gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Jul 8, 2007 16:56:08 GMT -5
As usual, everybody has more or less mentioned all the important points. Some quick notes:
Vernon: As somebody else mentioned, he definitely got hit in the face on that play. Nosebleed is the best guess.
Pat: Imposing. Dominant. I would be shocked if Pat doesn't start and make huge contributions this year.
Chris: Wow, I just love the way Wright plays the game. He gives 100% effort every single play both offensively and defensively. I can already tell after seeing him play 4-5 times that he's probably going to be my favorite Hoya after this senior class is gone. Something that I don't think anybody else has mentioned is the leadership he shows on the court. I saw him a number of times pulling people aside on defense to let them know what to do. For negatives, I would say he's a bit too turnover prone and needs to learn to look for his teammates a bit more when he gets into the lane. Could do better with shot selection, but we all know how strict JTIII is with that.
Nikita: Didn't really see much from him. He looked a step slower than everybody else. Has some skills, but it's impossible to tell whether they will translate or not.
Omar: Has pretty good form on his shot. Got beat too many times on defense. Didn't see enough to make any more judgments.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jul 8, 2007 17:39:03 GMT -5
If you have 13 Top 100 players, about four of them are going to transfer. Most of these kids want to play. I think Nikita and Omar are an attempt to take a couple of kids who do not expect to play immediately, who will work hard, be committed and possibly grow into players but will also grow into upperclassmen who will be a help in practice, not someone the coaches need to instruct. I think it is a combination of SFHoya's thoughts and the Dude. Omar and Nikita are likely to be 4 year guys who just might be important bench players at some point in their career. Both are said to shoot really well and Nikita has been touted as a passer. Guys like that will fit in JT3's system and provide some points off the bench. But we also need to pay attention to APR. When guys leave early (NBA, Transfer, Other) in good academic standing, it doesn't hurt as much as if they flunk out, or fail to finish a their last semester before an early NBA departure. But guys leaving early still has a cost. And we have had a LOT of guys leave early. Not just Jeff, Guibunda, Thornton, Reed, Spann, and Egerson (guess they didn't call him "luv" for nothing!). Did I miss anyone? That's a LOT of guys leaving. A variety of reasons and no one was forced out, but still... a lot of departures. That is NOT good for APR. On the plus side, it seems like the guys who are here are all dedicated students. Nonetheless, as the elite program GU is becoming once again, we are going to lose guys early to the NBA and due to lack of PT (Like Spann). Having kids on the team who accept their role and plan to stay all four years... even if they are only partial contributors in terms of game PT... is going to be important of APR, for continuity, for practice, for teachinng the JT3 system. I think Omar and Nikita fit that role. And I hope their games develop so we can see them on the court at some point too.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 32,002
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jul 8, 2007 18:07:39 GMT -5
One last question for you all: Do you think Omar and Nikita are insurance for our academic standards and APR ratings, as they are not any threat to leave early to the NBA, whereas a lot of the guys we're getting now are? Do you think we'll see this mix of top-notch, potential early entry players and under-the-radar, potential Junior/Senior contributors continue in JTIII's recruiting? Every team needs practice / bench players. The better they are, the more they can push the top 8-9. I doubt academic standings / APR has anything to do with it as the expectation has (and should) continue to be for 4 year students who do well on and off the court. Having said all that, the last 3 guys on the depth chart would be crazy if they did not take advantage of the educational opportunity they have. Speaking of taking advantage of educational opportunity, it sounds like Mr. Ewing paid rapt attention to the Jeff Green up fake and step through to knock down the jumper move last year.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Jul 8, 2007 19:59:58 GMT -5
thanks flhoya. 'ppreciate it c
|
|
02hoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 256
|
Post by 02hoya on Jul 9, 2007 8:16:42 GMT -5
For my first post, I just wanted to say thanks to all of you guys for providing these recaps. I've been able to make it out to the games the last two weekends, but all of your analyses are much appreciated. I can't wait for the season to start.
