|
Post by wahoohoya on Mar 9, 2014 8:04:57 GMT -5
You are right - I do remember that call on Lubick. And Moses has had similar bad calls against him. I realize I'm contradicting my argument - as I do see evidence of Nate and Moses trying to not foul in those situations. I think it comes down to reputation /perception from the refs. I believe (and this is just one fan's opinion) that JT3 has a defensive philosophy to challenge every shot aggressively and never back off, even if it means putting the opponent on the line. I like the aggressive defensive philosophy, but I like smart and aggressive, and I don't think JT3 has mastered that combination and made the adjustments this year in how his players approach the game to try and solve this excessive fouling problem. Which I believe has resulted in refs targeting us this season. The Marquette game was terrible officiating - I have no idea why refs allow themselves to get baited into calls like that - but that is a different discussion. But I would argue that if Nate and Moses played with more fundamental restraint earlier in that game, the refs would be less likely to call that against them later on when they really didn't commit a foul.
I've intentionally tried to stay away from talking UVA hoops on this board (partly out of fear that the bad mojo hitting our team this year might spread to my "1B" team"), but since you bring it up, I'll offer my observations (and in doing so will probably reveal the source of many of my recent frustrations with this Hoya team). UVA plays fundamentally sound basketball. Guys move their feet. They don't play defense on the perimeter with their hands - their defensive scheme / execution on switches enables them to stop penetration legally. When they challenge shots down low, they do it in a way where they maintain space so that they don't get fouls called against them. And when they are beat, they put their arms straight up and don't flail out of position, which lo and behold, actually allows them to grab defensive rebounds when the shot doesn't go in. And they do all of this without a bunch of plus athletes like Florida. And what I have noticed is that because they start with such good defensive fundamentals, the refs are more likely to swallow their whistles on those over-aggressive challenges that we would get fouls called against us every time.
Edit - also probably worth noting that UVA's "pack line" defense blends nicely with the new rules emphasis. At its core, it's a sagging type of defense that was invented to allow non plus athletes to defend dribble penetration. I'm not an X's and O's guy, but seems to make intuitive sense that this type of defensive scheme is better suited to handle the new rules emphasis.
But sure, ultimately it comes down to players / player execution. Replace Moses with Akil Mitchell and we probably compete for the Big East title this year. I just can't help to marvel over how Bennett gets his players to play so smart. I don't want to oversell that team as they might lose the next 3 games and be forgotten for all eternity, but I think Bennett has something going on down there and his recruiting will only get better. So when I watch that UVA team play, it just frustrates me that we can't play anwhere near as smart as they do.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,593
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 9, 2014 8:15:26 GMT -5
For various reasons the team does not play well on the road..
How fouls are called Players execution Coaching decisions
I think these all play a part in the road debacles..
With that said, the Hoyas got 1 of their biggest wins on the road at Madison Square Garden against Michigan State (yes, MSU was hurt and missing key starters). It remains to be seen which Georgetown team shows up.. the Verizon version or the road version that tends to lose by double digits.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,049
|
Post by dense on Mar 9, 2014 9:25:45 GMT -5
Worst effort ever I've seen. They gave up. Never seen a JT3 team give up as easy as they have today. Huge exaggeration Nope I feel its dead on accurate.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,807
|
Post by njhoya78 on Mar 9, 2014 10:11:12 GMT -5
