DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 8, 2020 11:15:22 GMT -5
My father is a Villanova alum. Every year when Nova plays the Hoyas in DC, he comes to the game with me. He gets invited to the Villanova alumni club pre-game event. He doesn't always go, but you know who's always there? Jay Wright. He pops in for 5 minutes an hour before the game, says a few words, thanks everyone for their support, and scurries back to the locker room. He's done it when his team was good, and he's done it when his team was bad. These things matter to fans. I hope that Patrick understands that. This is a culture issue which Patrick (and for that matter, his two immediate successors) have chosen not to change. At one point in the 1970's, John Thompson would stop into the Hoop Club lounge at McDonough when the locker room was a 30 second walk around the corner. That ended with the move to Capital Centre and the subsequent walls that were erected within the program. Capital One Arena does not provide the Hoop Club any dedicated meeting space and the Hoop Club is considerably less visible than it once was, so the staff may not see the need to invest time in it. Yes, it wouldn't bring the gameday planning to a halt if Ewing or one of the assistants spent 5 or 10 minutes before a game to say hello and thanks for stopping by, but if Ewing hasn't built a framework for outreach after three years, it's not likely in the fourth. Jay Wright is definitely playing the long game with his approach. When the plans came together for the renovation of the DuPont Pavilion, he had the relationships in place, not relying on development officers to make the big "ask". When Matt Doherty was at SMU in the midst of a fundraising campaign to renovate Moody Coliseum, he made a point of coming out a few minutes early during warm-ups, walking around to every court level seat and shake their hand and say a few words to them before the game. It didn't keep his job, of course, but a handshake today could be a gift somewhere down the road. For good or bad, that's not the Georgetown Way.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 8, 2020 12:08:33 GMT -5
Ewing should pick his own staff. He's the coach. To me, the more dismaying thing is that - at least for now - it appears that Ewing has chosen not to shake up the staff despite the troubles the team has had with that staff in place. When your recruiting has hit some snags and your defense has been putrid, with seemingly no ability to fix it, you would think a change would be warranted.
Perhaps the plan is to use the current staff and enact changes. To me, the defense is probably the biggest problem that needs to be fixed, and while Ewing clearly gets that the defense has been bad, I do not see any indication that any measures are being taken to improve it. Last year, we heard a lot about guys needing to defend better, play better individual defense, etc., but there was no indication that happened. Except for the occasional ineffective zone, we got the same man to man defense, defended pick and rolls with the hard hedge, etc. Plus, arguably we lose our two best defenders in Mosely and Allen. So what's the plan?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Jun 8, 2020 12:09:09 GMT -5
My father is a Villanova alum. Every year when Nova plays the Hoyas in DC, he comes to the game with me. He gets invited to the Villanova alumni club pre-game event. He doesn't always go, but you know who's always there? Jay Wright. He pops in for 5 minutes an hour before the game, says a few words, thanks everyone for their support, and scurries back to the locker room. He's done it when his team was good, and he's done it when his team was bad. These things matter to fans. I hope that Patrick understands that. This is a culture issue which Patrick (and for that matter, his two immediate successors) have chosen not to change. At one point in the 1970's, John Thompson would stop into the Hoop Club lounge at McDonough when the locker room was a 30 second walk around the corner. That ended with the move to Capital Centre and the subsequent walls that were erected within the program. Capital One Arena does not provide the Hoop Club any dedicated meeting space and the Hoop Club is considerably less visible than it once was, so the staff may not see the need to invest time in it. Yes, it wouldn't bring the gameday planning to a halt if Ewing or one of the assistants spent 5 or 10 minutes before a game to say hello and thanks for stopping by, but if Ewing hasn't built a framework for outreach after three years, it's not likely in the fourth. Jay Wright is definitely playing the long game with his approach. When the plans came together for the renovation of the DuPont Pavilion, he had the relationships in place, not relying on development officers to make the big "ask". When Matt Doherty was at SMU in the midst of a fundraising campaign to renovate Moody Coliseum, he made a point of coming out a few minutes early during warm-ups, walking around to every court level seat and shake their hand and say a few words to them before the game. It didn't keep his job, of course, but a handshake today could be a gift somewhere down the road. For good or bad, that's not the Georgetown Way. To me, this is about the administration not requiring that it be done. PE isn't the person sending out Hoya Hoop club information or season ticket information or soliciting for donations. I would assume most of these functions have the buy-in from the administration so if that's the case they should require the coaches that are paid high salaries to do certain goodwill gestures for the folks who support the team... It seems nuts that a program struggling to hold onto a shrinking fan base leaves it up to the coach whether or not the fans are given a few minutes during the season... Where's the sense of urgency from anyone associated with the program?
