|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 23, 2011 14:03:24 GMT -5
There was a comment on the last page saying that Markel didn't have an extra gear. Couldn't disagree with that more. Kid can flat out get to the basket, and his jumper opens up his game off the dribble. For as much as I loved Chris Wright, Markel has an explosion off the dribble that Chris never had. And when he gets there, he has a floater, which Chris never developed. Had he developed it, Chris Wright may very well be playing in the NBA right now. Going to be interesting seeing Markel for two more seasons. I fully expect him to be a borderline superstar next year, as he will know that the backcourt is all his I would disagree. Markel is nowhere near as explosive or fast as Chris Wright. That should be obvious from just watching the two play at game speed. Markel plays at a much slower speed and isn't as athletically gifted as Chris. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing, Mark Jackson was very slow and had horrible lateral quickness yet was one of the better point guards in the NBA. As far as NBA, at this point I don't see Markel as an NBA prospect. Now that may change in a year or 2 when he becomes a bigger option but right now he's the 4th option on offense and his assist to turnover ratio is 1.2 which is too low. (Wright's A/TO ratio was 1.6/1.8/1.8) statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/assist_turnover_ratio?conf=big-east&games=11.6 Assist per game compared to 3.7/4/5: statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/assists_avg?season=2011-2012&conf=big-eastStarks is a good solid contributor at this point. As far as Wright, who knows if he would have been in the NBA if it wasn't for the strike. We'll never know about this year. But I do think he will be in the NBA in year or two.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Dec 23, 2011 14:03:27 GMT -5
The problem I had with McDonough and Raftery is that they seemed to disagree initially with both calls, then fell back on the strained rules interpretation for the T, all the while saying that these refs are "among the BEST in the country" as if that legitimizes things. I thought Raftery had more backbone, but he let McD wash over him. To McDonough's credit, he was extremely complimentary of all things Hoya last night. Also, his response to Raf's coment about watching the UNC-TX game (I think) at 3:30am was hilarious: "You were just getting home?" I enjoyed Raf telling McDonough that it was good that McDonough's father didn't name him Adonis, since it wouldn't fit him. ;D
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Dec 23, 2011 14:45:40 GMT -5
Anyone remember the officiating forum website? I think it can into play with the whole Jeff Green v. Vandy non-travel call. I might be crazy but I think it's just forum.officiating.com/that's the one. thanks! nothing there about either the Pastner warning or Whit's flagrant.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Dec 23, 2011 14:54:51 GMT -5
With the End of the Out of Conference season the Hoyas have now won 35 straight non conference games at the Verizon Center. The last non BE team to defeat the Hoyas was Oregon in 2006-2007. That Oregon team went on to the Elite 8 that year.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 23, 2011 14:57:35 GMT -5
Coming into the season, many thought Markel would struggle, based on last years performance. But those of us who saw him routinely in high school are not surprised with what he's doing. In fact, he can do MUCH MORE. This is the guy we all saw at Georgetown prep, the guy we all thought was better than Kendall Marshall and Tyler Thornton. There was a comment on the last page saying that Markel didn't have an extra gear. Couldn't disagree with that more. Kid can flat out get to the basket, and his jumper opens up his game off the dribble. For as much as I loved Chris Wright, Markel has an explosion off the dribble that Chris never had. And when he gets there, he has a floater, which Chris never developed. Had he developed it, Chris Wright may very well be playing in the NBA right now. Going to be interesting seeing Markel for two more seasons. I fully expect him to be a borderline superstar next year, as he will know that the backcourt is all his I don't know if Markel's quicker than Chris or not, and I do know Chris developed some of a floater game (but never that killer unstoppable floater). But I do love that the areas in which he's seemed to improve the most offensively are exactly the areas you'd think a player of his skillset should improve in - he's got that mid-range floater, he's practiced the high lay-in for going in amongst the trees, and his always-pretty shot is finally falling.
