ridiculously high roster upheaval, but it's the only thing we have known from Ewing over the last several years.
I mean, the list over the 6 years is extremely long, so I really don't blame fans who are accustomed to this. Sodom, Antwan Walker, Akinjo, Grayson Carter, Josh LeBlanc, Mac McClung, Galen Alexander, Myron Gardner, Wahab, Berger, Donald Carey, Kobe Clark, Dante Harris, Collin Holloway, Timothy Ighoefe, Jamari Sibley, Tyler Beard, Jalen Billingsley, Jordan Riley, Denver Anglin, D'Ante Bass, Bradley Ezewiro, Brandon Murray, Primo Spears. And while a graduate transfer, Wilson. I think that's the full list of transfers, plus you've got Tre King who transferred but never played.
With King, that's 26 guys who left Georgetown over Ewing's 6 seasons (or the immediate aftermath of his firing). I don't care about transfer portals or NIL deals, that is an absurdly high amount of turnover. So, are Georgetown fans traumatized? Absolutely. Because since Ewing came on board, all we have known is constant transfers and losing virtually every player Ewing brought in over six years. To me, one of the frustrating things under Ewing, especially the last few years, was having to learn a whole new roster. While some of that will continue with the transfer portal and NIL, I don't think it will be nearly as bad as what we have witnesses over the last several years going forward. But, I cut our fans some slack for this reason.
That said, I am very confident things will be very different under Cooley. He has a strong record, I think he is much more of a player's coach than Ewing, and more simply, Cooley knows what he's doing. I think it's going to be a good ride, and Sorber will be an important piece after this season.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 19, 2023 21:02:18 GMT -5
The other schools in the league got better. It’ll be interesting to see how we fare. I don’t even know what running a clean program means anymore. Kids get paid, live in nice dorms and take easy classes. It means no NCAA violations and no legal issues. What other Big East programs have existing NCAA violations and legal issues? I am not asking this rhetorically. Other than the Anderson wrongful termination stuff, I cannot think of any active scandals or problems with our fellow conference members? I know Connecticut had the stuff with Ollie, etc. and some programs have had troubles in the past, but based on memory, at least in the era of the new Big East, I think the programs have been pretty clean. I am not sure it's considered an NCAA violation, but my understanding is that if the rules were not suspended, our APR would be problematic. I know it's a rolling average, but going forward, I do not see that being problematic under Cooley.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 18, 2023 19:08:51 GMT -5
I really think the main problem Georgetown had the last few years has nothing to do with getting quality players to practice against. The instruction was just plain bad. Our guys had no direction, it's unclear what was even being taught in practice because our guys made the same mistakes over and over again, and rarely did we see any evidence of improvement over the course of the season. It doesn't matter who you are practicing against if you're not being taught the right principles and skills. I really think it's hard to underestimate how much more skilled the current staff is, especially at the top (but also other levels), than the last one. I think it will be a big breath of fresh air for many fans when we start back up in November, even if it takes time to really get going. I cannot conclude, at this point, that the current asst coaches are much more skilled than Pat's last group. No basis to conclude that. This makes no sense. Patrick Ewing's staff, both the one that was in place for 2021-2022, and also the 2022-2023 staff, oversaw with Ewing two of the worst high-major seasons ever. Last year was an utter disaster. No cohesion, no defense, and it never got better over the course of the season. In contrast, Cooley has had substantially more success than Ewing, and he has done that with the SAME STAFF he now has at Georgetown. And that extends beyond the assistants to other staff members. So, there is every reason to think the current assistant coaches are more skilled that Ewing's last group. I am sure the next season will give people who are Cooley-skeptics chances to criticize him, but saying this about the assistants is just ignorant and makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 17, 2023 18:10:44 GMT -5
In the last few months under Cooley, it is abundantly obvious that Ed Cooley is a fantastic representative of the university. He really takes his role as a basketball coach and leverages it to make himself known in the community, to ingratiate himself into the Georgetown community, and show that he truly views the job as all-encompassing. That is a huge breath of fresh air from the way the program has operated in the past. On these factors (i.e., putting aside basketball), I don't think Georgetown could have chosen someone better.