For various reasons the team does not play well on the road.. How fouls are called Players execution Coaching decisions I think these all play a part in the road debacles.. With that said, the Hoyas got 1 of their biggest wins on the road at Madison Square Garden against Michigan State (yes, MSU was hurt and missing key starters). It remains to be seen which Georgetown team shows up.. the Verizon version or the road version that tends to lose by double digits. When John McKay coached the winless expansion football team in Tampa Bay, he was asked about his team's execution after a game. He answered, "I'm all in favor of it." In the case of the Hoyas, actually, it's player execution. Period. I went back and pulled the following out of the non-Verizon Center Hoya box scores, and the numbers don't lie. Key stats in games lost are in bold. Oregon Personal fouls: GU 31, Oregon 28 Points from the foul line: GU 20, Oregon 36 Rebounds: GU 32, Oregon 40Turnovers: GU 11, Oregon 13 Northeastern Personal fouls: GU 24, NU 21 Points from the foul line: GU 17, NU 20 Rebounds: GU 32, NU 36Turnovers: GU 15, NU 14 Kansas State Personal fouls: GU 24, K-State 19 Points from the foul line: GU 18, K-State 23 Rebounds: GU 28, K-State 32 Turnovers: GU 7, K-State 16 VCU Personal fouls: GU 32, VCU 29 Points from the foul line: GU 32, VCU 34 Rebounds: GU 34, VCU 29 Turnovers: GU 26, VCU 17 Kansas Personal fouls: GU 32, KU 23 Points from the foul line: GU 16, KU 31 Rebounds: GU 29, KU 39Turnovers: GU 12, KU 12 Providence Personal fouls: GU 22, PC 18 Points from the foul line: GU 12, PC 19Rebounds: GU 32, PC 32 Turnovers: GU 15, PC 10Butler Personal fouls: GU 28, Butler 20 Points from the foul line: GU 8, Butler 25 Rebounds: GU 43, Butler 36 Turnovers: GU 11, Butler 7 Xavier Personal fouls: GU 22, XU 15 Points from the foul line: GU 5, XU 18 Rebounds: GU 25, XU 36Turnovers: GU 9, XU 7 Creighton Personal fouls: GU 24, CU 15 Points from the foul line: GU 9, CU 21 Rebounds: GU 31, CU 39Turnovers: GU 11, CU 10 Michigan State Personal fouls: GU 14, MSU 21 Points from the foul line: GU 18, MSU 9 Rebounds: GU 37, MSU 30 Turnovers: GU 16, MSU 15 DePaul Personal fouls: GU 22, DePaul 30 Points from the foul line: GU 30, DePaul 17 Rebounds: GU 38, DePaul 39 Turnovers: GU 7, DePaul 13 St. John's Personal fouls: GU 27, SJU 19 Points from the foul line: GU 15, SJU 22 Rebounds: GU 22, SJU 27 Turnovers: GU 14, SJU 8Seton Hall Personal fouls: GU 25, Hall 16 Points from the foul line: GU 12, Hall 20Rebounds: GU 31, Hall 33 Turnovers: GU 8, Hall 9 Villanova Personal fouls: GU 23, Nova 23 Points from the foul line: GU 12, Nova 16 Rebounds: GU 30, Nova 31 Turnovers: GU 18, Nova 9Summary: If we lose in one of these categories, we are in trouble. How do you explain, then, the wins over Kansas State and VCU? The Hoyas shot 63.5% from the field against K-State (which only shot 36.0%) and 56.1% against VCU (which only shot 35.7%); after that, the only game in which the Hoyas were better than 48% from the field on the road was yesterday, against Villanova. In the Butler overtime win, GU shot 45.3% to Butler's 33.3%. We aren't that good a shooting team, so they have to compensate for that failure by playing smart (i.e.- limiting turnovers and fouls) and hitting the boards. If you are not in proper defensive position, you get beaten for fouls and rebounds. The coaching staff can drill this into the players again and again, but they have to execute come game time on the road. We always commend the Hoyas for their game in-game out effort, even when losing. Unfortunately, the numbers aren't showing likewise.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 9, 2014 10:15:27 GMT -5
Some good discussion going on in this thread and some typical after loss criticism. I kind of lost passion for analyzing this team after the 0-2 NYC trip against SJU and SHU. But I do believe this most recent game is as simple as Nova being a MUCH better team than the Hoyas. They play with great chemistry and have a nice mix of complimentary skills. They are a legit #1 seed and the Hoyas will be lucky to make the play-in game. So there is a HUGE difference between these two teams and the Hoyas made that even worse by coming out turning the ball over and getting in foul trouble. No further analysis needed on this one.