|
|
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Dec 23, 2011 16:58:11 GMT -5
There's a difference between fast and explosive. Chris may be faster....but Markel explodes to the cup....it's the difference between taking contested lay-ups with three defenders on you, like Chris did....or getting all the way to the basket pretty much unimpeded....Markel did that on Joe Jackson about three times last night...Jackson is one of the fastest players in college basketball.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,672
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Dec 23, 2011 17:32:24 GMT -5
Haven't read the whole thread. Saw the game, but did not have computer access, so my thoughts on the game. Tuned in with the Hoyas up 15. They played okay until they were 20 up, but then became tentative and careless. Had enough FTs to weather the storm. But they beat Memphis by more than L'ville beat them, I believe.
|
|
|
Post by bigelephant on Dec 23, 2011 17:58:54 GMT -5
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Dec 23, 2011 18:48:32 GMT -5
We are 9-1 because Chaminade is a DII team. No biggie, but that's the distinction. No, we are 10-1. Chaminade was not an exhibition game. We have played 11 NCAA-sanctioned games for 40+ minutes and have had a higher score at the end of ten than our opponents did. The win just doesn't count in the RPI calculations or in the eyes of the selection committee come March. Ok. That's all I meant. When you see our record as 9-1 sometimes, it is because we played a dII team. Because it doesnt count for RPI or the selection committee, it makes sense that a lot of publications dont even count it.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,522
|
Post by MCIGuy on Dec 23, 2011 22:55:58 GMT -5
All I want for Christmas is a 9-man rotation. Actually I would like a ten man rotation but I'm willing to compromise. III probably won't and that type of stubbornness remains his main weakness as a coach IMO. No way should I look at a box score of a December game against Memphis and see four guys on the Hoyas roster with well over thirty minutes of play each. The main core is starting to dominate the time on the court. Unfortunately we've seen this movie before and it doesn't have a good ending. By playing eight guys (barely eight at that) the Hoyas will once more have a tired starting five by the time February rolls around. The Hoyas will also be unable to take advantage of a new weapon they've unleashed this season: the press. The Hoyas, by playing only eight, will be slowing the development of the guys on the bench as well. Not only could that hurt in the somewhat long term considering a few of those guys could be main cogs of the team next season, but it could hurt in the short term too. Deep into Big East play foul trouble or, God forbid, injury could lead to the Hoyas to suddenly rely on players who haven't gotten enough run. Has III forgotten the disaster that took place last season when Chris went down and Markel was nowhere near ready to slide in? Now if Markel was too green after getting a few minutes every game, imagine how shaky Mikael, Tyler (if cleared to play) or Aaron could turn out if they were thrust into the spotlight. Considering the Hoyas are only playing two legit big men right now in Henry and Nate it is especially inexcusable for Mikael to not be on the floor much more. III even admitted he needed Him and Tyler to get a lot more time just because they'll be needed during BE time and yet III can never find the time for them. ] I would disagree. Markel is nowhere near as explosive or fast as Chris Wright. That should be obvious from just watching the two play at game speed. Markel plays at a much slower speed and isn't as athletically gifted as Chris. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing, Mark Jackson was very slow and had horrible lateral quickness yet was one of the better point guards in the NBA. As far as NBA, at this point I don't see Markel as an NBA prospect. Now that may change in a year or 2 when he becomes a bigger option but right now he's the 4th option on offense and his assist to turnover ratio is 1.2 which is too low. (Wright's A/TO ratio was 1.6/1.8/1.8) statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/assist_turnover_ratio?conf=big-east&games=11.6 Assist per game compared to 3.7/4/5: statsheet.com/mcb/players/stats/assists_avg?season=2011-2012&conf=big-eastStarks is a good solid contributor at this point. As far as Wright, who knows if he would have been in the NBA if it wasn't for the strike. We'll never know about this year. But I do think he will be in the NBA in year or two. Much slower than Wright? Seeing both in high school I felt Chris was perhaps slightly quicker and nothing I've seen since has changed my mind. Markel is plenty fast. It looks to me as if he has a better understanding of how to play the position at this stage of his college career too. It's early though so I won't get ahead of myself. And I will never judge a point guard in III's office by his assist numbers or even his assist to turnover ratio. It is a "different" type of offense for guards use to having the rock in their hands.