I do worry a bit about the basketball side. Not because I don't think Cooley can be successful (I think he will be), but I do think that a lot of fans are going to have unrealistic expectations, and if we don't instantly contest for the top half of the Big East, get down on Cooley and criticize him. I do think we will be so much better this year, that even if we finish in 7th or 8th, that it will be hugely obvious that Cooley is a massive improvement.
But, I think there will be a lot of sour grapes if Pitino gets St. John contending for an at-large bid in Year 1, and we do not. That said, I think the "Pitino is a Hall of Fame coach" credential is carrying much of the St. John's excitement among media, and for good reason since he is good. But, I think there's a chance of overhype there (or maybe not!).
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 15, 2023 8:56:51 GMT -5
I'm still not sold that Pitino has assembled a more talented team than last year's squad but Dingle would have definitely been the best backcourt player last season... Agreed. While I do think St. John's will be much better simply because Pitino is a better coach than Anderson, I think St. John's is getting a lot of hype because Pitino is Pitino. But, that hype is somewhat justified because after all the guy is a fantastic, Hall of Fame coach. That's why I wanted him to coach at Georgetown. So, it wouldn't surprise me if he has this sort of success. I just think putting everything together that quickly and expecting a top 25 type team is a lot. Not impossible by any stretch, though.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 14, 2023 9:14:39 GMT -5
Did someone ask if there’s a Plan B if players keep transferring at the current college bball pace? Seems pretty clear that Cooley is already on to Plan C. Plan A was bring Hopkins and Carter with him from Providence. That plan was scuttled by the NCAA's ruling on sitting out a year for second transfers (you would've thought we'd have good intel on that with our University President chairing important NCAA regulatory bodies). Plan B was identify and communicate with top potential veteran transfers on relatively low NIL deals, also known as the "Hunter Dickinson and Cam Spencer Plan". While Cooley & Co. were very good at communicating with these players and enticing them to leave their schools, we were very bad at closing the deal on the transfers, not realizing that other schools would come over the top of us with better NIL deals once it was clear those players were transferring. Plan C is tell people that what we're really focused on is 2024 and beyond anyway, which will include a poor out-of-conference schedule and consistent communication of the long-range plan when the Hoyas don't do much on the court in 2023-2024. I think it is kind of funny that some are still using Hopkins and Carter against Cooley. For starters, Cooley and his staff--the one that moved with him to Georgetown--recruited both Hopkins and Carter as transfers. Neither player was terribly successful in their first stint. Hopkins played very little as a freshman at Kentucky, and when he did play his performance wasn't very good. As for Carter, he played more than Hopkins in his freshman season at South Carolina, but he too was underwhelming there. At least under ESPN's rankings, both of these guys were in the lower end of the Top 100 (though I think Hopkins' ranking was better on some other sites). The reason Hopkins and Carter are notable at all is because they improved substantially under Ed Cooley. And guess what? We have the staff and head coach that turned these guys from recruits that did not live up to expectations as freshman into very good players. In getting guys like Stylez and Brumbaugh, Cooley is following a similar formula. That doesn't mean it'll turn out the same way, but the point being that Cooley helped to transforme Hopkins and Carter into very good college players. I think it is going to take Hoyas fans some time to get used to the fact that we might now have a coach and staff who actually develop players, rather than simply getting guys who come in and leave largely as the same player. Would I have liked to have Hopkins and Carter? Of course. But the transfer rules prevented them from leaving with Cooley, so I am not sure what people expected. Kids don't want to sit.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 14, 2023 8:48:12 GMT -5
As an addendum to my previous post, I think the more interesting thing here is whether, in the future, schools will be able to circumvent scholarship limits by funneling NIL money to guys instead (which they then use to pay tuition). If that is allowed to run amok, it would transform college basketball even more, and not in a good way. One way around this would be to impose a new rule that while you can have any amount of players on your roster, you can only play 13 of them. That would block this tactic to some degree (though it would still allow redshirts).
