AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 12:50:33 GMT -5
New to the board.....double Hoya from Mourning through Othella...There has been a lot of discussion about Hibbert's recent play. Last night many saw our #1 Monroe play. I think there is a common theme. We have talented players but yet to have that one player with the proverbial "killer instinct." We have not had a dominant player come to GU in a long time. I would consider Iverson or Mourning our last. So many have commented on recent players "intangible qualities," "basketball IQ" and how they will fit into the GU "system". Can we win it all, though, without that one player who demands the ball and makes it happen.....a guard who creates off the dribble or a center who demands the ball in the post and scores the goal? I appreciate the "brand" of basketball GU plays and the players who play. This being said, I fee that without a dominant player it will be difficult to win it all. Our current system makes it very difficult to come from behind and we have no one player who, when the game is on the line, make us feel over 90% confident that he will score. UNC plays the team concept well just like GU. The difference, however, is that they have several options to go to that are not dependent on team play but individual skill. Yes UNC lost to us in the regional.....I was there...we didn't win that game as much as they lost that game. The frustrations with Hibbert's games and the recent comments about Monroe's performance last night are more directed to the concept of a "go-to-guy." I think everyone expects a consensus #1 prep player to be such a guy (or for that fact, a 1st team preseason all-American).......a la Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley. "Team" basketball wins games and it is elegant. That's why so many bb fans favor college hoops over the 1-on-1 game in the NBA . Can we win though without having a little of the latter? Maybe some of our frustration are due to this void.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 11, 2008 13:10:34 GMT -5
1) I don't there is any system or style that can make a Final Four but not win a title.
More compelling point: Florida just won two National Titles without the level of one on one offensive player you were talking about.
2) You're not talking about system; you're talking about personnel. It's perfectly within the offense for a player to take over (see Green, Jeff versus various opponents last year) if they take have the matchups and take good shots.
Dominant players who don't buy into the team concept lose. There's a million examples. Dominant players who play within a team system win. Like UNC. Or Memphis. Or the Bulls with Jordan -- the triangle is team ball. Jordan played within the system and played team ball. He took more shots because he was simply better.
Disciplined, team play makes everyone better as long as it is not completely ill-suited in style to the players. But systems always get blamed for players' poor performance (see Macklin -- really? Macklin would be a 20 ppg scorer in an isolation offense?).
3) I think the personnel we have can win a National Title. They obviously have to play really well, and unlike DeCourcy, I think Kansas, UNC and a few other teams have more raw talent. I am sure the "system" can.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 13:47:15 GMT -5
You missed the point
(1) Florida's power forward (? Al Thorton) not dominant?!?! Corey Brewer not take someone one-on-one? (2) Team ball is best but when your under 2 mintues and down at the end of a game I would prefer to have the option of one-on-one basketball then a back door cut. (3) Jordan? How many times with the game on the line did he get the ball? Bulls vs. Cavaliers....Bulls vs. Jazz.....check the ESPN introduction to SportsCenter each night....it was a one man show (4) Macklin was an excellent HS player.... college? not the system just an overrated player
5 players who play as a team and don't have that go-to-guy are at a disadvantage compared to 5 players who play as a team and also have that one player to go to in crunch time.......GU is currently the latter.
Hoya fans need to be more realistic of what we have and what we are deficient in.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 11, 2008 13:55:11 GMT -5
Well, I had a really long and detailed response written out, but then I got kicked off the board.
Suffice it to say, you lost me when you said UNC lost that game more than we won it.
That's your opinion and that's OK, but I think it's not a very accurate analysis of that game.
There is no fundamental flaw in the system. In fact, what you are calling a "flaw" is exactly what everyone else was calling Georgetown's strength last year while the team was rolling through February and March: you can't focus on any one player because they all can beat you.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jan 11, 2008 14:00:03 GMT -5
We fight this battle every so often.
Jordan was a once-in-a-century player. It's not a good idea to make comparisons based on him.
The problem with your theory is that it doesn't work if your player is having an off night. Last year in the NCAAs, Jeff DID NOT TRAVEL and scored against Vanderbilt, then two nights later Wallace was the guy for regulation.