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Jun 8, 2020 12:14:31 GMT -5
Ewing should pick his own staff. He's the coach. To me, the more dismaying thing is that - at least for now - it appears that Ewing has chosen not to shake up the staff despite the troubles the team has had with that staff in place. When your recruiting has hit some snags and your defense has been putrid, with seemingly no ability to fix it, you would think a change would be warranted. Perhaps the plan is to use the current staff and enact changes. To me, the defense is probably the biggest problem that needs to be fixed, and while Ewing clearly gets that the defense has been bad, I do not see any indication that any measures are being taken to improve it. Last year, we heard a lot about guys needing to defend better, play better individual defense, etc., but there was no indication that happened. Except for the occasional ineffective zone, we got the same man to man defense, defended pick and rolls with the hard hedge, etc. Plus, arguably we lose our two best defenders in Mosely and Allen. So what's the plan? I wonder if losing 3 of our top 4 defenders in the middle of the season and having to abandon and reconstruct the defensive scheme had anything to do with it? Also, we’re replacing Mosely and Allen (slightly above average defenders AT BEST) with Harris, Harris, Beard, and Berger in the back court. I’m guessing the staff is planning on having some defenders emerge from that group. Every team loses core pieces every year. Your analysis isn’t exactly a logical one. We also lose some of our poorer defenders too, so what exactly is your point? Somehow the only impact will be the loss felt from graduating seniors who are decent defenders (while ignoring the two who were average at best) without there being any counterbalancing or redistribution/replacement of roles whatsoever? As bad as some claim we were through the first 7 games (claim because they can’t analyze the adjusted performance in the scheme of tinkering with the new roles/pieces), we would have lost to MSM and at least one other mid major had it not been for our defense. Our offense was trash through those first 7 games. Penn St wasn’t a bad defensive effort other than the first 3 minutes where the one dude hit like three legit heat checks. Our defense hasn’t been good under Ewing I get people who can only see that, but our defense in year 3 was different than in year 1 and 2 and was primed to actually be a force until we lost our best and most versatile defenders. If anything, Ewing just needs to give minutes to those who want to lock in on that end. We have more reported defenders in this incoming class than we’ve had amongst all of Ewing’s previous recruits. I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far. Time will tell how it all comes together though, but I still don’t understand how people don’t get that when you unexpectedly lose 1/3 of your roster (and really like 50% of your contributors) mid season that is a huge blow and pretty unprecedented in the modern era and more than anything else the lack of bodies prevents you from doing basic things like practice, let alone go to war for a full 40 mins and be at your best (you have to be at your best every night to win in the BE, not the case in other leagues). Explaining the situation isn’t excusing it, it’s shining some light on reality. Point being, I would have expected the team and our offense and defense to be much worse with so few bodies. To some of your points the staff spent the off-season implementing changes to the defense only to see all that work walk out the door by December. They had to hit the reset button, but some of you act as if the expectations for how the season played out shouldn't have changed. Coming from someone who actually knows what playing with dead legs feels like and the will/fortitude it takes to overcome that, this line of thinking I’m responding to really sells the situation of our part season wayyyyyyyyyy short. It also has to do with more than just what’s happening on the court. Patience is a virtue.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 8, 2020 12:16:28 GMT -5
To me, this is about the administration not requiring that it be done. Or, Jack not wanting to step on JT2’s toes.
