|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Dec 21, 2015 14:58:02 GMT -5
I am not sure B&G has put anything "to rest" He clearly states "as far as I know." If I was in that locker room, as a player, I would be highly upset and confronting myself first, but then everyone else on that team. I would not be taking things in stride, just be happy with where we are and how we are playing. I think I would even have broken something by now--a chair, maybe.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 21, 2015 15:20:51 GMT -5
Here are a couple of suggestions: 1) Go small against the likes of schools like Asheville. Derrickson at the 5 with White, Copeland rounding out the front line. If that fails, give Mourning a go as a stretch 5. I'd like to see this as well, but a) we're likely to get torn apart on the boards and b) we're likely to get torn apart defensively. When you look at how poorly we've rebounded with Hayes out, I'm not overly shocked that this hasn't been option 1A. Does Mourning have a defensive rebound all year? He's on the bench either way, right? I'm not sure where this makes a difference. He's gotten screwed on a quite a few calls and had to sit. Isn't that punishment? If he makes a mistake, we should leave him out there. I'm not sure what this does. Campbell has been an unmitigated disaster this year. He's probably the hoya least likely to drive and kick out. DSR is the most likely, by far. I can understand sending a message to those who aren't putting in the work on D, but I can't see punishing DSR for missing shots. And does the same punishment apply to Campbell? If he takes an ill-advised shot or doesn't move his feet -- and he's been awful this year -- is he benched as well? Who do we put in then? I'd love to see a competent 1-3-1, but do you think we could run one? We can't run 2-3 competently that we've been running for years, how is this team supposed to execute a 1-3-1 properly as a team when it can't do something it's been practicing for a while? Putting out a new defense with a week of practice is not a recipe for success. The press hasn't worked in short spurts; why do we think extending it longer will do it? Perhaps. I suppose they could do this but is it really going to help our defense? I feel like there's a contradiction here. He has been experimenting with lineups. With the exception of Mourning, we've seen a lot of them. While you've posited plenty of stuff to try, several of them seem impractical to me, namely relying on Tre and adding a 1-3-1. Basically it comes down to Play Trey and press, maybe bench some guys when they suck. I'm not opposed to trying Trey more or going with Derrickson at center. But I don't think either solves the issue -- this team needs to work harder, smarter and as a team on defense.
|
|
Loyal Hoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 554
|
Post by Loyal Hoya on Dec 21, 2015 15:33:16 GMT -5
I am not sure B&G has put anything "to rest" He clearly states "as far as I know." If I was in that locker room, as a player, I would be highly upset and confronting myself first, but then everyone else on that team. I would not be taking things in stride, just be happy with where we are and how we are playing. I think I would even have broken something by now--a chair, maybe. I thought about breaking a chair myself on Saturday.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Dec 21, 2015 15:45:12 GMT -5
Way too much speculation here. Most people who know me consider me to be someone with a good amount of inside info on the team. There are no such issues that would cause the team to play this poorly. In years past we know there have been some issues in the locker room or in the classroom....don't see any of that going on here. From what I know, our issues are strictly "on the court". Thank you for the information B&G, but I almost wish this was not the case. It scares me more to think this team could become this dysfunctional on the court so quickly. That said, Charlotte is really struggling, this should be a game where we can learn how to win again.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Dec 21, 2015 16:06:34 GMT -5
SF, you quickly shoot down every possibility. This is also a contradiction. When things aren't working, the definition of insanity is to try doing the same thing. Our press has gotten us back into games and brought energy when our guys were lifeless. In the Monmouth game, I would have fully supported benching all starters for the second half. Get a damn point across.
The point on LJ is at some point you have to hold him accountable. His third foul against Asheville was horrible. He undercut a guy on a board in the open court. Not a bad call, the right call and crappy play. If it was a game or two then fine, but when it has been every game he needs to figure out when to challenge and when not to. That is not on the refs, that is on him. Yes, he is your go to D stopper but maybe switch up and give him a break while throwing Paul White (he of Emmanual Mudiay fame) a shot on the other teams #1 outside option.
On the 1-3-1, there is plenty of time to teach that in addition to your base man to man and a 2-3. S**T my high school team could run out three or four defensive sets and know how to execute. To say that college hoops players who have been playing year round since 5th grade under many different coaches can't pick this up is an insult to Gtown basketball players who supposedly are all praised for having a high BBall IQ.