This system is skewed because of the many Division I teams, all but one won't win it all. Go to YouTube and search for Pacino's Any Given Sunday speech. In a one-and-done tournament, the "best" team doesn't always win, and it's for no other reason than luck.
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Jan 11, 2008 14:03:13 GMT -5
New to the board.....double Hoya from Mourning through Othella...There has been a lot of discussion about Hibbert's recent play. Last night many saw our #1 Monroe play. I think there is a common theme. We have talented players but yet to have that one player with the proverbial "killer instinct." We have not had a dominant player come to GU in a long time. I would consider Iverson or Mourning our last. So many have commented on recent players "intangible qualities," "basketball IQ" and how they will fit into the GU "system". Can we win it all, though, without that one player who demands the ball and makes it happen.....a guard who creates off the dribble or a center who demands the ball in the post and scores the goal? I appreciate the "brand" of basketball GU plays and the players who play. This being said, I fee that without a dominant player it will be difficult to win it all. Our current system makes it very difficult to come from behind and we have no one player who, when the game is on the line, make us feel over 90% confident that he will score. UNC plays the team concept well just like GU. The difference, however, is that they have several options to go to that are not dependent on team play but individual skill. Yes UNC lost to us in the regional.....I was there...we didn't win that game as much as they lost that game. The frustrations with Hibbert's games and the recent comments about Monroe's performance last night are more directed to the concept of a "go-to-guy." I think everyone expects a consensus #1 prep player to be such a guy (or for that fact, a 1st team preseason all-American).......a la Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley. "Team" basketball wins games and it is elegant. That's why so many bb fans favor college hoops over the 1-on-1 game in the NBA . Can we win though without having a little of the latter? Maybe some of our frustration are due to this void. So you dont think we have anyone who could take his man one on one if we needed that at the end of a game? That seems absurd to me, we have some extremely talented guys who have played plenty of basketball in a variety of different environments over the course of their lives. I think someone like DaJuan or Austin would be easily capable of taking their man to the hole for a game winning basket. Also, I agree with SF, where do people get this idea that a system can make it to the Final Four yet not have what it takes to win the National Championship? Weve proven we can play with the very best, most talented teams in the country, but I guess were only good enough to make the Final Four because our system "limits us". And finally, what makes people think UNC lost that game rather than us winning it? Hearing that makes me sick, yeah, they missed a bunch of shots at the end, but its not like we didnt play any defense. We also played our asses off and proved that we can come from behind and win, but I guess some people can't accept that and would rather just think that we got lucky.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 14:05:43 GMT -5
With 30 seconds on the clock, down by two who takes the shot?
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 14:09:10 GMT -5
I never said we can make it to the Final Four but not win it all.....I am making the point that we have a higher likelihood of winning it all if we had one guy in the clutch. Rose or Summers? Hansborough or Freeman? 30 seconds down lets try to run a backdoor and hope no one cuts off the passing lane.
UNC went stone cold....our defense contributed but simply they went cold.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 11, 2008 14:09:28 GMT -5
I would be happy with any of the following taking that shot:
Wallace from three, or driving for one of his floaters. Roy in the post. Summers from three. Sapp from three or creating off the dribble. Freeman from three or on a backdoor cut. Wright from three.
(and I have a feeling that come March, I'd be pretty happy with Summers, Freeman or Wright taking almost any shot they want)
|
|
nathanhm
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by nathanhm on Jan 11, 2008 14:10:17 GMT -5
The guy with the best shot!
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jan 11, 2008 14:14:37 GMT -5
In East Rutherford, someone asked me the question during the Vandy game and I quickly responded "Jeff". He had been playing the best during that game. There is a deference to someone with the hot hand.
Your theory has a point, but it's more game-based. If Player X has the hot hand that night, get it to him. GU is harder to defend in that situation since it's not always going to be Durant like Texas last year.
Also - our defense MADE THEM stone cold. Defense gets no respect - if you hit shots, you're great, if you miss, you're having an off night. Winners make their own luck.