This year's team has played to their potential. We can criticize the coaching, but nothing I see in the frontcourt makes me feel like the talent is there to compete at a top 25 level. Hopkins play has been especially concerning, not sure I can blame our staff for his lack of consistency. I feel like that is more on the player. The misses in recruiting on our 4s and 5s has been alarming. Unfortunately, it may take a staff change to get those position groups up to standard. Whatever advice III is getting on these frontcourt player's potential as college players has been misguided.
With the talent we have coming in next season, I am hoping we learned something by watching Nova because that team is constructed in a way you do not need a dominant 5 and that is our future for the next 2 seasons. Duke has been very successful as well with no real 5. You can win big without a serviceable 5. In my mind, these frontcourt excuses run out for next year's team - III has to figure it out with or without Josh Smith.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,593
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 9, 2014 10:24:54 GMT -5
For various reasons the team does not play well on the road.. How fouls are called Players execution Coaching decisions I think these all play a part in the road debacles.. With that said, the Hoyas got 1 of their biggest wins on the road at Madison Square Garden against Michigan State (yes, MSU was hurt and missing key starters). It remains to be seen which Georgetown team shows up.. the Verizon version or the road version that tends to lose by double digits. When John McKay coached the winless expansion football team in Tampa Bay, he was asked about his team's execution after a game. He answered, "I'm all in favor of it." In the case of the Hoyas, actually, it's player execution. Period. I went back and pulled the following out of the non-Verizon Center Hoya box scores, and the numbers don't lie. Key stats in games lost are in bold. Oregon Personal fouls: GU 31, Oregon 28 Points from the foul line: GU 20, Oregon 36 Rebounds: GU 32, Oregon 40Turnovers: GU 11, Oregon 13 Northeastern Personal fouls: GU 24, NU 21 Points from the foul line: GU 17, NU 20 Rebounds: GU 32, NU 36Turnovers: GU 15, NU 14 Kansas State Personal fouls: GU 24, K-State 19 Points from the foul line: GU 18, K-State 23 Rebounds: GU 28, K-State 32 Turnovers: GU 7, K-State 16 VCU Personal fouls: GU 32, VCU 29 Points from the foul line: GU 32, VCU 34 Rebounds: GU 34, VCU 29 Turnovers: GU 26, VCU 17 Kansas Personal fouls: GU 32, KU 23 Points from the foul line: GU 16, KU 31 Rebounds: GU 29, KU 39Turnovers: GU 12, KU 12 Providence Personal fouls: GU 22, PC 18 Points from the foul line: GU 12, PC 19Rebounds: GU 32, PC 32 Turnovers: GU 15, PC 10Butler Personal fouls: GU 28, Butler 20 Points from the foul line: GU 8, Butler 25 Rebounds: GU 43, Butler 36 Turnovers: GU 11, Butler 7 Xavier Personal fouls: GU 22, XU 15 Points from the foul line: GU 5, XU 18 Rebounds: GU 25, XU 36Turnovers: GU 9, XU 7 Creighton Personal fouls: GU 24, CU 15 Points from the foul line: GU 9, CU 21 Rebounds: GU 31, CU 39Turnovers: GU 11, CU 10 Michigan State Personal fouls: GU 14, MSU 21 Points from the foul line: GU 18, MSU 9 Rebounds: GU 37, MSU 30 Turnovers: GU 16, MSU 15 DePaul Personal fouls: GU 22, DePaul 30 Points from the foul line: GU 30, DePaul 17 Rebounds: GU 38, DePaul 39 Turnovers: GU 7, DePaul 13 St. John's Personal fouls: GU 27, SJU 19 Points from the foul line: GU 15, SJU 22 Rebounds: GU 22, SJU 27 Turnovers: GU 14, SJU 8Seton Hall Personal fouls: GU 25, Hall 16 Points from the foul line: GU 12, Hall 20Rebounds: GU 31, Hall 33 Turnovers: GU 8, Hall 9 Villanova Personal fouls: GU 23, Nova 23 Points from the foul line: GU 12, Nova 16 Rebounds: GU 30, Nova 31 Turnovers: GU 18, Nova 9Summary: If we lose in one of these categories, we are in trouble. How do you explain, then, the wins over Kansas State and VCU? The Hoyas shot 63.5% from the field against K-State (which only shot 36.0%) and 56.1% against VCU (which only shot 35.7%); after that, the only game in which the Hoyas were better than 48% from the field on the road was yesterday, against Villanova. In the Butler overtime win, GU shot 45.3% to Butler's 33.3%. We aren't that good a shooting team, so they have to compensate for that failure by playing smart (i.e.- limiting turnovers and fouls) and hitting the boards. If you are not in proper defensive position, you get beaten for fouls and rebounds. The coaching staff can drill this into the players again and again, but they have to execute come game time on the road. We always commend the Hoyas for their game in-game out effort, even when losing. Unfortunately, the numbers aren't showing likewise. Great post... I also noticed that on the road losses outside of Nova's 23 to 23 on Personal Fouls, the Hoyas always lead the opponent in fouls called against which tends to lead to the opponents getting bonus points from the foul line.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Mar 9, 2014 10:43:24 GMT -5