|
|
HoyaDr
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 616
|
Post by HoyaDr on Jun 8, 2020 12:27:43 GMT -5
Not sure if this has been posted yet but wanted to share with everybody here. I think this video highlights what is lost in today's game- fundamentals. Mike Miller is toasting DJ Jeffries with fundamentals and basically no athleticism. I mean he's 40, he's wearing a wedding ring and pants in the video and it's no competition. I think Ewing is trying to infuse fundamentals back into these young college players. All these highly ranked recruits have athleticism but barely any fundamentals and they are ranked as if they will be taught fundamentals in college. But we all know that doesn't happen at a lot of programs. The ones that do have fundamentals but no athleticism rarely get ranked unless they have something else going for them like size. My point is that rankings don't mean squat if theres no fundamentals. Just because Ewing isn't getting highly ranked recruits doesn't mean that he can't get kids that will result in a fundamentally sound and good team. Now only if we could get some younger former NBA/pro talent on our bench as assistant coaches. Maybe Wright or Freeman, or even Clark?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Jun 8, 2020 12:44:31 GMT -5
To me, this is about the administration not requiring that it be done. Or, Jack not wanting to step on JT2’s toes. Not sure why JT2 would care if PE met with season ticket holders for a few minutes before home games, I can't see that possibility at all...
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Jun 8, 2020 13:24:14 GMT -5
Ewing should pick his own staff. He's the coach. To me, the more dismaying thing is that - at least for now - it appears that Ewing has chosen not to shake up the staff despite the troubles the team has had with that staff in place. When your recruiting has hit some snags and your defense has been putrid, with seemingly no ability to fix it, you would think a change would be warranted. Perhaps the plan is to use the current staff and enact changes. To me, the defense is probably the biggest problem that needs to be fixed, and while Ewing clearly gets that the defense has been bad, I do not see any indication that any measures are being taken to improve it. Last year, we heard a lot about guys needing to defend better, play better individual defense, etc., but there was no indication that happened. Except for the occasional ineffective zone, we got the same man to man defense, defended pick and rolls with the hard hedge, etc. Plus, arguably we lose our two best defenders in Mosely and Allen. So what's the plan? I wonder if losing 3 of our top 4 defenders in the middle of the season and having to abandon and reconstruct the defensive scheme had anything to do with it?Also, we’re replacing Mosely and Allen (slightly above average defenders AT BEST) with Harris, Harris, Beard, and Berger in the back court. I’m guessing the staff is planning on having some defenders emerge from that group. Every team loses core pieces every year. Your analysis isn’t exactly a logical one. We also lose some of our poorer defenders too, so what exactly is your point? Somehow the only impact will be the loss felt from graduating seniors who are decent defenders (while ignoring the two who were average at best) without there being any counterbalancing or redistribution/replacement of roles whatsoever? As bad as some claim we were through the first 7 games (claim because they can’t analyze the adjusted performance in the scheme of tinkering with the new roles/pieces), we would have lost to MSM and at least one other mid major had it not been for our defense. Our offense was trash through those first 7 games. Penn St wasn’t a bad defensive effort other than the first 3 minutes where the one dude hit like three legit heat checks. Our defense hasn’t been good under Ewing I get people who can only see that, but our defense in year 3 was different than in year 1 and 2 and was primed to actually be a force until we lost our best and most versatile defenders. If anything, Ewing just needs to give minutes to those who want to lock in on that end. We have more reported defenders in this incoming class than we’ve had amongst all of Ewing’s previous recruits. I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far. Time will tell how it all comes together though, but I still don’t understand how people don’t get that when you unexpectedly lose 1/3 of your roster (and really like 50% of your contributors) mid season that is a huge blow and pretty unprecedented in the modern era and more than anything else the lack of bodies prevents you from doing basic things like practice, let alone go to war for a full 40 mins and be at your best (you have to be at your best every night to win in the BE, not the case in other leagues). Explaining the situation isn’t excusing it, it’s shining some light on reality. Point being, I would have expected the team and our offense and defense to be much worse with so few bodies. To some of your points the staff spent the off-season implementing changes to the defense only to see all that work walk out the door by December. They had to hit the reset button, but some of you act as if the expectations for how the season