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Jan 11, 2008 14:15:11 GMT -5
With 30 seconds on the clock, down by two who takes the shot? Does it always have to be the same guy? I dont buy the idea that you need to have one go to guy who always takes the last shot like a Jordan. It could be Austin one game, Wallace the next, Summers the game after that. The point is, we have extremely talented guys who can take it to the hole and hit the game winning shot, or, if they are covered they have the confidence in their teammates to pass the ball to the open man who can hit the open shot. I think the fact that we dont have one go to guy is a strength, because teams can't just focus on one guy. The key is having a number of extremely talented players that you believe in. If you have a less talented team with only one really good player then you need to always rely on that guy, which is a major disadvantage. Great teams have a number of players who can hit the game winner. I think the Spurs are a great example in the NBA. Although Duncan is their superstar and you want him to touch the ball, it could easily be Parker or Ginobili hitting the game winner.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jan 11, 2008 14:25:33 GMT -5
I see both sides to this argument. Right off the bat, it is very important to have the "right" system. You will have a hard time finding a Championship team at least at major college level or above, that doesn't have the "right" system. But in my mind that "right" system is simply a team idea of what the scheme is supposed to do. If that system is based on isolating one of your shooters for a free look, via inside out passing, dribble penetration or simply the high pick and roll doesn't really matter as long as every one knows and performs their job in the scheme. The underlying premise that hoya9397 seems to be stressing however is that regardless of the system, without the goto guy, the success of the team is capped at some point. I think I will meet him halfway. I think you need to have an understanding of what the goto guy means. It doesn't have to be the same guy, night in and night out. And in my opinion, it is better if it isn't. That is where he seems to differ in opinion. While every team would love a player like Michael Jordan, obviously very few teams do. In the case of Florida, 3 years ago, we had some talented players who were basically one on one guys. Anthony Roberson ran the point, but was really a poor man's Iverson. He could create his own shot and he was very willing to take the last second shot. Unfortunately, unlike AI, he couldn't knock them down consistently. Matt Walsh was a very streaky player who would score 29 one night and 7 the next. Additionally, his idea of solid defense is making sure not to break a friggin nail. The only significant real team players we had was David Lee. The result was a solid season and SEC tourny title, but a first weekend exit come March Madness. But the next two years we had a real team. I pretty much agree with SF, in that we didn't have that one goto dominant player, but in fairness to 9397, we did have 5 and sometimes 6 goto guys. Al Horford (not Thornton, he was FSU) could have been a 20/12 guy in college easily, but he played team ball. Corey Brewer probably could have been a 20/9 kind of player as well, but was willing to give up personal stats for the benefit of the team. Perhaps the player who most epitomized that attitude was Chris Richard. Here was a 6'10" senior who was Mr. Basketball in Florida and he was coming off the bench, and getting 18-20 minutes a game. Yet he didn't complain and has parlayed that into an NBA roster spot. I honestly didn't mean to go into this as deeply as I did, but I guess the synopsis of my point is that it isn't necessary to have 1 goto dominant player, provided you have a roster of viable options. Just as Green, Horford, Brewer or Humphrey were legitimate threats to score the game winner, I think Summers, Freeman, Wallace and Sapp are very solid options in addition to Hibbert inside. I don't think you need one guy. What is important though is the fact that such a willingness and ability to have the rock in your hands for the last shot is almost contagious. If someone turns out to be a goat in one game, then the next time that will be in the back of the minds of the rest of the team.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 11, 2008 14:28:59 GMT -5
Please take no offense to this post--but your logic is assnine. 1. Michael Jordan developed that "killer instinct" by having early success in a SYSTEM oriented program. If you actually watched the game and not the names--James Worthy was the best player on the court/for UNC--he dominated and did he get the last shot? No--the ball was moved over to a true FR named "Mike" Jordan--not Michael back then and it gave them lead in the game. 2. Georgetown won the game against UNC. You can't "lose" a game when you are dominated down the stretch--the other team wins. So when UNC was up double digits--were they "winning" or was Georgetown "losing the game" instead of UNC playing well? 3. The program went from awful to Big East Championship/Final Four in 3 years. The system seems to work just fine for me as a fan. Then again--I realize that BC, Vandy, UNC lost the games they played more then Hoyas won them. (insert prediction