B. Hayes

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 13:31:55 GMT -5 hoyasaxa2003 said:

Also, the fact that Hayes really didn't get any more time once Smith was ineligible really speaks volumes of what the coaching staff thought of Hayes in his sophomore year. There's no reason to think that if Hayes could have helped then, the coaches would have kept him off the court anyway. That's just not logical.

We're back to this after the last few pages?

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 13:11:40 GMT -5 bmartin said:

He was the third team center, and third teamers do not play unless there is foul trouble or garbage time. This is the same issue that limited Vee Sanford, Aaron Bowen, and several others who showed they were good enough to play more but were behind other guys at their positions.

The question of playing time is whether Hayes should have been the second team center and the answer is no. Smith was the better offensive player. Hopkins was by far the better defensive player.

Again, 5 mpg is not starter or secondary minutes. It helps in various ways, but read the last few pages because we're going round and round.

[FrazierFanatic]

Dec 8, 2015 12:28:01 GMT -5 Cambridge said:

This thread is why we can't have nice things.

We can have nice things. We just argue about how nice they really are, whether there are nicer things we should have gotten, why we don't use some of our nice things more, how many rebounds one of our nice things got 2 years ago . . .

[This Just In]

Dec 8, 2015 13:42:45 GMT -5 professorhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 13:31:55 GMT -5 hoyasaxa2003 said:

The Josh Smith experiment was not perfect, but I am not sure I would call it one of the "great mistakes" of the JT3 era. When JT3 brought Smith into the fold in 2013, it was in the context of a front court that wasn't very good. When he signed him in 2013, the frontcourt consisted of a very weak Hopkins on offensive, a very green Bradley Hayes, and a very raw Moses who really had shown little. Plus, by then, it was clear Tyler Adams would never play. And, we didn't have any big man recruits for 2014.

In that context, there was basically absolutely no downside to taking Smith. In that sense, I don't think it could possibly be one of the "great mistakes" of the JT3 era. Smith did not make the team worse. In fact, Smith was quite good offensively in both the 2014 and 2015 seasons. Yes, his academic ineligibility in 2014 was a bad thing, and yes, his attitude / early departure in 2015 was not a good thing, but on the court, I don't think it was a mistake.

Off the court, you can make all the arguments you want, but if you're simply trying to determine whether Smith was a mistake in relation to Hayes, I don't think there really is much to debate. Smith was clearly the better offensive player. If Smith had come to Georgetown and tanked, you'd have a different argument. But, he did not.

Also, the fact that Hayes really didn't get any more time once Smith was ineligible really speaks volumes of what the coaching staff thought of Hayes in his sophomore year. There's no reason to think that if Hayes could have helped then, the coaches would have kept him off the court anyway. That's just not logical.

Not sure how it can be considered a failure. Could it have been more successful? Possibly. But the Joshua Smith team (Along with the Sims/Hollis/Porter team 3 NBA players) went further than any team since the final four team in the NCAA tournament. The team and offense in particular ran well when you had DSR and Smith in. It basically collapsed if either guy came out for a breather or because of foul trouble.

This discounts what Bradley Hayes did all in the 1st half against E. Washington in the 2015 NCAA's when Josh Smith got into foul trouble:

10 mins, 3/3 FG's, 2/2 FT's
8 pts, 6 Rebs (4 offensive), 1 Asst, 0 T.O.'s

Gtown was down 21-15 (and it was dejavu all over again) with DSR and Smith playing in the 1st half.  Hayes gets his 1st board @ 8:34 mark, coincidentally an offensive board for a 2pt put back.  From that point on the Hoyas go on a 28-12 run and never look back.

Hayes could have done even more but never saw the light of day in the 2nd half.

[Locker]

Latavious Williams Went Down to Georgia

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 15:29:20 GMT -5 This Just In said:

Hayes could have done even more but never saw the light of day in the 2nd half.

This defeats the "he wasn't ready/the staff knew he wasn't ready" talk. He put on a great display and then he is not used again in the next half of the same game. Why? The coaches saw him in practice and knew better than what people were seeing?