On DSR, if he is 1-7 from 3, maybe pull him aside and say, hey D'Vauntes, try to get in the lane and get your little pivot turn around that you shoot unbelievably well on but seem to have forgotten about this year. Maybe that is happening and DSR isn't following suit but my guess is the coach isn't highlighting these things. I have been an ardent JTIII defender for years as an Esherick-era season ticket holder. I honestly take a lot of heat for it and after watching this team this year with this talent, I am out of excuses and am starting to side with my friends who started dumping on JTIII after the Ohio game.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by drquigley on Dec 21, 2015 17:55:03 GMT -5
I appreciate all the comments on this and other threads. I'm not sure what is is about the team but obviously they don't like playing against mid-majors. Before every one of these games I now find myself games thinking, just before they announce our opponents starting lineup, "please don't say they are starting 4 guards and have no one of their team over 6"7".
|
|
Loyal Hoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 554
|
Post by Loyal Hoya on Dec 21, 2015 18:10:06 GMT -5
Defend without fouling. Rebound. Make free throws.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 21, 2015 18:28:05 GMT -5
SF, you quickly shoot down every possibility. This is also a contradiction. When things aren't working, the definition of insanity is to try doing the same thing. Our press has gotten us back into games and brought energy when our guys were lifeless. In the Monmouth game, I would have fully supported benching all starters for the second half. Get a damn point across. I'm not trying to shoot every point down. I'd love it if we tried small ball. All I'm acknowledging is that there's strong reasons why it might not work -- and why Thompson may not have tried it yet. And believe me, I'm fine with benching guys for lack of effort. But we do have to acknowledge the downside of that -- when most of the team is failing, who gets to play? I mean, as much as we'd all love to have III pull a "My team is on the floor" I'm pretty sure that's a forfeit. Aside from Kaleb and Hayes, who put forward strong effort? Who gets benched and who plays? I'm not asking this figuratively -- give me your starters and rotation for Charlotte. So do you want to bench LJ or not? I'm still unsure. Above, you want to bench players for accountability. Here, you want LJ to keep playing but go up against a lesser offensive player? I'm trying to figure out what is a punishment here. Your high school team wasn't executing at a college level. Furthermore, do you really think it is a good idea to ADD a defense when a team isn't executing current ones appropriately? Hey, you guys can't find assignments, so let me add more confusion? Isn't a better solution is to make them work harder to get better at the 2-3 and man to man? It's not the structure of the defense that is magical -- its how you run it. Our issue is not number of looks, it's that we are never where we need to be in the looks we are in. Our defense is an executional issue first and foremost (and then likely a personnel). Adding complexity isn't going to help. Did you watch Asheville? DSR absolutely started driving and both tried to hit mid-ranges and hit layups -- he missed most of those. Of course, our offense was actually okay. It was our defense that was the issue. But that said, DSR is more reliant on the 3 this year, so maybe you have something. Perhaps he does need to drive more. Why is that your guess? This is what I don't understand. Perhaps the defense is taking away the mid-range (he's seen a lot more doubling on the perimeter). Perhaps DSR is getting more open looks from 3. Perhaps DSR is deferring to get others involved. Perhaps the fact that we aren't playing much like a team right now is hurting his shots. Perhaps it's just random chance. Why is the first assumption, your guess, is that the coach is such a moron he can't give basic basketball advice? III is highly successful, he's been doing this his whole life, he's got access to two HOF mentors, one of whom is in every practice, a brother who was a coach, three assistant coaches, he;s been lauded by NBA GMs for always prepping players, he's been to a Final Four... ...and your assumption is that he's a EditedING IDIOT. That he has no good reason for his actions; that he's literally either ignoring DSR and not coaching him in any way. How is this the baseline? How is this the most likely situation here? I don't mind if people criticize the coach; it's this criticism without any allowance that the professional basketball coach might have a good reason or might be doing his job but other people might not be OR the competition might be stopping it that utterly baffles me. I bet all those friends enjoyed all the wins between then and now. [/sarcasm]
|
|
lurkerhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by lurkerhoya on Dec 21, 2015 19:27:57 GMT -5
Is it fair to point out that our college team isn't executing at a college level? Kidding... kind of.