that response involves "Jeff Green traveled/lucky to win.... response) 4. It's more important to get a good shot--then have a great player in CBB. NBA is a different story--your best have to carry you--they get paid to do so and the rules of the game are geared toward that. If you rely on one person in CBB--especially late in a game--you become easier to defend and the shot will be forced/awful and the rest of team doesn't do anything. If you enjoyed watching Kevin Braswell Hoya ball--feel free to go back to the DVD/Tape and watch. I'd rather watch a team who has won NCAA games with Jon Wallace hitting a tying 3 to send the game UNC lost to OT, or Jeff Green hitting a shot to beat Vandy in game refs gave Hoyas--they didn't win. TEAMS WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS and great players make up a TEAM--so it's more important to develop a "get best shot possible" attitude then "star system". For instance--our "leaders" on III's initial teams didn't get ball to open man in BET 2 straight years and results were close losses--UConn and Cuse due to forced shots/forced plays from upperclassmen. That is style you are advocating and it resulted in failure. As did Pops style when Fred Brown had the ball and Sleepy Floyd didn't. Or when Iverson had ball in '96 BET final and Victor Page who was MVP of the BET that year in losing cause should've. How did that end for Hoyas? 5. If you are a CBB fan and think Al Thornton played for Florida--and point to him as a "go to guy" then please do a bit more homework prior to making your star system point. FLORIDA STATE's Al Thornton was a great player--but he couldn't carry a team to title-like Florida's TEAM full of talented kids could. They relied on Lee Humphrey to get them to Final Four last year with his big time shooting--then Corey Brewer took over, then it was Al Horford-but then again, I think UCLA and Ohio State lost the game more then Florida won. Since you are new--I'll stop here. One question I have to ask; when did it become en vogue to question whether programs are capable of winning National Championships due to "systems"? I mean--if that is how programs are judged-then 90% of the teams who are D-1 are failures and shouldn't even show up. UNC has a system--as does Duke, as does Florida, as does every other team who has won. It's called getting great players who play as a team and compete/fight together to win games. I think teams deserve more credit for battling back from behind--where you see it as opposing teams "losing". I call that being a great front runner when you aren't mentally tough to handle when a team makes a run at your team. Others who actually predicted that UNC was a good matchup for the Hoyas in due part to their awful defense and fact they'd keep GU in the game due to that--weren't shocked at the wilting of the Heels--see Maryland game they played in ACC play--same scenario. See most of their losses a year ago--same scenario. As for Hoyas "system", it'll be funny to see how the argument shifts after III eventually wins a NC. He will--just a matter of when/how many and if you are one of these guys who thinks Jim Calhoun, Jim Boeheim, John Thompson, Coach K, Dean Smith were failures for having 9 titles--which is less then John Wooden had by himself, then your opinion of what makes a successful season is clouded. In CBB the only thing you can do is put your program in position to compete for NC every year. To win them--that takes talent and some luck- 1. Fred Brown throwing ball to Worthy 2. Webber calling timeout without any 3. Playing Regional in Albany, NY when you stunk for 2 games but home crowd carried your team 4. Beating a Jon Konkak led SMU team by one point in first NCAA game 5. Having a player shoot a perfect game still in the game despite stepping on an opposing player/kicking him. Luck plays a part. Winning your conference/conference tournament is a realistic goal for a program on a yearly basis. Winning the NC is a great goal--and you will fail far more then you succeed. It makes it even sweeter when you do get the title and find a way to win. I just think it's getting insane how programs are viewed in College Sports---it takes some luck--and great TEAM PLAY to win a title. I'll SUFFER with III and fans with opposing viewpoint can enjoy watching the OJ Mayo's of the world gun/carry their poor teams who stand and watch one guy try to make a bigger name for himself/get higher draft position. Best thing for Georgetown--they are 42-8 in their last 50 games, have a Big East Title, Big East Tournament Title, Final Four Appearance, and boast a top 5 selection in NBA Draft with nobody averaging 20 ppg during III's tenure. That shows kids--you can play team ball, win, and not hurt your individual status as a player in eyes of NBA. Then again--I enjoy fact when a game is tight--a team can take away Hibbert--and he's got Wallace, Freeman, Summers, Sapp, and eventually Wright to throw ball out to and know that when they release a shot I'm confident it'll be a good shot and have a chance to go in. Then again I despised watching Kevin Braswell hold the ball, dribble clock down, and throw some wild 28 foot shot up--and the 2 times it worked--were against South Carolina in a year Hoyas ended up in NIT and BET against WVU where Hoyas were playing opening game of BET due to being an awful team. So what do I know?