played out shouldn't have changed. Coming from someone who actually knows what playing with dead legs feels like and the will/fortitude it takes to overcome that, this line of thinking I’m responding to really sells the situation of our part season wayyyyyyyyyy short. It also has to do with more than just what’s happening on the court. Patience is a virtue. LeBlanc was a huge defensive loss. But saying anyone else that was lost was even above average on that end is crazy. And Allen was an elite defender in the season before he came to DC. Mosely was a very good defender, as he was always in the right spot. He made some huge plays on that end and having to guard the best player every night, while on dead legs and saying he's average is really selling him short. Saying that they were just "slightly above average defenders AT BEST" is complete nonsense. And the reason we almost lost to the Mount was because of our defense. And if you don't believe me, take it from Patrick Ewing who after that game said "We talked about picking it up. It starts with individual defense and then also our team defense. Tonight in the first half, it was nonexistent." WaPo Part of Casual Links has it. Here's another quote from that game from 247 which said "The defense was a major issue, as the Mountaineers put Georgetown’s big men in the pick-and-roll all night long, with great success, leading to open looks at the rim and from three-point range." These issues (granted first game rustiness, but it's also MSM so it shouldn't ever be that bad) were there all season long. I think the defensive issues are mostly schematic. Which is why I can't get behind the "staff are planning on having defenders emerge" narrative. I think they have to change quite a bit. The hard hedge doesn't work with how we run it, three-point shooters get open so easily (size has very little factor in this, just look at Arkansas last season). I don't think our defense was even decent until the Texas game where granted, they didn't have many shooters which lined up well with our philosophy, the team played a very good defensive game. Aside from Coleman making everything, they couldn't do much at all. Aside from that Texas game, the defense was pretty bad all season. Penn State shot 13/29 from three in our game against them. Even if one dude hit three heat checks (Jones in the first five minutes is the only thing that I can come up with) allowing them to shoot 10/26 from three is still bad. I wouldn't consider his shots heat checks from what I remember, but I'm also not going to watch that game back (even if I can find it) so I'd be willing to concede that. Our offense and defense were horrible in that game. Here's a quote from Ewing after that game (same WaPo casual hoya thing) "Well, sometimes I’m not seeing what I want to in practice, but it starts individually. You have to be able to stop your guy, at least make him work. And sometimes we’re not getting that done, or four guys may do it and one may not, or three may do it and two may not. So we have to do a much better job of one, guarding our man, and then if we get beat, the help has to be there. Right now we’re not getting that done." Our defense was consistent with and without our guys. Against Central Arkansas, our defense was not good. It wasn't good before the defections and it wasn't good after, either. Losing the guys clearly hurt. I mean having to have guys like Malinowski come into practice is crazy. And seeing how much better the team was on long rest proved that. Credit to Allen, Mosely, Blair, and Pickett for fighting through that every night. Playing 40min a game is really hard, especially at the pace we were trying to. But, I think part of the reason we played at that pace was that the team couldn't defend for 30sec at a time to get a stop and control the tempo. Teams would abuse the hard hedge, or beat us since we rotated too much and give up an open three. I also don't think any of the newcomers are defensive-minded/elite defenders. I think the staff is going to have to find a scheme which works. So, I can't buy the narrative that this team will have the best defense, by far. I don't think they'll have the best defense either. I'd love to be wrong, but I just can't buy into it.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 8, 2020 13:26:15 GMT -5
Or, Jack not wanting to step on JT2’s toes. Not sure why JT2 would care if PE met with season ticket holders for a few minutes before home games, I can't see that possibility at all... He has established program policy since 1972. Hopefully Pat sees the benefit like he did when he got the job and met with students and other fans.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jun 8, 2020 15:24:39 GMT -5