You are right - I do remember that call on Lubick. And Moses has had similar bad calls against him. I realize I'm contradicting my argument - as I do see evidence of Nate and Moses trying to not foul in those situations. I think it comes down to reputation /perception from the refs. I believe (and this is just one fan's opinion) that JT3 has a defensive philosophy to challenge every shot aggressively and never back off, even if it means putting the opponent on the line. I like the aggressive defensive philosophy, but I like smart and aggressive, and I don't think JT3 has mastered that combination and made the adjustments this year in how his players approach the game to try and solve this excessive fouling problem. Which I believe has resulted in refs targeting us this season. The Marquette game was terrible officiating - I have no idea why refs allow themselves to get baited into calls like that - but that is a different discussion. But I would argue that if Nate and Moses played with more fundamental restraint earlier in that game, the refs would be less likely to call that against them later on when they really didn't commit a foul. I've intentionally tried to stay away from talking UVA hoops on this board (partly out of fear that the bad mojo hitting our team this year might spread to my "1B" team"), but since you bring it up, I'll offer my observations (and in doing so will probably reveal the source of many of my recent frustrations with this Hoya team). UVA plays fundamentally sound basketball. Guys move their feet. They don't play defense on the perimeter with their hands - their defensive scheme / execution on switches enables them to stop penetration legally. When they challenge shots down low, they do it in a way where they maintain space so that they don't get fouls called against them. And when they are beat, they put their arms straight up and don't flail out of position, which lo and behold, actually allows them to grab defensive rebounds when the shot doesn't go in. And they do all of this without a bunch of plus athletes like Florida. And what I have noticed is that because they start with such good defensive fundamentals, the refs are more likely to swallow their whistles on those over-aggressive challenges that we would get fouls called against us every time. Edit - also probably worth noting that UVA's "pack line" defense blends nicely with the new rules emphasis. At its core, it's a sagging type of defense that was invented to allow non plus athletes to defend dribble penetration. I'm not an X's and O's guy, but seems to make intuitive sense that this type of defensive scheme is better suited to handle the new rules emphasis. But sure, ultimately it comes down to players / player execution. Replace Moses with Akil Mitchell and we probably compete for the Big East title this year. I just can't help to marvel over how Bennett gets his players to play so smart. I don't want to oversell that team as they might lose the next 3 games and be forgotten for all eternity, but I think Bennett has something going on down there and his recruiting will only get better. So when I watch that UVA team play, it just frustrates me that we can't play anwhere near as smart as they do. Yes, I did a little digging (Googling) and came up with the same thing. Bennetball's Pack the Line defense is perfect for the new rules modification. "There is probably no reason to use the pack line defense if you have excellent, quick athletes who are good defenders... just keep the intense pressure on, using the standard pressure man-to-man defense. On the other hand, the pack line defense will perhaps help less talented teams "hang in there" with better teams, and can also help a team having difficulty preventing point guard dribble-penetration." " The idea is to clog the inside, protect the paint, and prevent dribble-penetration. Instead of defenders (whose man is one pass away) playing on the line in denial, they will sag back inside the imaginary "pack line". The pack line is an imaginary line two feet inside the 3-point arc (see diagram A). You will usually have one defender pressuring the ball outside, and the other four defenders inside the pack line. This allows the pass on the perimeter, but closes down the gaps and prevents dribble-penetration. The prime goal, as in any defense, is to stop the