|
Post by aleutianhoya on Nov 23, 2016 9:46:27 GMT -5
What the hell are you talking about? He's talking about his players. He is admitting that they weren't tough enough last night and didn't do the little things necessary. And he is publicly calling them out, and essentially saying that guys won't play if they don't do those things. That's exactly what we want him to say. If he were just satisfied with his paycheck, he'd say he didn't care. Plenty of things to complain about, but piling on with nonsense is silly. The guy clearly cares. See Etomic's post. Agree to disagree. He WANTS to call out his players publicly. It's not always appropriate, but it is appropriate when it's an effort issue. It's impossible to believe that rebounding hasn't been a priority and a point of emphasis from the staff. If he says "out staff needs to emphasize this more" the players don't fully appreciate the issue. But when you publicly say "you won't play if you don't rebound," well, that's impossible to ignore. Could he have added a "we need to do a better job as a staff" statement also? Well, sure. And for all I know, maybe he did, and that part of the quote wasn't reported.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,231
|
Post by EtomicB on Nov 23, 2016 10:00:08 GMT -5
What the hell are you talking about? He's talking about his players. He is admitting that they weren't tough enough last night and didn't do the little things necessary. And he is publicly calling them out, and essentially saying that guys won't play if they don't do those things. That's exactly what we want him to say. If he were just satisfied with his paycheck, he'd say he didn't care. Plenty of things to complain about, but piling on with nonsense is silly. The guy clearly cares. I am thrilled to see that quote from JT3. It is about time he calls out a few players and makes it clear the expectations that come along with playing time. There are too many guys who seem to float along and are not involved in all aspects of the game. Scorers get the headlines, but defense and rebounding is what gets you wins. It is time to demand intensity, focus and effort from everyone.Ā But what about him and his ever changing staff? The Players and staff come and go but the issues of intensity, passiveness, rebounding, stale offense, execution ect remain.. Who gets called out in the press for that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 10:16:23 GMT -5
And he is publicly calling them out, and essentially saying that guys won't play if they don't do those things. He's actually not saying this at all. I agree with you overall, but until/unless there's actual accountability, it rings hollow. That said, maybe Copeland's limited minutes last night were an example of that accountability. If so, great. But it's not like Cope had a fire under his ass when he was back in later in the game.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Nov 23, 2016 10:23:29 GMT -5
Incoming excuses: Wisconsin is a top 20 team so our loss tonight was inevitable! Since we beat Oregon, that victory should keep JT3 immune from criticisms for rest of the season! Hoya Saxa! According to Eagle54, losing to a higher ranked team is perfectly okay.
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,531
|
Post by bostonfan on Nov 23, 2016 10:28:14 GMT -5
I am thrilled to see that quote from JT3. It is about time he calls out a few players and makes it clear the expectations that come along with playing time. There are too many guys who seem to float along and are not involved in all aspects of the game. Scorers get the headlines, but defense and rebounding is what gets you wins. It is time to demand intensity, focus and effort from everyone. But what about him and his ever changing staff? The Players and staff come and go but the issues of intensity, passiveness, rebounding, stale offense, execution ect remain.. Who gets called out in the press for that? I agree that the staff needs to make some changes also, and start demanding the players be accountable and play with intensity. I just had never seen JT3 say anything like that publicly and I am hopeful that maybe this is the start of him, and this staff, making those needed changes. I think it needs to translate into every aspect of the program including making the players accountable in not only games, but also practices. If the players understand they need to give maximum effort in practice everyday in order to get playing time, those habits will translate into more consistent play in games. You need to start changing the culture somewhere, and hopefully this is the start. If it doesn't change and they continue to play at times with no passion, then maybe it is the coach that is the issue and then that needs to be addressed.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Nov 23, 2016 10:28:20 GMT -5
And he is publicly calling them out, and essentially saying that guys won't play if they don't do those things. He's actually not saying this at all. I agree with you overall, but until/unless there's actual accountability, it rings hollow. That said, maybe Copeland's limited minutes last night were an example of that accountability. If so, great. But it's not like Cope had a fire under his ass when he was back in later in the game. I agree. Talk is just talk. But I do think the "talk" in this instance was a direct shot across the bow of his players. Whether he follows-up on that is another issue entirely. That said, as you point out, I think he did walk the walk in the second half. I think Cope's reduced play in the second half absolutely was due to his poor play (perhaps as much offensive as defensive, but it's hard to know). He only played six minutes in the second half, with four of those coming at the end when the game was functionally over (and when III probably figured he needed to catch lightning in a bottle and hope Cope hit some threes). Govan also. He only played 4 mins in the second half (he picked up a quick third foul but he certainly could have been used after that). He and Cope combined to have zero rebounds. Zero!!! So, I do think he walked the walk a good amount in the second half. His starting four and starting five (the guys most responsible for rebounding) played a combined ten minutes in the second half, even though neither was in real foul trouble. The guys he brought in had their own problems, but within the context of the game, what else are you going to do?