Was any explanation ever given by JT3?

[Cambridge]

Dec 8, 2015 15:51:11 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 15:29:20 GMT -5 This Just In said:

Hayes could have done even more but never saw the light of day in the 2nd half.

This defeats the "he wasn't ready/the staff knew he wasn't ready" talk. He put on a great display and then he is not used again in the next half of the same game. Why? The coaches saw him in practice and knew better than what people were seeing?

Was any explanation ever given by JT3?

First, we won, handily, leading by 10+ for most of the second half...

Second, go back and actually watch the second half. Hopkins was great. He put up 8 PTS (1/1 FG, 6/6 FT), 8 REBS (6 DEF/2 OFF), 1 BLK, 1 STL, 1 TO, 1 PF in about 16 minutes of game play, while Smith and Hayes did little of impact during their brief stints on the floor during the second half.
That - rather than some coaching failure, conspiracy or otherwise - is why Hopkins rather than Hayes (or Smith) played most of the second half.

Don't believe me? Here is his play by play:

19:51 Subs in for Smith
19:27 Steal
18:17 Dunk
17:59 Defensive Rebound
15:40 Defensive Rebound
15:23 Foul (non-shooting)
14:52 Block
14:25 Defensive Rebound
13:43 Defensive Rebound
13:29 Subs out for Hayes (Note: while Hopkins is out, EWU scores on layups at the basket over Hayes in back to back possessions - Hayes grabbed no boards and took no shots)
...
12:05 Subs back in for Hayes
11:56 Offensive Rebound, draws flagrant foul, sinks two free throws
11:09 Offensive Rebound, draws foul, sinks two free throws
08:37 Turnover
06:52 Subs out for Smith
...
04:24 Subs back in for Smith
04:10 Defensive Rebound
02:36 Defensive Rebound
01:21 Draws foul and sinks two free throws
00:48 Subs out for Bowen (offense/defense)
...
00:36 Subs back in for Bowen (offense/defense)
...
00:35 Subs out for Bowen (offense/defense)

[prhoya]

Cambridge, it was a very nice half by Hops. Maybe if Thompson would have used Bradley more throughout the season, Hops could have been better offensively? Bradley inspired Hops.

[hoyasaxa2003]

Dec 8, 2015 14:39:44 GMT -5 prhoya said:

We're back to this after the last few pages?

I'm really not trying to restart or rehash anything. I get it. You think Hayes should have played more. Your argument is basically based on one game where he didn't even play that well (FSU), and one game where he did (Eastern Washington), and his performance this year (years after the FSU game). Given all the other evidence we have, I don't think the evidence is terribly compelling to support your point of view. I think it requires significant assumptions and speculation to get from those facts to your solid opinion that Hayes should have played more.

Clearly, nothing is going to change your opinion at this point. And those of us who feel otherwise are not likely to change either. It's fine. We'll agree to disagree.

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 16:35:19 GMT -5 hoyasaxa2003 said:

Dec 8, 2015 14:39:44 GMT -5 prhoya said:

We're back to this after the last few pages?

I'm really not trying to restart or rehash anything. I get it. You think Hayes should have played more. Your argument is basically based on one game where he didn't even play that well (FSU), and one game where he did (Eastern Washington), and his performance this year (years after the FSU game). Given all the other evidence we have, I don't think the evidence is terribly compelling to support your point of view. I think it requires significant assumptions and speculation to get from those facts to your solid opinion that Hayes should have played more.

Clearly, nothing is going to change your opinion at this point. And those of us who feel otherwise are not likely to change either. It's fine. We'll agree to disagree.

Funny, you just rehashed it and misinterpreted my position. One of the key parts were you and I see it differently is marked in bold. Again, I don't see that evidence "we have." What is it? Since the staff nor Bradley have pointed out a reason, your opinion requires "significant assumptions and speculation." And, btw, my argument is not based on just the games you mentioned, but about the general benefits of pt. Again, you can read through the pages for them.