To the extent that something like a 1-3-1 would be being installed in a week is problematic. To the extent that incorporating different schemes aren't a fundamental part of your practice routine either by way of instilling defensive principles or as a means of preparing for an upcoming opponent means we are in much bigger trouble than we thought.
I'm not saying which it is, but if this team hasn't been prepared to give any opponent over the course of the season any of several different defensive looks then that should be concerning.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by drquigley on Dec 21, 2015 22:03:31 GMT -5
For what its worth. UNC Ashville just lost to Elon. They hit 3 of 16 threes and 14 of 26 free throws.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 32,083
|
Post by DanMcQ on Dec 21, 2015 22:22:46 GMT -5
To follow up on SF's moron comment, it's entirely possible that this team is YOUNG and going through growing pains, that if one of DSR, Copeland,or Peak is on top of their game the rest of the guys with less experience can't compensate...yet. Paul White could be the guy to pull it together...but he still has a nagging hip injury holding him back. It's too easy to blame stubbornness or coaching stupidity - it's laughable what gets imputed on to 3 by people who have only snippets of watching on TV or at the games yet select traits that fit their agenda.
All that said, it starts on the defensive end - scoring 73 should be fine...but not if you give up 79. It's a problem of execution: some of that is coaching and motivation, but at least 80% of it lays on the players' shoulders.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 21, 2015 22:23:36 GMT -5
Is it fair to point out that our college team isn't executing at a college level? Kidding... kind of. To the extent that something like a 1-3-1 would be being installed in a week is problematic. To the extent that incorporating different schemes aren't a fundamental part of your practice routine either by way of instilling defensive principles or as a means of preparing for an upcoming opponent means we are in much bigger trouble than we thought. I'm not saying which it is, but if this team hasn't been prepared to give any opponent over the course of the season any of several different defensive looks then that should be concerning. How many defenses are required? Let's set the standard ahead of time. Less than 3 and is coaching malpractice?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 21, 2015 23:05:31 GMT -5
I think people are focusing too much on type of defense, rather than executing good defense. It doesn't matter if you do man to man, 2-3, 3-2, 1-3-1, trap, or press if you do not execute it well. For example, against Asheville, DSR and Copeland routinely lost their man who went right by them with minimal effort. Tell me how changing defenses is going to help there? In any defense, you've got to cover your guy at the appropriate time. We haven't been getting it done in any defense, including the much desired press.
|
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,402
|
Post by SaxaCD on Dec 21, 2015 23:59:48 GMT -5
For what its worth. UNC Ashville just lost to Elon. They hit 3 of 16 threes and 14 of 26 free throws. Of course.
|
|
lurkerhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by lurkerhoya on Dec 22, 2015 0:17:05 GMT -5
I dunno about coaching malpractice. I think the only reported cases on the standard of care for coaches are In Re Boeheim and Calhoun v. NCAA, and I don't think they are exactly on point. (A lawyer joke AND a dig at two of our favorite pariahs, admit that you smiled...)
But, it wouldn't seem unreasonable to me to have a trap zone in your arsenal for situations, such as being down double digits, where you need to force the issue and create turnovers. Or having a press to bludgeon a weak ball-handling team into an easy victory in the first 8 minutes. Or a 3-2 zone to occasionally deploy against a small-ball team (which we see regularly enough in BE to make worth a time investment).
Sometimes you have a team performing poorly, and the issue may be a mix of execution and Xs and Os not matching up with personnel. Certain looks and game plans may jive better with certain players insofar as young players may have more success with less thinking to do. "Here's your spot, here's where you go when the ball goes here and here's where you go when the ball goes there, don't overthink yourself into something else." Sometimes young people just need new stimulation to stay motivated and keep things interesting, like practicing a new defense for an hour to stay fresh and mentally focused, and holy cow, they seemed to really click when we tried that.
I would still maintain that after two months of practices and an offseason, that to simply have one man-to-man set, one 2-3 zone set, and no ability to get game-ready in 4 days against a 2-8 team an alternative look that you may want to try and should have already had at least some practice with, is a bit of a failing if it were the case.