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Nov 23, 2016 10:29:43 GMT -5
Incoming excuses: Wisconsin is a top 20 team so our loss tonight was inevitable! Since we beat Oregon, that victory should keep JT3 immune from criticisms for rest of the season! Hoya Saxa! Your argument would be a lot stronger if you even pretended like you were trying to make sense.
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Nov 23, 2016 11:11:31 GMT -5
Attacking the basket, communicating, making lob and bounce passes into the post, etc. is what coach is talking about in Bancroft's tweets. Playing unselfish.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Nov 23, 2016 11:12:41 GMT -5
I also think (hope) that the "WE have to get some guys" part is a recognition that the program, and JTIII as the head of the program, may have significantly failed either in bringing in those kind of guys, or in being able to create that mindset in the guys they do have.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Nov 23, 2016 11:24:39 GMT -5
What exactly do some of you want JT3 to do? I supported sitting Copeland last night - if he's not on offensively, he is a net negative on defense, so he should sit. But really, who else is going to play?
We have four players who can score at this point, and two play the same position: Govan, Hayes, Pryor, and Peak. Both Pryor and Peak are streaky, especially Pryor, in the sense that you cannot just dump the ball to them and let them go at it.
So what are we left with? Let's pencil in Pryor and Peak, and Govan/Hayes (assuming they alternatively play when the other sits).
Who else is going to play? Among the guards, Mulmore, Campbell, and Mosely are ineffective. None of them have been effective. I know some people call for Mulmore to play more, and maybe he will, but thus far aside from shooting FTs well, he's brought nothing on offense. None of them make threes, either. They are a combined 4-20 on threes. 20% from our point guards/shooting guards. Really, I am at a loss as to what you do here. Someone needs to play. And they aren't effective.
Then you move to the forward position. Copeland has been awful on offense. He's shooting 34.5% on twos, and is 0-9 on threes. He's a defensive liability (though was better in the last two games, to be fair).
So who do you play instead? Maybe Agau? He is a foul machine (drawing 6.2 fouls every 40 minutes), and he hasn't shown much on offense. Kaleb Johnson? He made a three last night, but he cannot shoot free throws well, and doesn't seem to bring much else on the offensive end, at least.
Of course, this is where Derrickson would help a ton. But we don't have him available yet.
The overall point? I am not sure what any coach would do with this group. We constantly talk about "talent" and all that, but the sports world is littered with "talented" rising stars and up-and-comers who never amount to anything at a higher level. Our guys need to perform and they haven't done so.
Can the staff emphasize rebounding and try to fix these problems? Of course, and they should, and I expect they do. But at some point, our players need to play better.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Nov 23, 2016 11:36:36 GMT -5
Fwiw, Mulmore has probably driven to the basket and finished or got fouled 10+ times than Mosley and Campbell combined. He's also probably hit more free throws and he has a tighter handle than both....I don't get why we're not baptizing him through fire.
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Nov 23, 2016 11:51:32 GMT -5
Fwiw, Mulmore has probably driven to the basket and finished or got fouled 10+ times than Mosley and Campbell combined. He's also probably hit more free throws and he has a tighter handle than both....I don't get why we're not baptizing him through fire. agree. if we're committed to a PG-Peak-Pryor starting back court, it has to be mulmore. he can get to the hole and we'll have to live with his growing pains. best option.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Nov 23, 2016 11:56:54 GMT -5
For what it's worth, here are the guard's states:
Mulmore: O rating - 113.8; eFG%: 40.9%, 2 PT %: 33.3%, 3 3 PT %: 1-2 (50%); FTs: 13-15 (86.7%); Assist Rate: 19.8; Turnover Rate: 19.3.
Campbell: O rating - 88.0; eFG%: 38.2%, 2 PT %: 33.3%, 3 PT %: 3-11 (27.3%), FTs: 7-7 (100%); Assist Rate: 15.7; Turnover Rate: 25.9.
Mosely: O rating - 84.7; eFG%: 27.8%, 2 PT %: 45.5%, 3 PT %: 0-7 (0%); FTs: 7-11 (63.6%); Assist Rate: 26.2; Turnover Rate: 21.1.
Based on these stats, I think you can definitely make a strong case for Mulmore getting the most minutes. You can make arguments for Mosely too, though, especially when you consider defense. I do not see any compelling reason for Tre Campbell to get a ton of playing time.