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 14, 2023 8:45:23 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see 2003’s take. That seems highly sketchy because my understanding was that if a university recruits a guy, they "count" as a scholarship, and so you cannot pull the walk on thing. But, other schools have done it, like Drummond at Connecticut years ago. And of course, Ewing pushing Wilson into a team manager role. I definitely think it's highly questionable, but since others have done it, I am guessing there is some justification there. Pitino is clearly the type of coach who pushes the envelop, he always has, but that is in part why he wins. I can guarantee you that if Pitino was at Georgetown and the same thing happened, most of the fans would be focusing mostly on getting a top 40 recruit, and not that he's a walk on. When you win, it's a lot easier to look past the shade.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 8, 2023 23:39:13 GMT -5
I could see Rick make this work somehow. Could he get someone to switch to a walk on and just hand them an NIL bag instead? Last year, Ewing made Malcon Wilson into a team manager to open up a space. And some Hoyas fans were so drunk on the Ewing-aid that they convinced themselves Wilson wanted to be a team manager instead of a player. Of course, that all blew up when Wilson rejoined after a roster spot opened up again. Perhaps St. John's fans will be similarly delusional and spin such tales to feel better about themselves. Whether it is technically allowed to run off a player, the fact is that it happens all the time. As someone else said, I think TC, I think it is ethically/morally bad to promise a kid a spot and then take it away, especially if a kid has done nothing wrong (other than perhaps not living up to expectations). Of course, basketball isn't Church and it's not a saint's game, but generally speaking I don't think kids should be run off. That said, I think realistically if a kid isn't going to play, the coach should be honest about that and give the kid a chance to go elsewhere. In most/many cases, the kids often leave anyway. A Malcon Wilson story is the rare circumstance these days. Of course, the circumstances would be different for a kid that doesn't follow rules, has numerous team violations, etc. The student-athletes have obligations of their own they need to meet, too.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 8, 2023 12:26:06 GMT -5
With UConn, the bottom line is that if they can get long-term football-level money that is unavailable in the Big East, they will take it. I really don't think it's more complicated than that. There are few schools that would turn down a financial pot of gold, particularly one struggling to turn an athletic profit (though I can envision Georgetown doing just that).
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 7, 2023 15:55:52 GMT -5
It'd be interesting if UConn breaks away, would the BE go approach schools like preferably Memphis, Dayton, VCU, Temple, or St.Louis If UConn goes to the Big 12, then the Big East should stick with the original 10 and see where things land once there is more shakeup. None of the schools mentioned above are at the level where they are obvious good choices for a major basketball conference. Of those, Memphis, Dayton, and VCU would probably be the best choices. I assume Memphis has the financial resources for basketball to make it fit the Big East--not sure the other do. Memphis also has the problem that they have (really bad) Division 1 football they'd need to put somewhere. Temple simply has not been good enough, and hasn't been in a long time since Dunphy's better years. And would it be weird to have two programs from the Philadelphia area? I am not sure how those dynamics work. And St. Louis is also mixed. Some good years, some truly atrocious years. I say wait and see what happens. Both when the Big East reconstituted after 2013, and also when Connecticut joined, people clamored for some of these same schools to join (especially after 2013) and the conference, I think, has been better off by keeping itself to a tight group of really good basketball programs. Bigger is not better. The whole "access to the [insert big city]" is silly too, and I have always thought so. The current cable model that subsidizes regional sports networks is slowly unraveling, and the money will eventually go with it to, though right now football still commands a premium. But, is the Big 10 better off because Rutgers joined? Did it increase interest in New Jersey and New York? Only at the margins. Of course, it's hard to turn down money as the school being courted, but I think the value of adding these sort of schools to the conference itself is more limited than people think.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 6, 2023 17:51:29 GMT -5
I like this. All four points are really important, but the point of practicing at game speed is something that I think has been a problem for the Hoyas for a few years. When another team made the Hoyas play at a fast pace it usually caused the team to break down and make mental and physical mistakes, which made me think the team typically practiced at a slower pace than normal game speed. I understand a lot of professional teams do practice at a slower pace to save their bodies during the long season and just work on concepts and game planning in practices, but that has not worked for the Hoyas or most college teams. Being comfortable playing fast is important, especially for the younger players on the team. I understand what you are saying, but from my vantage point, the real issue is not having quality teammates to practice against. As a result, players develop bad habits and get away with things in practice that they can't get away with in the game. I really think the main problem Georgetown had the last few years has nothing to do with getting quality players to practice against. The instruction was just plain bad. Our guys had no direction, it's unclear what was even being taught in practice because our guys made the same mistakes over and over again, and rarely did we see any evidence of improvement over the course of the season. It doesn't matter who you are practicing against if you're not being taught the right principles and skills. I really think it's hard to underestimate how much more skilled the current staff is, especially at the top (but also other levels), than the last one. I think it will be a big breath of fresh air for many fans when we start back up in November, even if it takes time to really get going.