EDITED to simply add to what I originally said in this thread. If we come out doing the same old, same old, it's JT3's indictment of the players. My system works, you're not running it right, and I'm not going to change what we run. That's all I meant by accountability in the other thread as well. When does JT3 take a little of the onus on him to say, what is my part to do better to get these guys playing better? If his answer is nothing except the same thing that has lost two games in a row and ask for more effort from a group of players who by no account seem to have thrown in the towel or don't care, then the university may as well set $3 million on fire instead.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Dec 22, 2015 9:28:32 GMT -5
SF, the reason I guess that is the case is because if a coach told you to do Y, and you continue to do X, the coach would give you an earful. JTIII never gives any player an earful during the game. Maybe that is his style. If so, there should be an assistant that fulfills that role. When I see players make mistakes during the games, whether out of lack of effort or execution, I rarely see a coach talk to the player. Once again to Dan's comment, I am a season ticket holder and go to 95% of all home games and I watch about 90% of all televised games.
I never called him an idiot, those are your words. I am saying that after all of the tough losses to inferior competition, III has highlighted the need to go back and review everything. Go back to the drawing board so to speak. Those were his words after FGCU. What has changed? We aren't good at rebounding or defending the 3. We have no ability to run quick sets at the end of games when we are down. Our execution out of time outs is laughable. We still get our asses handed to us by inferior teams. Either it is the kids you are recruiting or the way you are coaching them but one guy is responsible for these things and that is III. When do you start to ever question any aspect of what he is doing?
I would say he is running a clean program and for that he is to be commended but then they took a risk on Josh Smith who by all accounts didn't graduate or show up back on campus after his terrible performance in the NCAA's. That is judgement of ones character and I think III probably prioritized the desperate need for a big over quality of character. Granted mistakes happen in these assessments so I give him a pass for that because for the most part they have brought in really good kids. But I think that alone is not the standard that gets you 2.7mm in cheddar each year. For 2.7mm, you are paid to win the game! I really want to see III get it right but we are also one Jeff Green travelling call against Vandy away from having almost ZERO deep tourney success. You keep highlighting the ones that got away, what about the ones we eeked out. It cuts both ways.
|
|
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 Dec 22, 2015 9:56:22 GMT -5
For what its worth. UNC Ashville just lost to Elon. They hit 3 of 16 threes and 14 of 26 free throws. Well at least you will not hear these 2 things: 1. The Hoyas just lost to a good team. 2. The Hoyas just lost to a team that got hot at the right time for a March Madness run.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 22, 2015 10:35:52 GMT -5
I would say he is running a clean program and for that he is to be commended but then they took a risk on Josh Smith who by all accounts didn't graduate or show up back on campus after his terrible performance in the NCAA's. That is judgement of ones character and I think III probably prioritized the desperate need for a big over quality of character. Granted mistakes happen in these assessments so I give him a pass for that because for the most part they have brought in really good kids. But I think that alone is not the standard that gets you 2.7mm in cheddar each year. For 2.7mm, you are paid to win the game! I really want to see III get it right but we are also one Jeff Green travelling call against Vandy away from having almost ZERO deep tourney success. You keep highlighting the ones that got away, what about the ones we eeked out. It cuts both ways. No, people are not paid a lot of money to just run a clean program. But, John Thompson III has won, kept us in the NCAA tournament most years, and generally kept us in the national conversation. That's the main reason he gets paid well. The real problem that folks here have is that they don't think he's won enough in March. You can fairly criticize the losses this year, but given the massive OOC success Thompson has had over the years, that cannot possibly be a basis for saying that he's not a good coach or that he needs to be replaced. Listen, if the guy was paid $2.8 million a year for losing records and no post-season trips, I would get on board. But, that's simply not the case. And yes, the NCAA tournament is always based on luck. Just as much as we could've missed the Final Four in 2007, we could've made the Sweet 16 in other years (for example, if we weren't playing Stephen Curry in North Carolina in what amounted to an away game in 2008). There's a lot less luck involved in getting to the NCAA tournament every year than actual performance in a one-game elimination tournament.