I was very impressed with Wright's speed and aggressiveness, but I definitely agree that the big questions are 1) how TO-prone is he once he gets in the lane and 2) will he be able to find an open shooter instead of trying to take the shot himself? Regardles, he's going to be very exciting to watch this year.
As for Nikita, I think the biggest thing he needs to work on out of the gate is to NOT put on a bright orange Carmelo Anthony shirt after his games. I looked around the stands at one point after The Tombs game and I saw Nikita sitting in the back row with this shirt on (and possibly UNC shorts) and immediately thought, "WTF?!?!" I hate SU-cks as much as the next poster on this board, but hopefully one of the guys was able to give him a more appropriate shirt to wear....
|
|
|
Post by africanscout on Jul 9, 2007 12:40:48 GMT -5
Would agree with almost all of FL's statements, but I actually thought Wright's one on one defense could use some pointers from JW. There were lots of transition steals, but Abdulai Jalloh, the new PG at JMU, was able to repeatedly drive left on Wright. And one thing this amazing offensive player can due to limit TOs is to watch his palming of the ball. All in all, GU now has the type of talent the Princeton offense is designed to neutralize. Not really looking forward to seeing more of ROy standing around the 3pt line and losing to inferior teams that happen to shoot well.
DC Jammers didn't show for the first game and forfeited; saw only Gist and one or two other players, while 10 or so Bowie St. and co. were there. I really wish one of these teams with the deck stacked against them would win the league; they show up to play and are hungry.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 9, 2007 12:52:56 GMT -5
We had seven whole losses last year. In only four of them did the offense perform poorly, and only one of those occurred after January 8th.
There's nothing wrong with the offense. We had plenty of athletes last year and they performed extremely well in the offense. Just because Roy at the 3 point line offends your aesthetics doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it.
|
|
KennaHoya
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 181
|
Post by KennaHoya on Jul 9, 2007 13:07:10 GMT -5
I have to agree that there is nothing wrong with the offense. After years of the guards standing around trying to lob the ball or pound the ball into the post, it is nice to see motion and passing. While the center does play outside at times in this motion offense, it is often to clear the lane for cutters, and followed by the center's rotation inside on a pick-and-roll or other cut to the post. And there is nothing wrong with developing multiple skills.
Wallace and Sapp were able to penetrate in this offense last year, and with Wright and Freeman having the skills to penetrate as well, we will see what the offense does with those abilities.
|
|
chep3
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,314
|
Post by chep3 on Jul 9, 2007 13:46:11 GMT -5
Why is this still a question? We were easily one of the best offensive teams in the country last year.
|
|
|
Post by africanscout on Jul 9, 2007 14:08:42 GMT -5
Losing to ODU at home and to an Oregon team with one 6'9" guy? That's called overthinking and wasting your strengths. I also think there'd be less transfers if they didn't use such a short bench and were so low scoring. And they deserved to lose to a much less talented Vandy team, Green travel or not. My problem has nothing to do with aesthetics, just flexibility, or the lack of it. It's in the same vein (though not as bad) as Boeheim wasting his talent by playing a 2-3 zone 96%+ of the time. Seeing if the offense turns Chris Wright into well controlled talent who makes great decisions or someone shackled and frustrated, is a great question for the next year or two, though. I just think JTIII's done such a good job in taking the team to the cusp of a national championship that he shouldn't straightjacket them by running the Princeton O all the time. Pitino took a Louisville team to the Final 4 in '05 with basicallyseven guys; totally diffferent from his deep, athletic UK teams that pressed and ran. Getting the most out of your personnel while staying true to general principles, not gimmicky offenses, to me is the mark of a great coach.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jul 9, 2007 14:25:28 GMT -5
Losing to ODU at home and to an Oregon team with one 6'9" guy? That's called overthinking and wasting your strengths. I also think there'd be less transfers if they didn't use such a short bench and were so low scoring. And they deserved to lose to a much less talented Vandy team, Green travel or not. My problem has nothing to do with aesthetics, just flexibility, or the lack of it. It's in the same vein (though not as bad) as Boeheim wasting his talent by playing a 2-3 zone 96%+ of the time. Seeing if the offense turns Chris Wright into well controlled talent who makes great decisions or someone shackled and frustrated, is a great question for the next year or two, though. I just think JTIII's done such a good job in taking the team to the cusp of a national championship that he shouldn't straightjacket them by running the Princeton O all the time. Pitino took a Louisville team to the Final 4 in '05 with basicallyseven guys; totally diffferent from his deep, athletic UK teams that pressed and ran. Getting the most out of your personnel while staying true to general principles, not gimmicky offenses, to me is the mark of a great coach. Did we deserve to lose to UNC too? What about that close call in the BET? I bet we deserved to lose that one too. Are we ever going to get over people calling this a "gimmick" offense? What is so gimmicky about it? What more did you want from the team last year? They went to the final four for goodness sakes. And why you're at it, why don't you ask Roy Williams if he thought that the team was flexible enough when we were running with UNC. (and how'd that deep bench work out for him?)