I wonder if losing 3 of our top 4 defenders in the middle of the season and having to abandon and reconstruct the defensive scheme had anything to do with it? Also, we’re replacing Mosely and Allen (slightly above average defenders AT BEST) with Harris, Harris, Beard, and Berger in the back court. I’m guessing the staff is planning on having some defenders emerge from that group. Every team loses core pieces every year. Your analysis isn’t exactly a logical one. We also lose some of our poorer defenders too, so what exactly is your point? Somehow the only impact will be the loss felt from graduating seniors who are decent defenders (while ignoring the two who were average at best) without there being any counterbalancing or redistribution/replacement of roles whatsoever? As bad as some claim we were through the first 7 games (claim because they can’t analyze the adjusted performance in the scheme of tinkering with the new roles/pieces), we would have lost to MSM and at least one other mid major had it not been for our defense. Our offense was trash through those first 7 games. Penn St wasn’t a bad defensive effort other than the first 3 minutes where the one dude hit like three legit heat checks. Our defense hasn’t been good under Ewing I get people who can only see that, but our defense in year 3 was different than in year 1 and 2 and was primed to actually be a force until we lost our best and most versatile defenders. If anything, Ewing just needs to give minutes to those who want to lock in on that end. We have more reported defenders in this incoming class than we’ve had amongst all of Ewing’s previous recruits. I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far. Time will tell how it all comes together though, but I still don’t understand how people don’t get that when you unexpectedly lose 1/3 of your roster (and really like 50% of your contributors) mid season that is a huge blow and pretty unprecedented in the modern era and more than anything else the lack of bodies prevents you from doing basic things like practice, let alone go to war for a full 40 mins and be at your best (you have to be at your best every night to win in the BE, not the case in other leagues). Explaining the situation isn’t excusing it, it’s shining some light on reality. Point being, I would have expected the team and our offense and defense to be much worse with so few bodies. To some of your points the staff spent the off-season implementing changes to the defense only to see all that work walk out the door by December. They had to hit the reset button, but some of you act as if the expectations for how the season played out shouldn't have changed. Coming from someone who actually knows what playing with dead legs feels like and the will/fortitude it takes to overcome that, this line of thinking I’m responding to really sells the situation of our part season wayyyyyyyyyy short. It also has to do with more than just what’s happening on the court. Patience is a virtue. A few things in response to your post: (1) Our defense has never been good under Ewing. It was not good in Year 1 or Year 2. It was not good last year either, even before we lost any players. You want to talk about logic? If there is literally no indication of Ewing's team putting out a good defense, or even improved defense, why would you think that, without any changes, and a roster that-at least on paper-is not as good as the one we started with in 2019, that we would improve? I admire your optimism, but the "logic" would say that there was something wrong with the previous approach. (2) "I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far." This is not a high bar to cross, but I hope you are right. (3) On your last point, you are right that losing a normal sized roster is abnormal, a problem, and likely hurt the team. In fact, I think even if we had McClung and Yurtseven healthy the whole year we might have squeaked out a few more wins. That being said, I think there are a few things that undermine your point: (a) Small sample, but even with the full roster, our defense was not good. (b) Ewing's attempt at using the press/larger substitutions did not succeed. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate that our defense would have been better with a full roster. The real question is, how much better? Under Ewing, our defense has been ranked on KenPom 119, 133, 125. Even if we had kept the full roster, and had a defense of 80 or 90, while an improvement, that would have still been bad. When virtually every other top 6 conference team has a better defense than us, it's more than just the roster or players. There are lot of really mediocre or bad teams that still have better defenses than us. My point being, even if you are right (and you may be) that our defense would have been better with the full roster, the real question is, how much? 20 spots? Well, if so, that's still not good. But, with the exception of Alexander and Gardner our roster going into 2019 was largely the same as the previous year (I view Govan and Yurtseven as largely interchangeable for these purposes), and it did not improve or show signs of improvement. (4) I don't see the basis for your argument that we would have lost to Mount Saint Mary's without a good defense. This was our defense with the full roster: - MSM: We scored 81 points, and allowed them to score 68. I don't see how the defense won this one? Maybe your memory is thinking of another game. We allowed 0.94 PPP on defense, not a great number against a 250 level opponent. - Central Arkansas: We scored 89 points, and allowed them to score 79. We allowed 0.95 PPP on defense, not a great number against a 267 level opponent. - Penn State: We allowed 1.01 points per possession, which is not good. Sure, our offense was particularly horrid but our defense was bad