Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 7, 2010 11:23:43 GMT -5
No offense to Austin but most of the 3's were pretty wide open.We did not close out too well, and our constant switching on every screen left us one pass behind most of the night. In the first half, I think you are right. In the second half, I think the team did a much better job of getting up on the outside shooters on threes (and long twos), but they still hit almost all of them.
|
|
OldHoyafan
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,387
|
Post by OldHoyafan on Jan 7, 2010 12:08:38 GMT -5
The best news...Monroe (if he does not want to watch NBA games from the end of the bench) needs at least 2 more years. We're headed to 4-5-or-6 in the Big East...and a win or two in the NCAAs. Hopefully a loss to UC doesn't start a tailspin. I'm hoping that Monroe will get stronger as the year goes on. I think most of us on this board had projected him as a power forward in the NBA, but I am not so sure his not gaining any noticeable bulk and strength over the summer may because he sees himself as a 3 in the NBA ala Robert Horry of Rockets/Laker fame. Have noy seen any proof that he can hit the 3pt shot like Horry but he does have ball handling skills.
|
|
JimmyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Hoya fan, est. 1986
Posts: 1,867
|
Post by JimmyHoya on Jan 7, 2010 12:13:12 GMT -5
We lost a tough game at a tough place to a tough team. There isn't much to be said except to praise Austin and Julian's efforts, hope Julian and Chris are well, and pray the bench can step it up. There was no one last night that necessarily played a bad game (except maybe Monroe, but that's because we expect him to be the man every night).
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,443
|
Post by lichoya68 on Jan 7, 2010 12:23:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 7, 2010 12:31:24 GMT -5
I would like to see Greg work on the inside-out game a little more; when he gets the ball and the outside defender sags in on him, pass it right back outside, then we either get a relatively open shot, or it can come right back inti Greg while the help defender is still moving back out, giving Greg time to make a move. He seems to hold the ball too long and allow the D to double too easily. It takes time to handle this, but hopefully it comes soon.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 7, 2010 13:17:30 GMT -5
We just needed one more play.
That 3 or 4 minute stretch with three off the ball offensive fouls was especially tough because otherwise we were getting stops, attacking on offense, and threatening to open up a lead.
2 years ago in the same end game situation James fouled Wallace on the last second three, he made the foul shots, and Georgetown won in overtime.
Also, 2 years ago this was the kind of game where JTIII would sub offense/defense down the stretch and Ewing would have blocked a shot or grabbed a key rebound.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Jan 7, 2010 13:25:25 GMT -5
We just needed one more play. That 3 or 4 minute stretch with three off the ball offensive fouls was especially tough because otherwise we were getting stops, attacking on offense, and threatening to open up a lead. 2 years ago in the same end game situation James fouled Wallace on the last second three, he made the foul shots, and Georgetown won in overtime. Yeah, basically the difference b/w this game and two years ago was that Dominic James wasn't around to cost Marquette the game.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,604
|
Post by hoyatables on Jan 7, 2010 13:44:34 GMT -5
Apologies if this was already mentioned downthread, but I think all of the complaints about Greg's performance ignores the fact that during a crucial moment in the first half, Julian took advantage of Marquette's defensive shifts on the next five consecutive plays to bring us right back into the game. There will be games where Greg struggles or the defense does a good job of locking Greg up, and I think we'll be fine so long as Julian continues to step up and take advantage of those opportunities.
My only other comment on last night is that one of the two announcers was horribly annoying and far too exuberant for Marquette. I wanted to reach through the TV and punch him in the throat.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,089
|
Post by mapei on Jan 7, 2010 14:32:38 GMT -5
Some nights the other guys are better. That's what happened. We didn't play badly, especially on offense, and our interior defense was good. I think we are really good shot blockers (of course it helps if we have a big size advantage as we did last night).
I really like what I'm seeing lately from Chris and Austin - they are improving every week, it seems. And Julian has been terrific. He's not a star, but he is solid. Someone upthread mentioned that he got burned on D a time or two, and that's fair, but on balance he has been a real positive for us.
On the other side, I think we were a step slow all night. We didn't make it out to the shooter in time, didn't get first to the rebound, didn't pass nearly as quickly and as well as they did (couple of sweet entry passes being exceptions). So what I'm wondering is whether that's because we were a bit slow last night, or whether we are just a bit slow, period, compared to other teams. If the latter, we need to game plan to compensate.
I agree with those who say we aren't getting enough from Greg (losing the ball within point-blank range after a great pass was the play of the game) or the bench. But maybe what we see is what we are? Greg can be very good but isn't consistently great, and the bench is a year or two away from being where we wish they were as players.
Anyone who thought we were going undefeated in conference play has been delusional. Remember that those same preseason polls that FLHoya mentioned had us at, what, #6 in the conference? That could be right. It's not bad, but to pull off really big wins we need 4 or 5 players at the top of their games, not just one or two. Realistically, that may not happen too often.
