SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Autopsy
Mar 12, 2009 19:45:56 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 12, 2009 19:45:56 GMT -5
Youth does not damn a team to losing. That doesn't mean it isn't a significant contributor to some team's failure.
Forget even that youth is merely a proxy for physical strength, experience and maturity and not necessarily 1:1 -- some teams react differently in different situations.
It's like anything supposedly causal tied to personality. Does everyone who is abused grow up to abuse their children? No? Is a reason why an individual might do something? Of course. That's an awful example but it's kind of the same thing.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Autopsy
Mar 12, 2009 20:12:09 GMT -5
Post by sleepy on Mar 12, 2009 20:12:09 GMT -5
Youth does not damn a team to losing. That doesn't mean it isn't a significant contributor to some team's failure. Forget even that youth is merely a proxy for physical strength, experience and maturity and not necessarily 1:1 -- some teams react differently in different situations. It's like anything supposedly causal tied to personality. Does everyone who is abused grow up to abuse their children? No? Is a reason why an individual might do something? Of course. That's an awful example but it's kind of the same thing. Exactly. Our youth compounded a lot of other weaknesses that a more expirenced team could have overcome. Our biggest problem this sesaon was mental. We over thought way too much. We got less confident after every loss,a nd we let past mistakes effect the present. An older more expierenced team would let the small things that got to this team get to them. Simple as that. Also last time I checked, Cinnci had a prett epic collapse down the stretch as well. Losing to Seton Hall, South Florida, and Depaul all consecutively with an NCAA bid on the line is definitely a symptom of youth. They just happened to be playing well when they played us as we happened to be collapsing.
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,297
|
Autopsy
Mar 12, 2009 20:18:13 GMT -5
Post by royski on Mar 12, 2009 20:18:13 GMT -5
Youth does not damn a team to losing. That doesn't mean it isn't a significant contributor to some team's failure. Forget even that youth is merely a proxy for physical strength, experience and maturity and not necessarily 1:1 -- some teams react differently in different situations. It's like anything supposedly causal tied to personality. Does everyone who is abused grow up to abuse their children? No? Is a reason why an individual might do something? Of course. That's an awful example but it's kind of the same thing. Exactly. Our youth compounded a lot of other weaknesses that a more expirenced team could have overcome. Our biggest problem this sesaon was mental. We over thought way too much. We got less confident after every loss,a nd we let past mistakes effect the present. An older more expierenced team would let the small things that got to this team get to them. Simple as that. So would an older and more experienced coach. JTIII will get there, I don't believe his system requires a brutal rebuilding every few years.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Autopsy
Mar 12, 2009 20:24:13 GMT -5
Post by sleepy on Mar 12, 2009 20:24:13 GMT -5
Exactly. Our youth compounded a lot of other weaknesses that a more expirenced team could have overcome. Our biggest problem this sesaon was mental. We over thought way too much. We got less confident after every loss,a nd we let past mistakes effect the present. An older more expierenced team would let the small things that got to this team get to them. Simple as that. So would an older and more experienced coach. JTIII will get there, I don't believe his system requires a brutal rebuilding every few years. It will if every few years we lose a total of 6 players in one offseason. Although I totally agree with your point about JTIII needing to mature too. Also going to the NIT is not the end of the world. It was bound to happen eventually, and will happen again. It doesn't mean you are doomed for eternity, just that you stunk for one year.
|
|
|
Autopsy
Mar 12, 2009 22:50:34 GMT -5
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Mar 12, 2009 22:50:34 GMT -5
Another problem? We're too thin PERIOD. Only 10 guys on the roster? When other BE teams have 14-18?
|
|
GPHoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 466
|
Autopsy
Mar 13, 2009 9:50:21 GMT -5
Post by GPHoya on Mar 13, 2009 9:50:21 GMT -5
We would have had more somewhat useful players to play the 6th overtime than UConn or Syracuse did--not that it matters as we do not have Flynn, who was the difference.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,668
|
Autopsy
Mar 13, 2009 15:38:09 GMT -5
Post by Nevada Hoya on Mar 13, 2009 15:38:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Autopsy
Mar 13, 2009 19:43:42 GMT -5
Post by hoyalawyer on Mar 13, 2009 19:43:42 GMT -5
looks like omar chris and greg should have gotten way more burn this year, statistically speaking from a +/- ratio that is.
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,297
|
Autopsy
Mar 13, 2009 19:47:37 GMT -5
Post by royski on Mar 13, 2009 19:47:37 GMT -5
looks like omar chris and greg should have gotten way more burn this year, statistically speaking from a +/- ratio that is. Monroe and Wright are both top 500 nationally in percentage of a team's minutes they spend on the floor. I think we gave both of them as much run as we really could. (Moreso with Wright than Monroe, but even with Greg, we're talking about maybe a minute or so more per game.)
|
|
|
Autopsy
Mar 14, 2009 4:12:12 GMT -5
Post by hoyalawyer on Mar 14, 2009 4:12:12 GMT -5
agreed, but we also had only ONE other player with a positive +/-, and that was Omar. Don't know how dispositive this stat is, but its just an observation, especially noting our lack of a bench all year long, why not see if more run for him would have worked or not? Same thing I said with Nikita, wouldn't really solve all the problems but MAYBE the extra contribution MIGHT have made the difference in one of the MANY close losses (Marquette twice, Natti Twice, Seton Hall, St. Johns twice.)
no telling is all I'm really saying
-Lawyer
|
|
|
Autopsy
Mar 14, 2009 9:49:10 GMT -5
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Mar 14, 2009 9:49:10 GMT -5
The problem with this years team is not that the princeton offense sucks and is a detriment to the team. It's that the team did not run the princeton well at all this year. There was so little movement. The cuts were not hard and more importantly the players rarely set up their men on their cuts. they'd just jog to where they were supposed to go with their heads down. they were going through the motions. They didn't fake like they were going to pop out and then cut to the hoop they just ran to the hoop. If this team had played the princeton offense like they meant it then we would've won some more games.
|
|