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 9, 2007 14:25:56 GMT -5
The offense III runs isn't a gimmick. Just reading your post makes me think you don't really understand it. There's relatively few set plays and the offense is essentially read and react. What is restrictive about it is that III asks you to take quality shots. Imagine that. There's no straightjacket except the coach doesn't want people jacking shots.
The system is principles, not gimmicks.
The offense has adjusted significantly to the talent we've had here, so why would that change now? In season one we had a perimeter based center and then we shifted to an offense with Roy in it. The reason why it adjusts so easily is that it isn't a bunch of set plays -- it's read and react.
As for our incredibly bad losses last year -- none had to do with the offensive system. Oregon, who went to the Elite Eight and lost to the eventual champions by only 8 (their smallest post-season margin) killed us with guard quickness on offense and defense. They matched up great versus us and it had a lot to do with personnel, not the system.
As for ODU, our offense was actually okay. Our defense, however, let Drew Williamson do as he pleased (quick guard again!) and ODU had the second highest points per possession all season on us next to the Pitt game.
This offense scored the second highest points per possession in basketball last year, once you adjust for competition. In '05-06, we ranked 9th. In '04-05, with very little talent and completely unadjusted to the system, it was 36th.
|
|
DudeSlade
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I got through the Esherick years. I can get through anything.
Posts: 1,209
|
Post by DudeSlade on Jul 9, 2007 14:34:35 GMT -5
Then by your definition, africanscout, Phil Jackson is a terrible coach, nevermind that he won 9 championships, and Rick Barnes, who catered beautifully to Kevin Durant, is awesome! How did Boeheim win the NC with Carmelo, if he is wasting his talent? Cuse's defense gave us fits last year, along with any zone defense, and Cuse regularly frustrates other teams with their defense. That sounds like a good system to me. In fact, isn't that the perfect system when you have a bunch of long, rangy, quick, agile 6'8-6'10 guys, and no true center to guard Roy or Gray?
I'm not gonna get into the Princeton offense and whether it's a good system. But if you had attended Georgetown in the glory days of Craig Esherick around 2003-04 and seen how he catered to his players (Drew Hall shoots from half court when Ashanti, Brandon, Mike Sweetney are wide open! Yes, he misses!) and then seen our team since with JTIII, you'd understand why your argument doesn't sit well with people on this board. I hope your a frosh who doesn't know better or a troll, cuz if you've followed this team at all over the last 5+ years, I think you missed the Ray Reed transfer boat.
|
|
FOTP
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,435
|
Post by FOTP on Jul 9, 2007 15:13:30 GMT -5
"Gimmick offense"...nice. SF is dead on right and it's the reason why teams can't guard us and JTIII is always called a genius by other coaches.
It's actually not an offense at all. It's a concept. Nothing is set in stone. Against Texas last year they ran the same play over and over again. I don't care if Durant is the next Bird...that doesn't work.