[bmartin]

Dec 8, 2015 14:48:03 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 13:11:40 GMT -5 bmartin said:

He was the third team center, and third teamers do not play unless there is foul trouble or garbage time. This is the same issue that limited Vee Sanford, Aaron Bowen, and several others who showed they were good enough to play more but were behind other guys at their positions.

The question of playing time is whether Hayes should have been the second team center and the answer is no. Smith was the better offensive player. Hopkins was by far the better defensive player.

Again, 5 mpg is not starter or secondary minutes. It helps in various ways, but read the last few pages because we're going round and round.

Nobody plays their third team center regularly at an level of basketball. Starter plays, backup plays, starter returns, halftime, then repeat.

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 20:01:45 GMT -5 bmartin said:

Dec 8, 2015 14:48:03 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Again, 5 mpg is not starter or secondary minutes. It helps in various ways, but read the last few pages because we're going round and round.

Nobody plays their third team center regularly at an level of basketball. Starter plays, backup plays, starter returns, halftime, then repeat.

Yet Trey has played in 6 of 8 games from 3 to 14 minutes. Good for Trey, the staff and the team!! "Play Trey!"

Although I know your statement re: "nobody plays their third-team center regularly" is incorrect (and I just proved it with Trey), I could turn it around and say everybody with the luxury of having 3 or more centers does it. But, I don't care about anyone else's roster usage. Recent GU history has shown us that even a Nate Lubick got plenty of minutes at the 5, by design or necessity, with Hops, Smith, Moses and Bradley (and Caprio ) on the roster. Go Hoyas!!

[rockhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 20:52:54 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 20:01:45 GMT -5 bmartin said:

Nobody plays their third team center regularly at an level of basketball. Starter plays, backup plays, starter returns, halftime, then repeat.

Yet Trey has played in 6 of 8 games from 3 to 14 minutes. Good for Trey, the staff and the team!! "Play Trey!"

Although I know your statement re: "nobody plays their third-team center regularly" is incorrect (and I just proved it with Trey), I could turn it around and say everybody with the luxury of having 3 or more centers does it. But, I don't care about anyone else's roster usage. Recent GU history has shown us that even a Nate Lubick got plenty of minutes at the 5, by design or necessity, with Hops, Smith, Moses and Bradley (and Caprio ) on the roster. Go Hoyas!!

Ah hoyatalk, where the exception is the rule

[tashoya]

Dec 8, 2015 15:51:11 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 15:29:20 GMT -5 This Just In said:

Hayes could have done even more but never saw the light of day in the 2nd half.

This defeats the "he wasn't ready/the staff knew he wasn't ready" talk. He put on a great display and then he is not used again in the next half of the same game. Why? The coaches saw him in practice and knew better than what people were seeing?

Was any explanation ever given by JT3?

Would "you dance with the one that brought you" suffice?

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 21:35:52 GMT -5 rockhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 20:52:54 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Yet Trey has played in 6 of 8 games from 3 to 14 minutes. Good for Trey, the staff and the team!! "Play Trey!"

Although I know your statement re: "nobody plays their third-team center regularly" is incorrect (and I just proved it with Trey), I could turn it around and say everybody with the luxury of having 3 or more centers does it. But, I don't care about anyone else's roster usage. Recent GU history has shown us that even a Nate Lubick got plenty of minutes at the 5, by design or necessity, with Hops, Smith, Moses and Bradley (and Caprio ) on the roster. Go Hoyas!!

Ah hoyatalk, where the exception is the rule

Facts suck, rock.

[rockhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 21:54:36 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 21:35:52 GMT -5 rockhoya said:

Ah hoyatalk, where the exception is the rule

Just the facts, rock, or are you ignoring Trey et al. for the sake of argument?

You do realize you argued against your own point right? We had Nate get minutes in front of Brad because he was so bad and we didn't have that luxury of a third center (and a luxury means an exception to the rule, i.e. out of the norm).