ball." www.coachesclipboard.net/BasketballPackLineDefense.htmlSo here is the thing. With the new rules, unless you have uber plus athletes (which means your athletes are much better than the opponent) it's impossible to stop dribble penetration without fouling. Starks and DSR don't have great lateral quickness, so the choice is to foul and put them in foul trouble (which we can't afford) or let them blow by you to the 2nd level Big men. The 2nd level Big men are in a quandry because they are not allowed to use there hands to defend, they can only use moving their feet to defend. What's the problem with this. Well, if you are moving your feet then you can't draw a charge call. If the offensive dribble penetrator throws himself into you then it will be a foul on the defensive player who is moving his feet. If the defensive player just stands still and is unable to use his hands then he basically just becomes a lightpole that the offensive man can easily maneuver around. The problem also applies down low when a skilled Big like Devonte Gardner receives the ball in the low post. You can't use your hands to keep him from backing you down and direct him. Yet if you move your feet then you are susceptible to the offensive player dribbling to the basket and drawing a blocking foul. So there in lies the dilemma. What's the best way to prevent this from happening? That is to prevent feeds into the low post and also to stop dribble penetration. Easier said than done but Bennett's Pack the Line defense's main goal is to stop dribble penetration. This is why UVA's defense is consistently thriving this year while more aggressive man to man and zone defenses are not working consistently under the new rules. "In summary, the pack line defense will help a less-athletic team compete with a stronger, quicker team. And you still can use a full-court press, but then drop back into the half-court pack line defense. There are some disadvantages, however . . ." "if you are behind late in the game, the offense can "run the clock", unless you come out and start denying passes. So the pack line defense is a problem here." www.coachesclipboard.net/BasketballPackLineDefense.htmlNow the thing is it took Bennett three years for his players to absorb and learn and perfect the Pack the Line defense. It's not something that can be learned overnight. (There's an article talking about it taking about 3 years to perfect the Pack the Line which I can't seem to find it the moment) So unless the rules go back to how they were, then the Pack the Line defense might be what teams have to go to given that the rules are making it very hard for the Bigs to defend without fouling. **** As far as UVA, there's no shame in enjoying their season. The year a long down trodden program turns it around, going from irrelevant to relevant is always magical and special and that experience will never quite be the same even with continued or greater success in the future. So enjoy it.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 9, 2014 10:45:45 GMT -5
Do people still read TJI? I've blocked that dude for ages. It's pretty easy to tell who has nothing of value to add and just block them off. ETA: I still have to read him once in a while because the mobile app sucks, but if they ever fix that, it'll be nice. Isn't that a bit elitist? TJI is entitled to an opinion - is TJI really block-worthy? Nah. Not at all. It's all good. Yeah, I totally do this weird thing in my life where I evaluate things, people and experiences and then allocate more time and resources to things I like more and find worthwhile cut out the ones I don't. Crazy, I know, but I find it's an incredibly stupid strategy to go through life giving everything equal time. Do you go through life eating at restaurants you don't like, listening to music you don't like, watching tv / movies you don't like just to make sure you aren't "elitist"? I'm truly curious.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 9, 2014 10:49:22 GMT -5
ing smart (i.e.- limiting turnovers and fouls) and hitting the boards. If you are not in proper defensive position, you get beaten for fouls and rebounds. The coaching staff can drill this into the players again and again, but they have to execute come game time on the road. We always commend the Hoyas for their game in-game out effort, even when losing. Unfortunately, the numbers aren't showing likewise. I think the first paragraph here is a very good wrap-up of the season. I think the second is tougher to agree with. I don't think the team puts forward their best effort every game, and certainly it seems like some of these metrics might correlate to effort and focus, but sometimes they also correlate to another team simply being better at those skills.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Mar 9, 2014 10:54:35 GMT -5