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 3, 2023 10:20:14 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing. I am not an expert high school talent evaluator, but for a bigger guy he seems to have some nice speed, footwork, and passing ability, which is all good to see. As for concerns about the 5, I think that because of Georgetown's history, there's probably an overemphasis on needing a large/big bodied/skilled center who can post up and get shots. Of course, I would much rather have such a player than not have one, but plenty of teams have a lot of success without having centers like that. And, as any long-time reader knows, I favor a more modern approach to the 5 as opposed to "let the big man eat" approach of dumping it to the post and letting someone go to work, anyway. To me, my concerns about the 5 are more with defense than offense. We need guys who can rebound pretty well and defend other bigs during Big East games. BUT, you don't necessarily need a center who can go one-on-one with someone like Soriano at St. John's either. If you have an effective defense with good help and rotations (something Georgetown has lacked now for almost a decade), you can get around those matchups. (To be clear, because there has been confusion on this point: I do think there is a role for bigs in college basketball, and I want skilled bigs. I just prefer guys that are used in more modern/effective ways, like Kalkbrenner, as opposed to the more old-school approach used by Ewing, which I do not think is an ideal way to play in the modern game. That said, I do think the slower, less athletic bigs that at one time had a big role in basketball have largely become obsolete (more so in the NBA than college) because of their inability to defend the pick and roll.)
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 2, 2023 8:03:54 GMT -5
I think there's room here to overperform a 144 projection. Kinda surprising that Torvik thinks Pitino has barely improved St. John's at all over last season (82 kenpom, 78 torvik ->73). Yeah, I wouldn't put too much stock into this. I know, at least on KenPom, when there is a coaching change, that negatively impacts ranking, which makes sense under normal circumstances. Teams with coaching changes often do take a step back before improving (if they do improve). But Ewing's teams were so bad, and Ewing was such a bad coach, that I think the improvement we will see with Cooley is something that is not going to be captured in the pre-season rankings. If we finish 144 on KenPom/Torvik, I would be hugely disappointed. There's no reason we should be that bad. I really think being around 100 is a very reasonable goal/floor.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 2, 2023 7:59:00 GMT -5
I get your point, but one would hope that if Mutombo improves that his fouls per 40 minutes will go down...If not, then yes, he won't be playing huge minutes.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 1, 2023 8:24:41 GMT -5
Regarding playing time/rotation size, the 2023-24 season might not be representative of what we will see from Cooley in future seasons. After the Ewing debacle, Cooley might need a full roster of able bodies just in case some players don’t work out as we/he hoped. This is definitely possible. Cooley is coaching an entirely new group, and so I am sure that it will take at least a couple of years for him to build things exactly as he wants them to be. I do like that Cooley seems to value high school recruits. While the transfer portal is very important, I think bringing in high school recruits remains important for long term stability and planning (with the caveat that people will transfer at times). As for the rotation, I am open to Cooley playing bigger rotations than Ewing, but even if you play more than 9 guys a game, there are always going to be the guys who have very low minutes. Given the lack of information about many of the new players combined with Cooley being new to Georgetown, I really think it's hard to predict at this point. That said, I think multiple factors will impact playing time, including (a) the inevitable injuries that often change playing time in unexpected ways, (b) players who are not as good as they might seem, (c) relatedly, freshman who may not be as game-ready as they seem. We've had multiple off-seasons/Kenner reports where guys are hyped up and things don't work out. I remember the off-season where people were claiming Ighoefe would be the next greatest thing, and that never panned out, but that's only one of many examples. It'll be fun to see how things shake out, and because Cooley is more open about the team, we may even get first hand information about it once practices start.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on May 31, 2023 14:32:16 GMT -5
We have 2 scholarships left right? I thought a few people were saying one, but I am not seeing how that shakes out?