That said, none of these guys are killing it. Mulmore's O rating is only high because he has drawn a lot of fouls and made the free throws. But still, that's almost certainly better than what Campbell has to offer.
NOTE: I originally had the wrong stat for three point shots for Mosely as 1-2; he is actually 0-7.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Nov 23, 2016 11:58:35 GMT -5
Let me ask the board this- If Pops were coaching this squad, do you honestly believe that we would have gotten 1 offensive rebound to their 19? No way in hell. Let me ask the board this - If JT3's father wasnt Pops would he still be the coach of Georgetown?
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Nov 23, 2016 11:59:11 GMT -5
Mulmore may have earned himself a bigger role last night.
But oh, his defenseš±
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Nov 23, 2016 12:03:08 GMT -5
Let me ask the board this- If Pops were coaching this squad, do you honestly believe that we would have gotten 1 offensive rebound to their 19? No way in hell. Let me ask the board this - If JT3's father wasnt Pops would he still be the coach of Georgetown? This question has never been asked before. I am being sarcastic, but it's really a silly question because JT Jr. is influential and the Thompsons mean a lot to Georgetown, and that's the reality. Any other discussion is speculative. I know you're asking the question because you think the answer is yes, but given Georgetown's institutional weight against firing coaches, I don't think it's as clear cut as some think.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Nov 23, 2016 12:06:47 GMT -5
Let me ask the board this- If Pops were coaching this squad, do you honestly believe that we would have gotten 1 offensive rebound to their 19? No way in hell. Let me ask the board this - If JT3's father wasnt Pops would he still be the coach of Georgetown? Yes. He had a string of very good regular seasons, the last few of which were marred by bad NCAA losses. He had a bad overall season 3 years ago, then a pretty good bounceback 2 years ago - then a relative disaster last season. However he might definitely have been fighting for his job this season. The question might better be whether he would have gotten the job in the first place. I am not saying that his qualifications at the time would not have made him a candidate, but the lineage certainly closed the deal.
|
|
hoya1984
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 488
|
Post by hoya1984 on Nov 23, 2016 12:07:54 GMT -5
The main thing I want to see from this team is that they are ready to compete, hustle, win the 50-50 ball. Yesterday, in the second half some of the players were walking back . This tell you a lot between the relationship of the players and the coach. It is unacceptable that these players embarrass the Georgetown tradition, their University and their coach. I think that JTIII has lost control of these players. Can you even imagine the margin on rebounds from last night game. It is completely unacceptable .
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Nov 23, 2016 13:20:23 GMT -5
For what it's worth, here are the guard's states: Mulmore: O rating - 113.8; eFG%: 40.9%, 2 PT %: 33.3%, 3 3 PT %: 1-2 (50%); FTs: 13-15 (86.7%); Assist Rate: 19.8; Turnover Rate: 19.3. Campbell: O rating - 88.0; eFG%: 38.2%, 2 PT %: 33.3%, 3 PT %: 3-11 (27.3%), FTs: 7-7 (100%); Assist Rate: 15.7; Turnover Rate: 25.9. Mosely: O rating - 84.7; eFG%: 27.8%, 2 PT %: 45.5%, 3 PT %: 1-2 (50%); FTs: 7-11 (63.6%); Assist Rate: 26.2; Turnover Rate: 21.1. Based on these stats, I think you can definitely make a strong case for Mulmore getting the most minutes. You can make arguments for Mosely too, though, especially when you consider defense. I do not see any compelling reason for Tre Campbell to get a ton of playing time. That said, none of these guys are killing it. Mulmore's O rating is only high because he has drawn a lot of fouls and made the free throws. But still, that's almost certainly better than what Campbell has to offer. Doesn't scoring from the FT line contribute to your total score? That's literally the only production we're getting out of all three guards. Not sure Mosley is that superior defensively either.
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Nov 23, 2016 13:59:47 GMT -5
What the hell are you talking about? He's talking about his players. He is admitting that they weren't tough enough last night and didn't do the little things necessary. And he is publicly calling them out, and essentially saying that guys won't play if they don't do those things. That's exactly what we want him to say. If he were just satisfied with his paycheck, he'd say he didn't care. Plenty of things to complain about, but piling on with nonsense is silly. The guy clearly cares. I agree with PR here.. Reads to me like he's throwing the players under the bus.. Why not say "we as a staff have to get kids to care about all aspects of the game? Because that would be a case of him actually taking accountability for once, and we all know that publicly, he has rarely if ever done that. I can overlook a lot of things about him as a coach but that's the one thing that really burns me up about him.
|
|