|
|
idhoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,177
|
Post by idhoya on Dec 24, 2011 0:04:16 GMT -5
Markel seems more in tune to getting others involved than looking for his own shot. He's not a true PG, like Wright, but already has a better deep stroke. I think he's faster than Chris, but Wright is stronger. As someone mentioned, Markel has that burst that allowed him to repeatedly beat Jackson off the dribble. What I like the most is that Markel is almost always under control. His dribble drive and floater off the window was pretty.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 24, 2011 0:41:58 GMT -5
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,382
|
Post by calhoya on Dec 24, 2011 8:08:27 GMT -5
MCIGuy--Amen. Who knows JT III's reasoning but each year we hope for a longer rotation and each year--no matter the talent--we seem to go through the pre-conference schedule without meaningful minutes for the 8-11 players on the team. At this rate next year's team will feature Hopkins, Tyler (hopefully), Moses, Bolden and Lubick at the 4/5 positions. We know that Bolden, Tyler and Moses will effectively be first year players. At the current rate Hopkins will have little experience, as well. That leaves Lubick, who has regressed into a one-dimensional player this season and appears destined to lose playing time to Otto as the conference schedule progresses. The question continue to have is why the coach cannot find the time to slip some of these guys into the rotation with the other key players and not simply in garbage time.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Dec 24, 2011 8:34:32 GMT -5
The guy who needs more time on the court is Hopkins. we need him to spell Henry and Nate. He has shown some potential, but also the need for significant development. I agree he needs more minutes and the team needs to get him more minutes.
On the other hand, I like when Greg and Otto come in together. Gives opponents a different look. Trawick has been getting minutes too.... and I find him to be an intriguing kid.
Markel is developing into a very solid, BE quality PG. I agree with ID about Starks playing more in control than Chris W at the same stage -- and even as a Senior. I was a skeptic about Markel after last year, but he has already proven himself.
The L'ville game is going to be a real tough test for our guys... and we'll (and they) will learn a lot from that game. I don't know if we can pull a W from our trip to KY, but my belief is we will play well and be in that game to the end. Here's hoping we can pull it out!
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Dec 24, 2011 8:37:41 GMT -5
"Actually I would like a ten man rotation but I'm willing to compromise. III probably won't and that type of stubbornness remains his main weakness as a coach IMO."
Perhaps, just perhaps, III knows more about coaching than you do.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,382
|
Post by calhoya on Dec 24, 2011 9:14:21 GMT -5
"Actually I would like a ten man rotation but I'm willing to compromise. III probably won't and that type of stubbornness remains his main weakness as a coach IMO." Perhaps, just perhaps, III knows more about coaching than you do. Understand your comment and several coaches do go with the shorter bench. I have speculated that perhaps JT III is simply not comfortable that Hopkins/Bowen are ready this year. Yet, last summer JT III said that this year's team was much deeper and the bench would be used more. So if expectations arose from those comments, it is only as a result of statements made by the coach. The fact is that last year when Wright went down, the bench was so inexperienced late in the season that the team could not play with the competition. I can understand not playing the end of the bench players against Louisville but it is hard to understand how little time they received against some of the lesser teams we just played. Moreover, even against Memphis with a 20 point lead, why not give Hopkins a run with some of the top 6 players. If nothing else he can learn to play with these guys in the event it later becomes necessary.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Dec 24, 2011 9:52:04 GMT -5
Been traveling for the holidays after the game so haven't had a chance to post on the game yet.
For all the attendance problems I was anticipating given all the ticket deals that McD had been swarming my inbox with the past week, I was more than happy with the turnout. Crowd wasn't great, but for a crowd that likely consisted of a lot of giveaways and neutral family members/friends with no real rooting interest, I'll take what I can get.
I think Coach summed up the game perfectly when he said in his post-game presser that we let them back into the game when we started turning the ball over mid way in the second half. Memphis could barely score against us in their halfcourt sets, and for the most part we did a good job in limiting fast break opportunities. We also did a really good job attacking the rim and getting to the line.