Wayne Bristol Jr. Jay Heath Akok Akok Ismael Massoud Ryan Mutombo Dontrez Styles Supreme Cook Jayden Epps Drew Fielder Rowan Brumbaugh Drew McKenna
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on May 31, 2023 13:20:51 GMT -5
Cooley's a coach. At the risk of being reductive, it's his job to get the guys playing how he wants them to play. I do understand guys have skillsets and often have preferences, and sometimes they are uncoachable in attitude or simply can't play any other way, but I'm not sure either applies to Heath. Like, I like Primo more than most, but the dude can only play the way he plays. He's a high volume scoring PG, and that's what he is. I don't think it is an attitude thing, just like, that's all he has in his toolbox. Or Murray, who honestly, didn't defend from the very first game and seemed to fade in and out whether he cared. Now, I get losing can beat you down, but he wasn't committing to playing the whole game from day one. But Heath? Eh, I am not nearly impressed talent-wise by him, but I don't think he's inflexible like Primo and I never got early effort issues like Murray. (Everyone kind of quit down the stretch, and who can blame them?). Agreed. And I think because we witnessed years of Ewing's inability to mold guys, there's a tendency for us to think that what we see is what we are going to get. But, a good Coach--and I do think Cooley is one--can mold players to fit their strategy and plans. I do think Heath seemed more flexible than Primo Spears or Murray did, and so I am hopeful he can take a jump over his performance last year. To the other point raised above, there is no way we will go ten deep, I agree. But, I do think there may be a need for Cooley to see what he's got at the beginning of the season, before distilling the rotation down to a smaller one. Virtually no teams (good or bad) run a true 10 man rotation, there's no reason to think we will do that, either.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on May 31, 2023 13:15:44 GMT -5
More so than any previous year, even those in which our roster turnover was crazy, I think it's very hard to predict minutes at this point because (a) almost the entire roster is new, (b) the roster still isn't complete, and (c) we have an entirely new coach and staff that will likely play significantly different than Ewing. There are a lot of new faces, and a lot of pieces to the puzzle. While I agree that we cannot roll Akok out there at the 5 for long periods, I do think he's talented enough to play there when we go smaller or when we play OOC teams that are horrible/lack size.
Akok's playing time last year actually eclipsed what I thought he'd play given his injury-prone past, but he managed fairly well with it. That said, his efficiency took a nosedive, and I think he can be a MUCH better player under Cooley than he was under Ewing, especially if he's playing around better players and in a better system. Akok actually took a lot of threes last year (which I wanted him to do), and wasn't very good, only hitting 28.2%. But, a lot of them were bad shots, and I think in a better system, he could improve on threes, and all around. I really think Akok will be an important part of the puzzle.
I do think Cook will get a bunch of playing time, but I wouldn't sleep on Mutombo either. I don't think Mutombo is going to get a huge amount of minutes, but I think he might be better than he's given credit for.
|
|