The rule change has had a huge impact on the game. Now it's almost impossible to guard a plus athlete who can dribble penetrate without fouling. That's one of the reasons why Villanova (who was picked 4th in the BE) is doing so well this year. They play 4 guys on the floor who can dribble penetrate at the same time. If you look at the teams that we are getting blown out by they have dribble penetrators that are athletically superior (Kansas, Oregon, St. Johns, Seton Hall /Fuquan Edwards, Providence/Brice Cotton, Villanova) who are unstoppable or get our team in foul trouble. The teams we play better against like Creighton, Butler are less athletic than us and lack those aggressive rim attackers. I think it's also tough on us because we have a small backcourt (Starks, DSR), that lacks lateral quickness. Good shooters can shoot over them because they lack length and dribble penetrators can blow by them and expose the bigs who cover for them to fouls with the new rules. The past couple years we have had alot of length with Whit and Poter. Whit and Trawick could play shooting guard and Otto at 6-9 at small forward could give us alot of length which made it harder to shoot over and made the zone more effective. They could also hit the passing lanes with their length and get steals or turnovers. Marquette's having trouble adjusting as well since they lost Vander Blue and lack a good point guard. Even Syracuse is having problems. No team has really looked dominant and good this entire year except Florida and Wichita State who is untested. It's a very weird year in large part due to the rules which are frankly turning the game into a joke. Defense has gone out the window but the game isn't more exciting because it's just leading to more fouls and games being won because of free throws and foul trouble. New Rules: espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9830285/rick-pitino-john-calipari-bill-self-coaches-torn-rule-changes-2013-14-seasonReally good points in this post IMO. It's also why our guys look much better when they can get out and run a bit. In any case, well stated professor. Yup, I agree with both posters' points. I'm not sure the current rules emphasis would have affected last year's team much, for the reasons stated in the second to last paragraph. We had more length and could play zone defense really darn well. That's actually been the biggest disappointment for me this year: we have so many zone defense possessions that are just shockingly bad. That's not on a rule emphasis either--it's just terrible rotations and bad communication. One thing to underline though: this isn't a recent development. ESPN's PBP announcers did a video segment about our struggling defense and poor defensive communication during the Puerto Rico Classic in, like, our fourth game of the season. There were Josh Smith issues there too, but the point is we've been a poor defensive team all season and specifically unable to defend the kind of athletic teams the original posters discuss above.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 9, 2014 11:08:59 GMT -5
Yep, totally agree. That's why I think this will be the wildest tourney of all time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2014 11:33:56 GMT -5
Very impressed by Nova this season. They are talented at every position and have some good depth off the bench (thanks to their DC recruits, who BTW, I thought Wright gave extra playing time to yesterday cause it was their hometown team). As others have said Nova has great chemistry this season and they get to the line a lot. I disagree with people that think they will get "Georgetowned" in the NCAAs and think they will make a run.
They are also a bad matchup for us especially. Our propensity to foul mixed with their ability to get to the line -- some would call it flopping -- makes it nearly impossible for us to guard them straight up. If they are making their outside shots, forget about it. If we are turning the ball over, double forget about it.
And on top of all that, this group has played terribly at Wells Fargo three games in a row now. Just some bad juju there-- and to be honest, a lot of it has been cause Jabril has repeatedly gotten into early foul trouble playing in his hometown. I can pretty much predict whether we'll win these days by whether or not Jabril picks up and early two, or three fouls. If I'm JT3, I'm pulling him aside and telling him, I don't care how many baskets we give up, you can't be physical with the other teams' drivers. At least not in the first 5-10 minutes. His presence on the court is too important.....