I'm reading a lot of debate between Otto and Nate re: minutes, starting lineup, etc. It's no secret that Otto will end up being the better player. But, I think at this point in time, they pretty much give us the same thing. Good rebounding, a little shaky on defense (Nate a step to slow to cover in the post, Otto still having trouble with defensive rotations and getting out on perimeter shooters), and limited perimeter scoring. The difference between the two right now is this: Otto has two distinct advantages over Nate. One is his ability to handle the ball (especially against pressure). The second is his ability to finish in traffic (which Nate has absolutely none). FWIW, I thought both gave us good minutes on Thurs. night. I was very critical of Nate earlier in the year during Maui and even the Alabama game (and rightfully so), but Nate has gotten a lot better in the last few games. I'm OK with the limited scoring; what we can't have is the fumbled passes / turnovers due to sloppy passing. If the minutes breakdown continue in the way that they have, I don't have a problem with it as long as we don't get off to the slow starts like we did earlier in the year.
Jason had a really good offensive game overall. But he got into a really bad habit late in the game of jumping and then forcing a bad pass while being caught in mid-air. Did that at least twice for a turnover during Memphis' run. Expect better decision making from a senior.
Thought Markel had a really strong game. As far as who is quicker between him and Wright, I don't think it really matters. What matters is taking the contact and finishing the play. Don't care how quick you are; it doesn't help us if you don't complete the And-1. Markel's not only shooting better from the perimeter, but also finishing much better near the rim this year. Improving his strength as he matures will only continue to help.
Officiating. I mean, what else can be said? Blatantly missed the Whittington "offensive foul / flagrant elbow" call (even after a lengthy delay and the benefit of a review). Blatantly missed the Pastner 6th defender call (why stop play and confer if you aren't going to make any type of call anyways?). They kept Memphis in the game in the 1st half for sure, and to Memphis' credit they weren't missing from the line at all early in the game. Typical John Cahill game, and give credit to our guys for remaining unfazed and sticking to it even though they were getting jobbed (at home, no less).
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,522
|
Post by MCIGuy on Dec 24, 2011 10:08:02 GMT -5
"Actually I would like a ten man rotation but I'm willing to compromise. III probably won't and that type of stubbornness remains his main weakness as a coach IMO." Perhaps, just perhaps, III knows more about coaching than you do. Cliche response of the year. Wow, that one has never been pulled out of a hat before. Doesn't matter how much more III knows than me because he is still making the same mistake. How has that worked out for him the past few years? Yeah, exactly. III said it himself immediately following that game against NJIW or whatever the school is called. He said he needed to get Hopkins and Adams more minutes because he will need them in Big East play. Understandably the plans for Adams have been put on hold. But why has the same been done for Hopkins as well, especially considering he has looked competent when out on the floor? Who in their right mind only relies on two legit big men over the course of 11 games, especially when both are in the starting lineup? The Hoyas are not playing in the Pac 12 or the Atlantic 10. They play in the BE where it would be harmful (duh) to use only two big men. So shouldn't Hopkins have gotten some more run by now?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,531
|
Post by prhoya on Dec 24, 2011 10:46:36 GMT -5
Unless there's a reason why Hopkins couldn't play, I agree with MCI on the mistake of not getting him minutes before BE. I'll add that that reason cannot be that "he wasn't/isn't ready". Let him get some run and learn some more. Why not get him some minutes vs. Memphis with 4 other 20+ mins. player (to not say starters around here)? Two minutes vs. American?