too. - Georgia State: We allowed 1.06 points per possession, which is terrible. We won this one with offense. - Texas: Okay, this was one of our better games. We allowed 0.97 PPP on defense, nothing to write home about, but our offense was great. We won 82-66. - Duke: We allowed 1.00 points per possession. Against one of the best teams this is fine. Our offense wasn't good. - UNC Greensboro: We lost this one 65-61. Our defense allowed 0.93 points per possesion, not bad, but our offense was horrible. So those are the seven games with the full roster. I would say in that in four of them, our defense was terrible (MSM, Central Arkansas, Penn State, Georgia State). I would say it was okay against Texas and Greensboro, and somewhere in between against Duke only because Duke is a good team. Your argument above fits a lot better on offense. The team clearly improved after we lost Akinjo and LeBlanc on the offensive end. Rock, I admire your optimistic approach and strong efforts to spin our season last year better than it was in light of the transfers (while essentially giving the program a pass on those transfers), but the fact is we stunk last year, and if Ewing wants to improve he needs to get better on the defensive end. There will always be arguments to be made that "if" this happened and "if" that happened, we might have been better. But, the only facts we have are what happens on the court. And so far, it hasn't been good on the defensive end.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,352
|
Post by daveg023 on Jun 8, 2020 16:56:45 GMT -5
The simple fact is Ewing’s first 3 years here we had statistically speaking the worst three seasons of defensive efficiency in Georgetown history since the “metric era” began. That is not a sample size of 20 games post-defections, but almost 90 full games.
We have had guys that are above average defenders during this time too, so I don’t view this as a talent problem. And the fact of the matter is we have less talent (albeit greater depth) next year than we’ve had in the prior 3 seasons. Not sure I expect the defense to improve unless the scheme changes. Our inability to guard the 3 point line has been especially troubling. To me that’s all about scheme, preaching not over helping, rotating correctly, etc.
I don’t think Nova or PC have had elite defenders always, but their scheme and discipline have been consistently excellent, and thus their level of play has remained high as their rosters have turned over. Given Ewing’s playing career, I actually thought being a defensively adept team would have been the last thing to worry about. In reality, we’ve actually been much more efficient on the offensive end.
The one sliver of hope is that it seems like with the right scheme and coaching, defense can improve rather quickly. Whether that comes in the form of a new assistant’s philosophy or Patrick just starting over on how he wants to play, it could change quickly. But if we see the same man to man, hard hedging style next year, it would be irrational to expect better results just because we are hoping for it.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 8, 2020 17:23:53 GMT -5
I wonder if losing 3 of our top 4 defenders in the middle of the season and having to abandon and reconstruct the defensive scheme had anything to do with it? Also, we’re replacing Mosely and Allen (slightly above average defenders AT BEST) with Harris, Harris, Beard, and Berger in the back court. I’m guessing the staff is planning on having some defenders emerge from that group. Every team loses core pieces every year. Your analysis isn’t exactly a logical one. We also lose some of our poorer defenders too, so what exactly is your point? Somehow the only impact will be the loss felt from graduating seniors who are decent defenders (while ignoring the two who were average at best) without there being any counterbalancing or redistribution/replacement of roles whatsoever? As bad as some claim we were through the first 7 games (claim because they can’t analyze the adjusted performance in the scheme of tinkering with the new roles/pieces), we would have lost to MSM and at least one other mid major had it not been for our defense. Our offense was trash through those first 7 games. Penn St wasn’t a bad defensive effort other than the first 3 minutes where the one dude hit like three legit heat checks. Our defense hasn’t been good under Ewing I get people who can only see that, but our defense in year 3 was different than in year 1 and 2 and was primed to actually be a force until we lost our best and most versatile defenders. If anything, Ewing just needs to give minutes to those who want to lock in on that end. We have more reported defenders in this incoming class than we’ve had amongst all of Ewing’s previous recruits. I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far. Time will tell how it all comes together though, but I still don’t understand how people don’t get that when you unexpectedly lose 1/3 of your roster (and really like 50% of your contributors) mid season that is a huge blow and pretty unprecedented in the modern era and more than anything else the lack of bodies prevents you from doing basic things like practice, let alone go to war for a full 40 mins and be at your best (you have