FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Jan 5, 2005 2:38:15 GMT -5
But the offense as is has functioned very well. There are really only two reasons I see to do less 3 point shooting: 1) Eventually people will catch on and game plan to stop the three OR we will meet a team that is talented enough to guard the three even without gameplanning 2) Ignoring driving and post play makes your offense erratic. We're on the same page as far as this is concerned. I think the main difference between us is that I think #1 is gonna happen with greater frequency now that the BE season is starting, and I think #2 has occurred more frequently thus far than you do. Which is cool. Really all my previous bluster was to point out essentially those two points. I think it's an intriguing "philosophical" question if you will, and one that clearly started some discussion. As for what the balance of the student section seemed to think so far...well, that depends on whether the last 3 was good or not when you asked them.
|
|
|
Post by pax on Jan 5, 2005 12:23:07 GMT -5
If you can't teach the fundamentals of shooting, what can you teach? So right. Patrick Ewing made himself into a hall of fame NBA player by developing a 20 foot turnaround jumper that he didn't have at G'town. (Actually, JT the 1st never came close to realizing the offensive potential of either Ewing or Mourning.) There are many other examples of players who developed into better shooters with the combination of coaching and hard work. Michael Jordan comes to mind. It's not a God-given skill, IMHO.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 5, 2005 12:28:51 GMT -5
On defense, MCI, Georgetown is giving up 96.6 points per 100 possessions, according to Ken Pomeroy. That's 119th in the nation, out of 330 D-1 schools. We have a mediocre schedule so far, so the defense is probably right around there.
It's not bad, but that's at the lower end of a major school. This combination of defense, defensive rebounding, offensive turnovers that lead to points, etc., is holding us back more than the offense.
The offense has seemed streaky, but we're scoring very well for a team averaging 60 possessions a game.
|
|
|
Post by Fan Of The Game on Jan 5, 2005 22:27:29 GMT -5
"If we shoot 50% or better from 3-pt range against Pitt, we'll win. If we shoot 35% or worse, we'll lose. Anywhere in between, who knows?"
Well, I know there were multiple reasons we won, but shooting 75% from 3 land in the first half was definitely one of them.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,432
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jan 5, 2005 22:46:44 GMT -5
52% from the 3 vs Pitt; we win; good call FOTG.
Oh, I see that was a quote by somebody. Anyway, that's the way it went down.
|
|
hoyadrummer
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Class of 2000
Posts: 266
|
Post by hoyadrummer on Jan 6, 2005 13:08:28 GMT -5
After last night's game, Bowman, Cook, Wallace and Owens are shooting a combined 42% from three point range. They took a lot of shots last night that those of us at Ship of Fools going "NO, wait, YES!" (brought back memories of Garun Hester's shot)
The shots were tough, but they kept falling, it was not like the "Chuck-a-three" we used to see under Eshrick.
If they keep hitting them, I say keep taking them.
|
|
McBricks
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
What Rocks.
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by McBricks on Jan 6, 2005 14:37:14 GMT -5
While hanging with SFHoya99 at a bar in San Francscio last night, it was pretty clear halfway through the first half that this post was pure genius! Unbelievable shooting night for the Hoyas. Is it kinda pathetic and sad to be THIS HAPPY after a win? I'd forgotten what this felt like. Go Hoyas!
|
|