JTIII just has guys actually make cuts and read the defense. Teams HATE to play us because they actually have to play real defense for 35 seconds...god forbid.
Yeah, Roy ends up at the three point line sometimes, but most of the time that clears the lane for a backdoor cut or he's setting a screen for a guy to get a wide open shot.
JTIII is a coaching savant...period.
|
|
|
Post by africanscout on Jul 9, 2007 17:06:32 GMT -5
Hey, y'all can get drunk off the Kool Aid and pig pile all you want. I stand by my statement that sending Roy out there that often (on offense of defense) is not getting the most out of him. He said himself in an interview has has to do two or three things before he can react and do what he does best: post up. But he is looking forward to another year of that apparently, which is a lot more important than if you or I are. The Princeton O is not the only alternative out there to the star system, for those with recent historical Hoya paranoia. I like that JTIII's in control and wants smart shots, it's just not always the best offense for this collection of talent/athletes. Wright also had doubts about how he'll do in this. Maybe JTIII'll adjust a little bit more now that he has more skilled /athletic guards. Or maybe the'll have cold shooting at the end of some games and lose to teams they should've blown out. There's a reason no other top D-1 team runs it nearly as much. It's a great equalizer for a team with less talent/athletic ablitiy/size than most of their opponents, like, say.......PRINCETON!!
And dudeslade, think you should've traded t-shirts with Nikita down at Kenner. One title in 20+ years of having the top NY area talent is frustrating only to their fans. Ask the inferior Depaul team that shot'em out of the gym by 39 in '06 about that one.
|
|
Locker
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,265
|
Post by Locker on Jul 9, 2007 17:33:22 GMT -5
I hated seeing Roy out by the three point line with 31 seconds left against Carolina. Sure, his screen sprung Jon for the game-tying three on a beautiful piece of offensive execution (hat tip: JT3's wonderful offensive teaching), but it offends my preconceived notions of where 7'2" dudes should operate.
It's Not Broke, Let's Fix It!
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 9, 2007 18:05:31 GMT -5
Scout,
I find it funny you call us drinking the kool-aid, because you're the one that is repeating crap they've heard all their lives and not backing it up with facts. You make massive assumptions with no reasoning.
You say, "It's a great equalizer for a team with less talent/athletic ablitiy/size than most of their opponents, like, say.......PRINCETON!!" and dismiss REALITY.
How good was our offense last year? It was AWESOME. We didn't use the system to equalize ourselves with a team like UNC or Memphis. We had a better offense than they did. BETTER. We had a better offense than anyone but Florida!
How is that "equalizing?" Our offense kicked ass. Gee maybe when we have a team of multiple NBA draft picks (Summers, Green, Hibbert), or get size (again) or have more athletic backups than those slackers PE, Jr. and Macklin, who have no athleticism, then yeah, we can ditch this offense for something more showboaty!
Another comment you said: "There's a reason no other top D-1 team runs it nearly as much." Yep. Most people can't run it. They can't teach it, and they are caught up in the same crap you are. They are probably also obsessed with getting all those recruits who would rather run and put up monster numbers than win. And people wonder why Greece can kick our ass in basketball.
Another comment steeped in fun: "Or maybe the'll have cold shooting at the end of some games and lose to teams they should've blown out."
Never mind that this hasn't happened in two years, or really three. We had 22 wins 10 points or more in 30 wins. And lots of fast paced teams lose close games when they stop shooting.
Like say UNC. In the Elite Eight.
Last point. say: "Maybe JTIII'll adjust a little bit more now that he has more skilled /athletic guards."
I can't express how much a comment like this makes me think you don't get it.
Do you think III says to Jessie and Jon not to drive and dish? Absolutely not. He has them read the defense and decide what the best option is. He asks that they move without the ball, set a screen or two and maintain quality spacing.