[dreamhoya]

That's my next discussion. Trey really should be playing a lot more. Put him with Hayes, defense will be better. Period. Trey's another gamer.

[dreamhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 0:46:04 GMT -5 professorhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 0:27:03 GMT -5 tashoya said:

Actually, this is the the coaching staff watches him play and you don't theory but, inexplicably, you somehow know better. I'm not saying you're wrong You could be right. I could be right too. Neither of us could ever prove it, however. But there is an entire staff that does this stuff for a living that thought the best option was to sit him. Considering the fact that you have no better information than I do, I'll side with the people that do have better information and get paid to make such decisions based on their ability to do so.

Not only that but the staff probably watch him at least 3 hours a day, say roughly at least 200 days a year. So that's 600 hours a year x 3 years. 1200 hours of watching Hayes. So they might just have a little bit more data then all of us Chinese food eating couch potatoes.
*except for me, I can watch someone for 10 minutes between dipping dumplings in sweet and sour sauce and tell if a player is good or not like with Jeremiah Rivers.

And they had Othella Harrington who played in the NBA for 17 years as a big man watching him for 1200 hours. You would think he would have given some input and lobbied on playing Hayes, if Hayes was this juggernaut in practice.

Maybe it's not those things, or part of those things. And when JTIII says he had a coach that just didn't play him, maybe he's right...sometimes coaches get into a routine with the players they envision in certain roles within the system they teach ....sometimes coaches get stuck on the fact that a player is "project" and miss the fact that they may or could be more than that ...sometimes, in "practice" players don't get the same reps as first teamers and key bench players who all are pretty much interchangeable except the seven footer who ....sometimes, the fact that a player works hard, studies tape and knows as much or more about scouting report than the entire team (as JTIII has stated about Hayes) you'd think would earn a player SOMEthing ...sometimes a player doesn't fit the mold of player that the coach likes ...sometimes a coach doesn't like mistakes within a system and doesn't have the patience to allow a player to get better (see RGIII) unless your name is M. Hopkins ....anyway. that's the past. Hayes could stand to improve in a few areas and it seems like he's not being coached on those things. Like keeping the ball high or not switching constantly on smaller guys and to time his jumps better to block more shots etc. etc. Proud of the guy.

[dreamhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 0:16:47 GMT -5 professorhoya said:

Dec 7, 2015 23:50:29 GMT -5 IDenj said:

Unless someone here has a time machine there's nothing that can be done about his minutes from yesteryear.

Let's move on shall we?

My question is can be continue to improve and develop into a player on the NBA radar?

If prime Shaq were in the league yes, because you would need big bodies.

I dunno hard to say because the league is moving to small ball at the center position and kind of those Euro 3pt guys like Porzingius. I guess you still have guys like the Lopez brothers and Asik. Hayes is your traditional big man but league has been moving away from that for quite some time now.

His defense would have to improve. He doesn't block shots and I'm not sure if it's because he does or does not have elite wingspan (even Gortat has a 7-6 wingspan) or because he's still working on that part of his game.

Then you need at least a mid range game like Asik or Gortat.

He's shown a work ethic and dedication so you can't rule it out.

Even getting a Brian Zoubec like NCAA run, I would take that but Zoubec never made the NBA and opened a candy store in New Jersey.
Henry Sims who was probably more defensively advanced and could drive to the basket made it with the 76ers but now is out of the league.

It's hard to say. I would just enjoy his development at this level now and worry about that stuff later.

Does anyone think that Hibbert's a ton > than Hayes?

[prhoya]

Dec 8, 2015 21:56:48 GMT -5 rockhoya said:

Dec 8, 2015 21:54:36 GMT -5 prhoya said:

Just the facts, rock, or are you ignoring Trey et al. for the sake of argument?

You do realize you argued against your own point right? We had Nate get minutes in front of Brad because he was so bad and we didn't have that luxury of a third center (and a luxury means an exception to the rule, i.e. out of the norm).

No, I proved my point, but you're choosing to ignore the facts. I just named our five centers, yet you say we didn't have a third. You hate facts. I get it.