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Dec 24, 2011 10:51:38 GMT -5
I have speculated that perhaps JT III is simply not comfortable that Hopkins/Bowen are ready this year. This is probably the easiest explanation, and if I'm guessing, the correct one. Summer league, imperfect as it is, did offer the chance to see all five freshmen (until Adams' injury) playing together for a dozen or so games. At the end of Kenner, I'd have ranked the freshmen in likelihood of playing time/contribution: Porter/Trawick as 1A/1B, Whittington, Hopkins, then Adams. Bowen (who was on a different team)...didn't see that much different from year one to suggest a major jump in playing opportunity. So far, Otto, Jabril and Whit are in fact getting the most playing time. IMO it's a Occam's Razor thing--choose the theory that requires adding the fewest extra assumptions. We know relatively little about how Coach Thompson structures practices or evaluates player readiness. So I tend not to guess based on assumptions like "JTIII is stubborn" and just go with the easiest (to me) solution: the eight rotation players are the eight most qualified to be regular rotation players. If there were nine or ten, we'd run a nine or ten player rotation. I do make one significant assumption, or perhaps have one significant bias in my thinking. I tend to believe that practice time and other non-game work leads to more player improvement than playing a certain number of minutes in a regular season game. Maybe that only works to a point--I imagine Markel Starks minutes are more useful to development than Aaron Bowen minutes on the regular, but then nobody is arguing for Mikael Hopkins to play 30 mins a game. It's an open debate: how impactful on a player's development are even a few minutes of on-court action each game? I can understand not playing the end of the bench players against Louisville but it is hard to understand how little time they received against some of the lesser teams we just played. Moreover, even against Memphis with a 20 point lead, why not give Hopkins a run with some of the top 6 players. If nothing else he can learn to play with these guys in the event it later becomes necessary. This is one of those dilemmas that makes coaches earn their big bucks. It's also why these types of discussions on message boards can produce good debate and rarely have an easy answer. On the extremes, it's probably not as hard. In hard-fought close contests against elite opponents (like Kansas, or what we expect from Louisville), you go with the starters as long as possible. In blowouts against weaker opponents, everyone would say go ahead and put in the deep bench. The Howard game is an instructive example though. By the time we were up 17-0, Coach did start to put the bench in--Hopkins and Bowen were in around the midway point of the half. We even IIRC played some all freshmen lineup. Now, we also stagnated around that same time. Had we kept starters in longer, it's possible we could have led by 25 or 30 at the half instead of 13. There have been a few other times against the weaker opponents that the deep-bench approach earlier has done this. Now, I'm fine with that in those games--getting players on-court minutes is more important to me than the cosmetics of (what should be) a blowout. And to be fair, the starters blew the 13 point halftime lead against Howard. It's the situations like last night--why not put X in up 20 against Memphis--that are the toughest/most ambiguous. And here, my bias is similar to something I'm pretty sure RBHoya brings up every time we have this discussion: once we're in the Big East and/or playing good opponents almost every night, a Coach's job is to win the game being played at the time. The best way to do that is to go with your best lineup possible for the game situation. That may be dictated by foul trouble or matchups, but it's no longer the time for playing X purely because it'll be good for their development. I won't care about the 2012-13 season/lineup when we're at the Yum! Center next week. For the record, last season we were 6-2 in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT. During our longest Big East winning streak, we were 4-0 in such games. The Villanova, Louisville, and Providence games during that streak were decided on the final possession with us on defense. During Big East play, one-possession games are going to happen. For that reason alone, IMO a Coach absolutely has to put the best possible team/strategy on the court for 40 minutes. The Memphis game last night is a great example. We COULD have put a deeper bench in up 20. But then, with our regular starters in Memphis still went on a run and cut the lead to 7, with some chances to do better. Could you argue perhaps that the starters were fatigued? Sure...we did play the Porter + the other four starters a lot. Maybe a deeper bench keeps them slightly fresher. But, the keys to Memphis' run IMO were: (1) we stop playing interior defense on a few consecutive possessions; (2) the Memphis zone led to bad shots/poor passing choices and fast break points. No chance IMO anyone beyond our Top 8 in the rotation fixes either problem, and possibly/probably makes it worse. Less a fatigue issue IMO and more poor strategy/adjustment. The Providence game last year would be an interesting one to look at--we were up a lot and Marshawn Brooks went unconscious on us. You can never anticipate when a 10-15 point game with 15 minutes to go might become a one-possession game. The points scored with 13 mins to go in the first half count as much as those scored in the final minutes. Does a shorter rotation hurt us in the long run? I don't know. I'm personally of the opinion that talented players and a good system can overcome that...after all, nobody would want us going 9 or 10 deep if the next two bench players were Jerrelle Benimon and Jeremiah Rivers, right? ;D
|
|