I'll be rooting hard for us Saturday in section 110 for UConn to be one of those games when it all comes together for us.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Jan 7, 2010 15:08:58 GMT -5
Did anyone else have the thought that the coaching staff failed to prepare the players for the patently obvious game situation? I see a lot of remarks along the lines of, "Sometimes we'll get outplayed, and this was one of those times," which I appreciate and with which I argee, but which doesn't really speak to any correctible issue.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 7, 2010 15:38:30 GMT -5
nc hoya i have to stongly disagree. outside of buyzks three from the corner virtually all the threes made where wide open. when i think it was hayward makes one off an out of bounds play by sliding to the elbow extendeded and they run the exact same play 2 mins later and we still allow a wide open shot there is a problem. When it takes 35 minutes of play to adjust to the 3 its a problem. Sure they shot lights out but we knew going in that they had 3 strong 3 point shooters who knew cublian is going 6/6. but we didnt adjust. the fact that our on ball perimeter defenders are so laterally challenged forcing so much help is distressing but do we really need all 4 defenders off the ball moving to help. yes our rotation were a little better in the second half it didnt look like a total chinese fire drill with the closeout to the shooter coming from the weak side. I really would like to them get back to playing more of the matchup zone but that exposes Monroe to more foul trouble in the middle. so much for trade offs. What is really distressing to me is that Clark despite his speed is at best an average on ball defender and is continually being abused on penetration. sleepy, I think I was just building on a point another poster made that you do not gameplan for a role player to have a breakout, career game like Cubillan. The rest of the team only made 6 threes. Hayward and Butler were the two guys we needed to stop and based on their 6 of 23 shooting (3 of 9 form three), I would say we did a solid job. I think sometimes we forget it is a heck of a lot more common and forgivable for ANY defense to give up an open 3 pointer than a lay-up. I did not see our defense give up many easy baskets inside the 3 point line, most nights that is enough. You just do not expect a guy like Cubillan to shoot 6 for 6 and single-handedly decide the game. If he shoots an outstanding 66% from three and we win by three. Perhaps that is too simple, but that is how I look at it. The shots fell for MU, I will be concerned when this becomes a trend.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 7, 2010 15:58:37 GMT -5
NC - once the guy gets to 3-3 and then 4-4, don't you think it is time to get inside his uni and not let him get a sniff from outside? That is a problem we should have recognized. Just because we didn't expect him to be o fire doesn't mean we have to continue to let him burn us.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Jan 7, 2010 16:11:42 GMT -5
David Cubillan made tough shots in his last two looks, the last being a fadeaway falling to his left from the top of the key. What he did last night I'm willing to bet he's never done in his life. Not even in pick-up ball. He just had a career night.
They were hitting tough shots all over the place. I'm impressed that we should've won the game because Marquette played out of its mind last night on both ends of the floor.
|
|
robbyt
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 334
|
Post by robbyt on Jan 7, 2010 16:49:58 GMT -5
Yeah no question Marquette was playing out of their minds and the announcer was hyped like it was Game 7 of the World Series.
We played well enough to win but for most of the game but, to recap earlier points, basically a) Taking out Vaughan opened the boards to them throughout the stretch. Did anybody determine why Vaughan was not in at the end? b) We *gotta* shut down more 3s, that's the only way these guys and a lot of other teams had/will have a chance.
On a), going back to posts from a month or so ago, I hope that JTIII is not of the mind that Hollis is a 4. We debated it at length in a previous post and somebody actually posted all the heights and weights of Big East 4s and we found that he gave up around 20-40 pounds average at the 4. Sims and Benimon are the only 4s we have besides Vaughan. Hollis should be the *fourth option* at the four. He can't be in as the 4 when you need boards at the end of a game, not because of his ability, but because it's not his position, it's unfair to him and the team. Gotta get Sims more minutes, I would even have had him in there at the end to clean boards if Vaughan was hurt (who knows if he was). But again, where was Vaughan?
Once again (1000th time) you can be a team of jacks of all trades, but being big isn't a trade; either you have the size or not.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2010 17:04:52 GMT -5
Vaughn was limping at points -- he may have been hurt.
|
|
robbyt
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 334
|
Post by robbyt on Jan 7, 2010 17:14:20 GMT -5
Thanks SF. That's the only explanation I can think of. Basically, if he was hurt, I would put in Sims or Benimon instead of Hollis as a true 4, I'd be interested to hear if others agree/disagree because I feel that this can be an achilles heel, repeatedly putting a guy 210 at the 4 and thinking somehow it will work out.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2010 17:22:20 GMT -5
Thanks SF. That's the only explanation I can think of. Basically, if he was hurt, I would put in Sims or Benimon instead of Hollis as a true 4, I'd be interested to hear if others agree/disagree because I feel that this can be an achilles heel, repeatedly putting a guy 210 at the 4 and thinking somehow it will work out. Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of Hollis at the four. I was one of those who thought DaJuan shouldn't have been an issue -- he was an issue, but he also rebounded worse last year than ever before -- but Hollis is a completely different story. He tries hard, I think he will be above average at the 3, but the four is too much right now. On the other hand, I'm not sure Benimon is a better choice. I personally would have likely gone with Sims, but he's not exactly lighting the world on fire.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2010 17:24:39 GMT -5
By the way, as one of the larger proponents of the screen/pick and roll, Vaughn ran it to perfection quite a few times last night with Austin and Chris. Nice to see.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,526
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 7, 2010 18:46:21 GMT -5
Thanks SF. That's the only explanation I can think of. Basically, if he was hurt, I would put in Sims or Benimon instead of Hollis as a true 4, I'd be interested to hear if others agree/disagree because I feel that this can be an achilles heel, repeatedly putting a guy 210 at the 4 and thinking somehow it will work out. On the other hand, I'm not sure Benimon is a better choice. I personally would have likely gone with Sims, but he's not exactly lighting the world on fire. With UCon, SHU, Villanova and Pitt coming up, it's baptism by fire for Sims & Co. if Vaughn is unavailable. What a difference a year makes!
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,089
|
Post by mapei on Jan 7, 2010 18:55:48 GMT -5
Why don't we know if JV is injured or not? If he were, wouldn't someone know and say so? Or is this a deep dark secret so other teams won't know??
To me, he and Chris both looked a *little* hurt, but not enough to be taken out of the game.
|
|