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 14:29:00 GMT -5
Good point....obviously this is situational and dictated by an individual game. The point, however, is that I would like GU to have one player for crunch time. Boz....your right....I would rather have those guys than Derrick Rose off a dribble drive.....let's be realistic. There is a difference between being a passionate fan and loss of perspective as a result of that passion. Everyone has been complaining about Hibbert's perceived lack of intensity. With 30 seconds left I don't want Hibbert posting right now.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 11, 2008 14:36:45 GMT -5
RDF...too much to process....quantity doesnt replace quality...will tune in when I have an hour.
Right now GU doesn't have any one player who I feel extremely confident in with the game on the line....period. As for "new" to the board....doesn't deserve a response. Thanks.
|
|
HoyaNyr320
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,233
|
Post by HoyaNyr320 on Jan 11, 2008 14:40:19 GMT -5
I never said we can make it to the Final Four but not win it all.....I am making the point that we have a higher likelihood of winning it all if we had one guy in the clutch. Rose or Summers? Hansborough or Freeman? 30 seconds down lets try to run a backdoor and hope no one cuts off the passing lane. If you were at the Georgetown vs. Vanderbilt game, which you say you were, you will remember that the final play was designed as a backdoor cut with Jeff receiving the ball and Ewing cutting to the basket. Vanderbilt did in fact cut off the passing lane, so what did JTIII have Jeff do? Allow our best player to take his man 1 on 1 (or 1 on 3 in Jeff's case) and create a basket. If we are in the same situation this year you will see either Hibbert, DeJuan or Freeman getting the ball and either looking to pass out to an open Wallace, hit Ewing on a back cut (if the pass is there), or create their own basket. Does that answer your question?
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Jan 11, 2008 14:41:22 GMT -5
RDF...too much to process....quantity doesnt replace quality...will tune in when I have an hour. Right now GU doesn't have any one player who I feel extremely confident in with the game on the line....period. As for "new" to the board....doesn't deserve a response. Thanks. wow, so now you dont have the time to even read his response? I am in complete shock that there is no player on the team you would be confident in taking the last shot right now. Have you been watching the same team I have? No confidence in Austin or Wallace at the very least? They've hit almost every shot they've taken over the past few games.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Jan 11, 2008 14:43:48 GMT -5
RDF...too much to process....quantity doesnt replace quality...will tune in when I have an hour. Right now GU doesn't have any one player who I feel extremely confident in with the game on the line....period. As for "new" to the board....doesn't deserve a response. Thanks. When you have an hour, you'll probably find out that RDF just destroyed your "argument" with a quantity of quality (why does that phrase sound like something Vitale would say?)
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Jan 11, 2008 14:46:08 GMT -5
I think what you are saying is that you wish we had a superstar, a top 5 player in the NCAA type. Right now, we don't.
It would be nice if we did, but I think it is pretty clear that the team is good enough to win a title anyway. I am also confident that JTIII isn't intentionally recruiting guys that don't fit your definition as "an end of game player." Guys can be team players 99% of the time but switch to "playground" mode when the shot clock is running out or the game is on the line.
In any case, as has been outlined above come a final possession, we have a number of ways to beat a team, and I don't see why that is worse than them knowing we will run an isolation for our star. If that isn't enough for you, I'm sure Freeman and perhaps Wright will be the guy you are looking for pretty soon.
|
|