HoyaPride
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 484
|
Post by HoyaPride on Apr 16, 2011 8:51:23 GMT -5
What I find surprising about cases like this where the kid is most likely not going to be a pro, he was 1/2 way to earning a Georgetown degree- at no cost. I didnt go to GU, but would think that with that prize on the horizon, one would think twice about moving to a less prestigious school for two years of ball. Not just in Vee's case, but you see it all over the place.
|
|
|
Post by wahoohoya on Apr 16, 2011 8:59:49 GMT -5
Not surprising - these kids want to play. Plenty of other good schools out there that can give him more of a balance. And even even he doesn't see himself going pro, maybe he knows he wants a career in basketball - i.e. coaching - in which case a GU degree probably doesn't offer a distinct advantages over a less prestigious school.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 16, 2011 9:09:23 GMT -5
if this is true, in one sense, i think its best for all parties involved.
but, in another, this really hurts our backcourt situation.
Despite a limited role, Vee still had some experience.
we have 1 guard returning with valuable game experience in Clark.
Starks barely got run last year until later in the season.
we are recruiting a lot of bigs and size, but the majority of our big guys are returning next year, some with years of eligibility remaining (Moses, Nate).
guard play is essential in college basketball. we may be taller and bigger, but i'm not sure if we have answered the question of quickness, ballhandling, and decision-making with the ball just yet.
Starks and Clark (sounds like a law firm doesn't? lol), better be ready next year. We are going to need them.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Apr 16, 2011 9:10:06 GMT -5
Not surprising - these kids want to play. Plenty of other good schools out there that can give him more of a balance. And even even he doesn't see himself going pro, maybe he knows he wants a career in basketball - i.e. coaching - in which case a GU degree probably doesn't offer a distinct advantages over a less prestigious school. There's also always the possibility of playing overseas--two good years at another school could mean he gets to play in Europe, something that's probably harder to get into if you don't get playing time.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 16, 2011 10:29:06 GMT -5
An observation that may or may not be correct: It seems that III forms his opinions on personnel during their pre-season practice during their freshman year. If you do not see a freshman getting some playing time during his frosh year, he's probably never going to see appreciable PT. There may be emergency situations, like this year for Markel, where he has to act differently, but that's the exception. Be interesting to see if III's nomal will keep Moses on the bench this year. Or Bowen.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 16, 2011 10:32:39 GMT -5
if this is true, in one sense, i think its best for all parties involved. but, in another, this really hurts our backcourt situation. Despite a limited role, Vee still had some experience. we have 1 guard returning with valuable game experience in Clark. Starks barely got run last year until later in the season. we are recruiting a lot of bigs and size, but the majority of our big guys are returning next year, some with years of eligibility remaining (Moses, Nate). guard play is essential in college basketball. we may be taller and bigger, but i'm not sure if we have answered the question of quickness, ballhandling, and decision-making with the ball just yet. Starks and Clark (sounds like a law firm doesn't? lol), better be ready next year. We are going to need them. Still wondering whether this might mean a move to the 3 for Hollis, either by design or necessity. If so, needs to spend the summer working crazy hard on his handle.
|
|
damnhoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 650
|
Post by damnhoya on Apr 16, 2011 12:44:42 GMT -5
Very disappointing only because I really liked Vee (as did many on this board). My favorite (bench) Hoya who should have seen more minutes this past year. But this isn't a game changer for the program although as people have noted, we are thin in the backcourt. Bowen better be ready to play next year because he is going to get minutes. Clark better work really hard on his handle because he will get minutes at the point. And Starks better work on his shot because he is going to get lots of open looks next year. Although there is lots of discussion about Hollis moving to the 2 (he will play minutes at the 3 regardless of whether he also gets minutes at the 2), I'm skeptical at this point because he doesn't have the handle and 2s will run circles around him on offense. Hope I'm wrong...
Wish Vee all the best. He is a classy kid who represented the university well.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Apr 16, 2011 12:58:10 GMT -5
I never had an issue with Vee's playing time. Yes, he played well: In spurts.
But anytime he was out there for extended periods, he showed exactly why he was the fourth guard in the rotation. He wasn't ready for bigtime minutes. He was a flat out gambler on defense and he was a tweener on offense. The board's obsession with him was laughable because he wasn't better than anyone playing more minutes than him.
That being said, Im sorry he's leaving because I think he could've provided a valuable 15-18 minutes a game next season.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,321
|
Post by tashoya on Apr 16, 2011 14:14:05 GMT -5
I obviously have no clue why Vee didn't get more time but I'll trust the staff that they made the best moves for the team as a whole in doling out the minutes. That said, Vee seems like a really good kid that I'll be rooting for wherever he ends up.