So when Chris sees a guy he can break down, do think the Princeton says not to do so? No, it says if it is a mismatch, then do it. Force your defender and other defenders to commit. Then find the open man. What it says is don't try to penetrate against three defenders or throw up a thirty foot three. Only because that isn't a good shot.
I expect us to run more with Chris, because that will be a good option. I expect to see more penetration, because that will be a good option. But it would be ridiculous to change a system so a player can pad his stats. We play to win.
|
|
Oh My!
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 938
|
Post by Oh My! on Jul 9, 2007 18:18:09 GMT -5
Hey, y'all can get drunk off the Kool Aid and pig pile all you want. I stand by my statement that sending Roy out there that often (on offense of defense) is not getting the most out of him. He said himself in an interview has has to do two or three things before he can react and do what he does best: post up. But he is looking forward to another year of that apparently, which is a lot more important than if you or I are. The Princeton O is not the only alternative out there to the star system, for those with recent historical Hoya paranoia. I like that JTIII's in control and wants smart shots, it's just not always the best offense for this collection of talent/athletes. Wright also had doubts about how he'll do in this. Maybe JTIII'll adjust a little bit more now that he has more skilled /athletic guards. Or maybe the'll have cold shooting at the end of some games and lose to teams they should've blown out. There's a reason no other top D-1 team runs it nearly as much. It's a great equalizer for a team with less talent/athletic ablitiy/size than most of their opponents, like, say.......PRINCETON!! And dudeslade, think you should've traded t-shirts with Nikita down at Kenner. One title in 20+ years of having the top NY area talent is frustrating only to their fans. Ask the inferior Depaul team that shot'em out of the gym by 39 in '06 about that one. I would say that other reasons no other "Top D-1 Team" uses this offense are: --No major programs have Head Coaches who were trained by Pete Carrill (most of those guys are in the NBA) --It takes UNBELIEVABLE FAITH & PATIENCE to foster a group of 14 young men while they learn such a difficult (read: contrary-to-nature for "talented/athletic/sizeable" athletes). John Thompson III is UNDOUBTEDLY a man of great faith & patience (in all of life). --As for Kool Aid, I like drinking Kool Aid.......It's SWEEEEET!
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jul 9, 2007 18:23:11 GMT -5
Ken Pomeroy's Final Four preview:
Georgetown
Strength: Cramming it down your throat.
That’s the only way to describe the Hoya offense. Never before* has there been a combination of shooting efficiency (4th nationally) and offensive rebounding (7th nationally) seen in the sport. And they seem to be getting better in the tournament.
Both Oden and Hibbert draw fouls like crazy, so I think it’s likely that both guys will be managing foul trouble during this one. So it’s imperative for Ohio State to force a few 3’s to keep the pressure off of the middle. Georgetown isn’t Northwestern - everybody can crash the offensive boards for Georgetown, and if Oden can’t stay on the floor, that problem will only get worse.
*since 2003-04 season
Weakness: Turnovers.
Georgetown has been turnover prone, but they’ve done a better job during the tourney. Basically, if they’re not coughing up the ball, prepare to need an insane offensive night to beat them. Talk to Vanderbilt and UNC about that one. The Hoyas don’t figure to get the offensive boards or shooting percentage they’ve had in their last few games, so they can’t commit too many turnovers if they want to post another efficiency above 110.
The one guy that doesn’t give up the ball is Roy Hibbert. Oden is the more dominant player considering both sides of the ball and his playing time advantage. But offensively, when each is on the floor, there’s not much difference.
ORtg/%Poss OR% TO% Oden 116.4/25.9 14.8 16.2 Hibbert 131.6/22.4 14.7 13.7 Hibbert doesn’t use as many possessions, but he may actually handle the ball more than Oden, making his microscopic turnover rate that much more impressive. I could make the case that normalized for playing time, Hibbert has been the more effective offensive player of the two.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 9, 2007 18:27:23 GMT -5
Plus, multiple NBA teams have incorporated it into their offenses. They run the principles.
|
|