|
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Dec 22, 2015 10:58:57 GMT -5
I am as perplex as many of you as to the current run of play by the team. One of my perplexities is why III, who has consistently gotten competitive efforts from far more limited teams(notwithstanding his NCAA tourney record) is having so much difficulty getting one of his better teams, personnel wise, going. After some reflection, it occurred to me that with our depth we can for long periods have five players on the court who can score. Consequently players may be too focused on looking for their shots, rather than on making the right basketball play. This selfishness may be a factor in our lack luster rebounding and over all defensive efforts. It is not an unassailable situation. It takes coaching and buy-in by the players. On the coaching front, however, I am not as convinced as some that III is not trying hard enough. Good players present their own unique challenges to a coach. It is difficult, for example, to bench or otherwise reprimand a player for taking an ill-advised shot, if that player was open and it was a shot he was capable of making. It is easy to tell someone like Peak to stop driving the ball into traffic, but when he is one of the few members of the team capable of putting dribble penetration pressure on a team, you have to be careful how your message comes across. Part of what makes a good basketball player is the confidence to put the shot down, when the opportunity presents itself. You don't want to coach away that confidence. III's focus with this group, as I see it, is to convince each that playing team ball will bolster rather than weakened their NBA resumes. Time in a program usually helps resolve many of these challenges, but III is limited in having DSR(a scorer,not a facilitator)as his only true senior, experience wise. I still believe that this team has the personnel to make a deep run in the NCAA tourney. They will need to commit to each other. Each in any given game must, in order to win, be willing to accept and embrace rebounding and defense as his primary duties. Yes, III has a big role in helping to make this happen, but it will be the buy-in from the players that guarantees it. This is all true, but you could have looked at the roster and written pretty much all of this (multiple individual scorers, poor defense and rebounding, subpar passers in the backcourt, need to subjugate individual stats for the team) this past April. It shouldn't have taken losses to Radford and UNC-Asheville for III to figure this out.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 22, 2015 13:30:41 GMT -5
I dunno about coaching malpractice. I think the only reported cases on the standard of care for coaches are In Re Boeheim and Calhoun v. NCAA, and I don't think they are exactly on point. (A lawyer joke AND a dig at two of our favorite pariahs, admit that you smiled...) But, it wouldn't seem unreasonable to me to have a trap zone in your arsenal for situations, such as being down double digits, where you need to force the issue and create turnovers. Or having a press to bludgeon a weak ball-handling team into an easy victory in the first 8 minutes. Or a 3-2 zone to occasionally deploy against a small-ball team (which we see regularly enough in BE to make worth a time investment). Sometimes you have a team performing poorly, and the issue may be a mix of execution and Xs and Os not matching up with personnel. Certain looks and game plans may jive better with certain players insofar as young players may have more success with less thinking to do. "Here's your spot, here's where you go when the ball goes here and here's where you go when the ball goes there, don't overthink yourself into something else." Sometimes young people just need new stimulation to stay motivated and keep things interesting, like practicing a new defense for an hour to stay fresh and mentally focused, and holy cow, they seemed to really click when we tried that. I would still maintain that after two months of practices and an offseason, that to simply have one man-to-man set, one 2-3 zone set, and no ability to get game-ready in 4 days against a 2-8 team an alternative look that you may want to try and should have already had at least some practice with, is a bit of a failing if it were the case. EDITED to simply add to what I originally said in this thread. If we come out doing the same old, same old, it's JT3's indictment of the players. My system works, you're not running it right, and I'm not going to change what we run. That's all I meant by accountability in the other thread as well. When does JT3 take a little of the onus on him to say, what is my part to do better to get these guys playing better? If his answer is nothing except the same thing that has lost two games in a row and ask for more effort from a group of players who by no account seem to have thrown in the towel or don't care, then the university may as well set $3 million on fire instead. I could respond piece by piece, but I will just do on a larger level. 1. We obviously have more than 2 looks. We have a press, we run zone and man (that's three!) and at least in prior years, we've had a 3-2, a match-up zone and others. 2. It's tough to tell how many wrinkles or exactly what we are running now because execution is so shoddy. 3. Execution is clearly the key problem right now. I don't know how you could tell if each defense is actually inappropriate for an opponent or our talent when our players aren't doing much in most games. 4. If you had 2 hours a day, what would you do right now with the team if you were III? Add another zone to their list? Or work on their footwork, work on knowing where they are supposed to be in the zone, how to handle picks, communication on switching, recognizing when help is needed, and running their asses off so they will work. People keep saying III doesn't CHANGE anything. But the most important changes he needs to teach right now is footwork, teamwork, positioning, not jumping at headfakes and effort. Not whether we run a 1-3-1 or not. Some of these things require habit forming and muscle memory -- you don't want people thinking -- you need them reacting. And you need them trying.
|
|