Best of luck Mr. Sanford. We didn't get to see much of what you can do but I hope you're moving on to a situation more to your liking. Sorry it didn't work out. Best of luck.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,297
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 16, 2011 14:41:09 GMT -5
The board's obsession with him was laughable because he wasn't better than anyone playing more minutes than him. The board's obsession, as you call it, was due to his high FG% from 2s and 3s and his excellent FT shooting. Although those numbers would have gone down with more PT, we could have used more of all three this past season and next season for 10+ mins per game.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,438
|
Post by lichoya68 on Apr 16, 2011 14:45:41 GMT -5
first if true best of luck always liked vee and wished hed played more SECONDLY ive been away and oh DARN we needed his guard skill sYUP WE NEEDED HIS GUARD SKILLS yup for sure lots of bigs and more coming need ANOTHER STEAY POINT GUARD and i saw vee as that coaches son yup if bye then GOOD LUCK
|
|
|
Post by bigelephant on Apr 16, 2011 14:51:52 GMT -5
On the transfers, no one knows the real story except probably the coach and player. Vee, if true, good luck - you were and always will be a HOYA.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Apr 16, 2011 14:55:01 GMT -5
PR,
It was an obsession and it was laughable, because in two years he wasn't a better player than the players getting minutes ahead of him. Good potential, yes. Made things happen in spurts, yes. But he never, ever, ever, gave us a better chance to win than Chris, Austin, Jason or Markel. Not even for a moment. That's why it was a laughable obsession. I'd sit after games, and read these "We may have won if Vee had played more" posts, and absolutely shake my head. It was silly.
|
|
jester
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,006
|
Post by jester on Apr 16, 2011 15:08:26 GMT -5
Was bee the back up for the point guard position? Isn't there a void with him gone if markel is in foul trouble? Any expectations Jabril can run the offense better than bee would?
|
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,753
|
Post by blueandgray on Apr 16, 2011 15:27:00 GMT -5
I never had an issue with Vee's playing time. Yes, he played well: In spurts. But anytime he was out there for extended periods, he showed exactly why he was the fourth guard in the rotation. He wasn't ready for bigtime minutes. He was a flat out gambler on defense and he was a tweener on offense. The board's obsession with him was laughable because he wasn't better than anyone playing more minutes than him. That being said, Im sorry he's leaving because I think he could've provided a valuable 15-18 minutes a game next season. Why are u sorry he's leaving if he only plays well in spurts and is not ready for big time minutes? You contradict yourself from one word to the next.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,901
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 16, 2011 15:50:27 GMT -5
PR, It was an obsession and it was laughable, because in two years he wasn't a better player than the players getting minutes ahead of him. Good potential, yes. Made things happen in spurts, yes. But he never, ever, ever, gave us a better chance to win than Chris, Austin, Jason or Markel. Not even for a moment. That's why it was a laughable obsession. I'd sit after games, and read these "We may have won if Vee had played more" posts, and absolutely shake my head. It was silly. Day, Vee should have played more last year without question. Chris and Austin should not even be mentioned in this discussion. As for Jason and Markel you're right they're better.... However the playing time they were given over what Vee was given suggests that they were Wayyyyyyyyyyy better than Vee. I don't believe that to be the case. This Transfer is on the staff and could have been avoided.
|
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,753
|
Post by blueandgray on Apr 16, 2011 16:20:48 GMT -5
What did Starks do this year to suggest that he is better than Vee? While Starks may one day be better than Vee ...I didn't see it this year.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 16, 2011 16:53:59 GMT -5
PR, It was an obsession and it was laughable, because in two years he wasn't a better player than the players getting minutes ahead of him. Good potential, yes. Made things happen in spurts, yes. But he never, ever, ever, gave us a better chance to win than Chris, Austin, Jason or Markel. Not even for a moment. That's why it was a laughable obsession. I'd sit after games, and read these "We may have won if Vee had played more" posts, and absolutely shake my head. It was silly. Yeah, those games down the stretch when Austin was shooting 0-for-the-century, we had no use for a guy who could knock down a three. What were we thinking?
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Apr 16, 2011 16:58:21 GMT -5
Yeah I don't know where all this "Vee was CLEARLY the inferior player" stuff is coming from. In his limited minutes, the numbers suggest otherwise. Vee had the second best offensive rating on the team (to Hollis), and the best defensive rating. hoyaprospectus.blogspot.com/p/georgetown-season-statistics-individual.htmlNow, obviously that's a really small sample size and it doesn't mean he would have done better than Clark et al if he had played more minutes, or even that he would have done well at all. But to say you could tell he wouldn't have done well from what you saw on the court? If anything, his on-court performance showed the opposite imo.
|
|
kghoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,993
|
Post by kghoya on Apr 16, 2011 17:03:06 GMT -5
It's my hope that Otto has a big game tonight and we can all turn our attention to something besides what Vee did or did not do on the court over the past two seasons.
He seems ok with moving on. We should probably file in line behind him on that one.
|
|