to be at your best every night to win in the BE, not the case in other leagues). Explaining the situation isn’t excusing it, it’s shining some light on reality. Point being, I would have expected the team and our offense and defense to be much worse with so few bodies. To some of your points the staff spent the off-season implementing changes to the defense only to see all that work walk out the door by December. They had to hit the reset button, but some of you act as if the expectations for how the season played out shouldn't have changed. Coming from someone who actually knows what playing with dead legs feels like and the will/fortitude it takes to overcome that, this line of thinking I’m responding to really sells the situation of our part season wayyyyyyyyyy short. It also has to do with more than just what’s happening on the court. Patience is a virtue. A few things in response to your post: (1) Our defense has never been good under Ewing. It was not good in Year 1 or Year 2. It was not good last year either, even before we lost any players. You want to talk about logic? If there is literally no indication of Ewing's team putting out a good defense, or even improved defense, why would you think that, without any changes, and a roster that-at least on paper-is not as good as the one we started with in 2019, that we would improve? I admire your optimism, but the "logic" would say that there was something wrong with the previous approach. (2) "I’d put my money on this team having the best defense of the bunch, by far." This is not a high bar to cross, but I hope you are right. (3) On your last point, you are right that losing a normal sized roster is abnormal, a problem, and likely hurt the team. In fact, I think even if we had McClung and Yurtseven healthy the whole year we might have squeaked out a few more wins. That being said, I think there are a few things that undermine your point: (a) Small sample, but even with the full roster, our defense was not good. (b) Ewing's attempt at using the press/larger substitutions did not succeed. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate that our defense would have been better with a full roster. The real question is, how much better? Under Ewing, our defense has been ranked on KenPom 119, 133, 125. Even if we had kept the full roster, and had a defense of 80 or 90, while an improvement, that would have still been bad. When virtually every other top 6 conference team has a better defense than us, it's more than just the roster or players. There are lot of really mediocre or bad teams that still have better defenses than us. My point being, even if you are right (and you may be) that our defense would have been better with the full roster, the real question is, how much? 20 spots? Well, if so, that's still not good. But, with the exception of Alexander and Gardner our roster going into 2019 was largely the same as the previous year (I view Govan and Yurtseven as largely interchangeable for these purposes), and it did not improve or show signs of improvement. (4) I don't see the basis for your argument that we would have lost to Mount Saint Mary's without a good defense. This was our defense with the full roster: - MSM: We scored 81 points, and allowed them to score 68. I don't see how the defense won this one? Maybe your memory is thinking of another game. We allowed 0.94 PPP on defense, not a great number against a 250 level opponent. - Central Arkansas: We scored 89 points, and allowed them to score 79. We allowed 0.95 PPP on defense, not a great number against a 267 level opponent. - Penn State: We allowed 1.01 points per possession, which is not good. Sure, our offense was particularly horrid but our defense was bad too. - Georgia State: We allowed 1.06 points per possession, which is terrible. We won this one with offense. - Texas: Okay, this was one of our better games. We allowed 0.97 PPP on defense, nothing to write home about, but our offense was great. We won 82-66. - Duke: We allowed 1.00 points per possession. Against one of the best teams this is fine. Our offense wasn't good. - UNC Greensboro: We lost this one 65-61. Our defense allowed 0.93 points per possesion, not bad, but our offense was horrible. So those are the seven games with the full roster. I would say in that in four of them, our defense was terrible (MSM, Central Arkansas, Penn State, Georgia State). I would say it was okay against Texas and Greensboro, and somewhere in between against Duke only because Duke is a good team. Your argument above fits a lot better on offense. The team clearly improved after we lost Akinjo and LeBlanc on the offensive end. Rock, I admire your optimistic approach and strong efforts to spin our season last year better than it was in light of the transfers (while essentially giving the program a pass on those transfers), but the fact is we stunk last year, and if Ewing wants to improve he needs to get better on the defensive end. There will always be arguments to be made that "if" this happened and "if" that happened, we might have been better. But, the only facts we have are what happens on the court. And so far, it hasn't been good on the defensive end. 2003, thanks for taking the time to research and write your thorough analysis using numbers and facts.