Bowen had another nice game at least. Starks and DSR were their usual consistent selves, although I thought Starks forced a few passes and DSR forced a few shots, but that kind of thing tends to happen when you're getting crushed.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Mar 10, 2014 12:58:29 GMT -5
Isn't that a bit elitist? TJI is entitled to an opinion - is TJI really block-worthy? Nah. Not at all. It's all good. Yeah, I totally do this weird thing in my life where I evaluate things, people and experiences and then allocate more time and resources to things I like more and find worthwhile cut out the ones I don't. Crazy, I know, but I find it's an incredibly stupid strategy to go through life giving everything equal time. Do you go through life eating at restaurants you don't like, listening to music you don't like, watching tv / movies you don't like just to make sure you aren't "elitist"? I'm truly curious. That's not entirely accurate, you don't really do that do you? I wouldn't advise that Just seems that was more extreme than it needed to be because all of us love GU
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Mar 10, 2014 15:50:00 GMT -5
^^^Man, I truly do not understand your posts at all.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,522
|
Post by MCIGuy on Mar 10, 2014 19:39:35 GMT -5
This was the most frustrating performance of the season for the Hoyas. This was such a big game, with so much at stake against a longtime rival and the team came out apparently as if it wasn’t ready to play. I say apparently only because I didn’t get to see most of the first half. That being said based upon all descriptions and radio play-by-play calling, it was a less than admiral effort on the part of the Hoyas. I even felt bad for the guys calling the game on FS1. In all likelihood they were expecting a great contest and instead had to watch a game so lacking in energy. Before bFS1 switched over to Gtown-Nova I was cursing over the fact that the St. John’s Marquette game didn’t want to end. Afterwards I felt ashamed for even thinking that because the guys on Marquette and St. John’s played with a passion that the Hoyas lacked.
Unbelievably Gtown shot 50% from the floor and was still blown out. The Hoyas shot even better during the first half and yet Villanova had a commanding, double digit lead going into half-time . I’ve seen enough basketball. When a team shoots way over 50% in the first half but have a lot of turnovers it tends to mean the team goes into halftime with a slim lead rather than a large lead, or it means the team trails only be a few points at the end of the first half. Somehow the Hoyas manage to bury themselves in a hole that you knew was too big. And you knew it was too big because III’s teams still find it virtually impossible to come back from double-digit deficits. That is still a major problem going forward: how to make comebacks from large deficits and win games in the process. Inexplicably in the second half as Villanova’s lead kept growing the Hoyas went back to the traditional waste the shot clock mode before getting off a basket. And at times during that half III wasted possessions by having Nate and Moses on the floor at the same time. Why? I have no idea. Not as if Nova had a bruising frontcourt. There appeared to be no sense of urgency by our guys.
I could accept the Hoyas losing but not like that. Such a dreadful performance seemed to come out of nowhere considering over the past few weeks the team at least seemed to turn the corner in regards to not coughing up the ball. On the other hand it appears as if this team is just no good on the road, and three of our last four losses on the road have been blowout defeats. Those are not the type of results that get bubble teams picked for the NCAA tourney but I suppose that is stating the obvious.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,593
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 11, 2014 8:52:41 GMT -5
This was the most frustrating performance of the season for the Hoyas. This was such a big game, with so much at stake against a longtime rival and the team came out apparently as if it wasn’t ready to play. I say apparently only because I didn’t get to see most of the first half. That being said based upon all descriptions and radio play-by-play calling, it was a less than admiral effort on the part of the Hoyas. I even felt bad for the guys calling the game on FS1. In all likelihood they were expecting a great contest and instead had to watch a game so lacking in energy. Before bFS1 switched over to Gtown-Nova I was cursing over the fact that the St. John’s Marquette game didn’t want to end. Afterwards I felt ashamed for even thinking that because the guys on Marquette and St. John’s played with a passion that the Hoyas lacked. Unbelievably Gtown shot 50% from the floor and was still blown out. The Hoyas shot even better during the first half and yet Villanova had a commanding, double digit lead going into half-time . I’ve seen enough basketball. When a team shoots way over 50% in the first half but have a lot of turnovers it tends to mean the team goes into halftime with a slim lead rather than a large lead, or it means the team trails only be a few points at the end of the first half. Somehow the Hoyas manage to bury themselves in a hole that you knew was too big. And you knew it was too big because III’s teams still find it virtually impossible to come back from double-digit deficits. That is still a major problem going forward: how to make comebacks from large deficits and win games in the process. Inexplicably in the second half as Villanova’s lead kept growing the Hoyas went back to the traditional waste the shot clock mode before getting off a basket. And at times during that half III wasted possessions by having Nate and Moses on the floor at the same time. Why? I have no idea. Not as if Nova had a bruising frontcourt. There appeared to be no sense of urgency by our guys. I could accept the Hoyas losing but not like that. Such a dreadful performance seemed to come out of nowhere considering over the past few weeks the team at least seemed to turn the corner in regards to not coughing up the ball. On the other hand it appears as if this team is just no good on the road, and three of our last four losses on the road have been blowout defeats. Those are not the type of results that get bubble teams picked for the NCAA tourney but I suppose that is stating the obvious. I remember stating during the in game thread that Moses & Nate on the court @ the same time was a bad idea...glad u brought that up. Also RDF's dungeon ball analysis did apply on Saturday... You are the only other person I have seen even touch that subject in post game analysis.... Do not know why we do that down by double digits... That is a very bad habit that has become a characteristic of the team over the years.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 11, 2014 10:18:06 GMT -5
It is not a "dungeon ball" mentality, and you guys should know that. It all goes back to offensive limitations. We have 2 very good offensive players, one often-good offensive player (bril) and one sometimes-good offensive player(Bowen, although he is becoming more consistent). We frequently have 2 or even 3 guys on the floor who are little or no threat at that end, allowing a good defense like 'nova to overplay our scorers, making it very difficult to get off a good shot - so we have to work harder (and longer) to get off that good shot, and sometimes even 35 seconds is not enough. If we had 4 or 5 guys who were threats, could create their own shots and also hit open shots, I think we would see a different offensive scheme. It just isn't in us this year.
|
|
OldHoyafan
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,387
|
Post by OldHoyafan on Mar 11, 2014 12:58:30 GMT -5
It is not a "dungeon ball" mentality, and you guys should know that. It all goes back to offensive limitations. We have 2 very good offensive players, one often-good offensive player (bril) and one sometimes-good offensive player(Bowen, although he is becoming more consistent). We frequently have 2 or even 3 guys on the floor who are little or no threat at that end, allowing a good defense like 'nova to overplay our scorers, making it very difficult to get off a good shot - so we have to work harder (and longer) to get off that good shot, and sometimes even 35 seconds is not enough. If we had 4 or 5 guys who were threats, could create their own shots and also hit open shots, I think we would see a different offensive scheme. It just isn't in us this year. This. Had to work last Saturday and have not had the stomach to watch the game on DVR, but I would guess reading most of the posts that the combinations on the floor were dictated to III by the foul trouble of Nate, Moses, Hopkins and Jabril. To win from here on out this year will continue to rest on whether the refs calling the game like most have this year( drives to basket with contact, initiated by offensive player or defensive player is a foul on defense), or closer to old BE interpretation( if contact had no effect on offensive players ability to shoot the shot, then no call). To our despair, I think the remainder of games played by the Hoyas will be called like the former.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Mar 11, 2014 21:38:29 GMT -5
It is not a "dungeon ball" mentality, and you guys should know that. It all goes back to offensive limitations. We have 2 very good offensive players, one often-good offensive player (bril) and one sometimes-good offensive player(Bowen, although he is becoming more consistent). We frequently have 2 or even 3 guys on the floor who are little or no threat at that end, allowing a good defense like 'nova to overplay our scorers, making it very difficult to get off a good shot - so we have to work harder (and longer) to get off that good shot, and sometimes even 35 seconds is not enough. If we had 4 or 5 guys who were threats, could create their own shots and also hit open shots, I think we would see a different offensive scheme. It just isn't in us this year. This. Had to work last Saturday and have not had the stomach to watch the game on DVR, but I would guess reading most of the posts that the combinations on the floor were dictated to III by the foul trouble of Nate, Moses, Hopkins and Jabril. To win from here on out this year will continue to rest on whether the refs calling the game like most have this year( drives to basket with contact, initiated by offensive player or defensive player is a foul on defense), or closer to old BE interpretation( if contact had no effect on offensive players ability to shoot the shot, then no call). To our despair, I think the remainder of games played by the Hoyas will be called like the former. Markel also picked up a quick 2 in the first half and had to sit. With him and Jabril in foul trouble it made it difficult to catch up and forced bringing in Caprio and others at certain points in the game.
|
|