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,102
|
Post by hoyas315 on Jun 8, 2020 18:40:19 GMT -5
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Jun 8, 2020 18:46:27 GMT -5
Yeah I just saw that too... That really hurt. Like, it's one thing when it's said here but I mean to hear actual prospects say it really hurt.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,135
|
Post by RBHoya on Jun 8, 2020 19:11:40 GMT -5
Shots fired. Maybe if his former rival/now teammate hadn't jilted us we'd have a little more area momentum There's definitely a chicken/egg component too. I'd love us to dominate local recruiting, but it's hard to do that when so many top kids in the area are so keen on running off to the ACC, Michigan, etc. We recruited Timberlake and Williams pretty hard but they had other ideas in mind. It's a nice hypothetical to say "what if one school could keep all the local talent?" and start dreaming up what the lineup could look like, but the reality is that the Anthony Harrises and the Jeremy Roaches and the Trevor Keels of the world are going to jump on that more high profile offer when it comes, and once they do, the "local dream team" idea looks less appetizing to the next tier of guys too. We do need to do something to turn local recruiting around though. Our image with local recruits is as bad as its been in a long time, and anyone who can't see that or makes excuses for it is in denial. Whatever we're doing, we need to try something different--trying some different assistants being the most obvious option. Even if it's just cosmetic, a token gesture to show local players that they are important to us, it would be a step in the right direction. Right now we give off the impression that we don't care that much about the area, as Dickinson's tweet indicates. My preference would be to move Orr to a special assistant/non-recruiting advisory role to continue to guide Patrick on running the program, part ways with Waheed, and get the two best local recruiters you can find. If one of those is a guy in his late 20s/early 30s who doesn't have an extensive resume but has energy, connections and a grasp of modern recruiting (ie. social media), that's fine. We can stand a roll of the dice on 1 of the 3 recruiting assistants. Something has to give though. Some of the guys we've landed may turn into nice players but this program isn't going to get where we want it to go with Orr landing 3rd tier guys from Big Ten country and Kirby pulling 3rd tier guys from SEC territory.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Jun 8, 2020 20:19:31 GMT -5
Yeah I just saw that too... That really hurt. Like, it's one thing when it's said here but I mean to hear actual prospects say it really hurt. Even when it's said here some people don;t believe it. There is always a rebuttal that those saying it have no idea what they are talking about. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
LCPolo18
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,406
|
Post by LCPolo18 on Jun 12, 2020 15:05:47 GMT -5
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,102
|
Post by hoyas315 on Jun 12, 2020 17:14:25 GMT -5
Ewing needs to use his experiences coupled with current events to relate to kids. Definitely has an advantage over others that can’t relate.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jun 12, 2020 20:19:00 GMT -5
My dad used to explode with every story of what Ewing had to endure from ignorant fans of opposing teams. Big John’s handling of that situation made him a hero in our house.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,331
|
Post by tashoya on Jun 12, 2020 20:46:38 GMT -5
Ewing needs to use his experiences coupled with current events to relate to kids. Definitely has an advantage over others that can’t relate. I agree but, in this particular case, I care FAR less about the basketball side of it. Considering Patrick's journey and the part of that journey that he shared with Big John, I think it's a huge opportunity for Patrick to use his platform to share his perspectives. He might be able to do some good and it's a natural path for the head coach of the Georgetown Men's Basketball to boot. I know that we debate a lot here about Big John's continued influence (or lack thereof) but, at this particular time especially, I'm very grateful that his is a voice that's still part of the conversation at Georgetown with regard to basketball but, even more, within the University itself.
|
|