|
Post by BeantownHoya on Jan 21, 2020 16:16:12 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin...
During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love.
In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it.
He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Jan 21, 2020 16:34:32 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. I think it is pretty impossible to extrapolate based on the 20 seconds you see of player-coach in-game interaction every week or so. If you attend the games you get a little more, but not much. Certainly not enough to make general conclusions.
|
|
HoyaDr
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 616
|
Post by HoyaDr on Jan 21, 2020 16:35:05 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. When we are playing well and on a scoring a run, when the other team takes a timeout you can clearly see Ewing clapping as his team returns to the bench, saying good job, slapping his players' butts. I think the "inside the huddle" cameras mostly capture him giving tough love.
|
|
Eurostar
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by Eurostar on Jan 21, 2020 20:55:35 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. I have been trying to turn a blind eye to this for the last few years, but I agree and glad someone else posted it. I hear a lot of yelling and F bombs from coach to the player's faces. Need to match that with a few atta-boys. If I were a player, I would take more to the Jay Wright style of "teaching" as opposed to the more old school style of "hard coaching" and yelling. You can be a hard coach and expect a lot from your players without continually yelling at them and dropping F bombs.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 21, 2020 21:36:38 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. I have been trying to turn a blind eye to this for the last few years, but I agree and glad someone else posted it. I hear a lot of yelling and F bombs from coach to the player's faces. Need to match that with a few atta-boys. If I were a player, I would take more to the Jay Wright style of "teaching" as opposed to the more old school style of "hard coaching" and yelling. You can be a hard coach and expect a lot from your players without continually yelling at them and dropping F bombs. Same concern but hope that it is just select glimpses from broadcast. When we were at the providence game last year it appeared that Ewing was all tough love and Orr was the more positive influence.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 21, 2020 21:45:43 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. Did you already forget that III would just say nonsense during the TV lookin in because he knew the camera's were on him. Those lookin's are all for show. III would do the real coaching and strategy after the camera's were turned off.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 21:46:49 GMT -5
Not sure where else to put this as it is more about Ewing's coaching then his approach but here seems the most appropriate...and I am sure I will get blasted for this and told to get some thick skin... During every game when they go inside the huddle and show Ewing talking to the players it always feels like their being read the riot act. Maybe as a TV viewer that is all I am shown because that is considered appealing to a TV audience but not once have I seen him praise the team. Look I am all for tough love. That was how I was coached and I appreciated it. However everything feels tough with no love. In comparison, I believe it was Jay Wright they showed in the huddle during our game against them and he said something to the effect..."Guys you did "this" and "this" well but you continue to do "this" and were going to get killed". I am obviously paraphrasing but I find that a much more effective approach then being torn down every time. Maybe that is not what it's like in person and I get the guy is intense and I know it's just natural (as a coach myself) to harp on the bad versus the good but I don't think there is anything wrong w/throwing these kids a bone sometimes when they deserve it. He is very complementary after a game, I certainly give him that but feels like in the heat of the battle that never happens. Yes I know they don't need to be coddled, yes I know they are grown men to some degree but a "good job" here and there never hurt anyone. Again maybe it's not like that in person. I have been trying to turn a blind eye to this for the last few years, but I agree and glad someone else posted it. I hear a lot of yelling and F bombs from coach to the player's faces. Need to match that with a few atta-boys. If I were a player, I would take more to the Jay Wright style of "teaching" as opposed to the more old school style of "hard coaching" and yelling. You can be a hard coach and expect a lot from your players without continually yelling at them and dropping F bombs. Watching games when players come out they also get the positive kudos and low five from Patrick. He gets to yelling when the player is making the same mistake over and over, or does a "have you done that in practice?" moment. He does both. Also Jay Wright also gets really feisty with his players when things are tense or they do dumb things.
|
|
LCPolo18
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,406
|
Post by LCPolo18 on Jan 23, 2020 1:02:35 GMT -5
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,496
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 23, 2020 6:25:17 GMT -5
Legendary Coach of historic program in major American City.
Succeeded by son
Falls into obscurity
DePaul or Georgetown?
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Jan 23, 2020 7:48:30 GMT -5
Those shot charts show nothing about how to win, simply that the game is evolving overall. -- 2 of the top 4 teams in 3FGA didn't make the NBA playoffs last year. The bottom 3 all did. -- None of the top 10 KenPom offenses are even in the top 120 in 3FGA/Total FGA. Only 2 are in the top 200. -- To borrow from other sports... Jimmy G and the 49ers passed the ball just 8 times on Sunday and dominated. Compare that to passing trends of the last 30 years. As for us (currently 330 of 353 in 3FGA/FGA)... is that a problem? I don't see why it would be - we're 19th overall in total offense. Other major conference teams are in the same ballpark as us in that category (Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, WVU) and Top 25 Rutgers is one spot below us. We shoot the three well - 66th in 3FGP at 35.9%. But we also shoot it well from inside the arc -- just above 50%. That's a bit of an edge in Effective FG% for our 3-point shooting which is genuinely negated by the positives (offensive rebounding, increased foul shot attempts, opponent fouls, etc) of getting the ball inside. Quick & dirty analysis suggests we're pretty efficient offensively vis a vis 3s vs 2s. If you're the Warriors and you can shoot it at a 39/40 percent clip from 3, then you do... And you win titles... And everybody copies you. This year, the Lakers & Nuggets are 1st & 2nd in the Western Conference standings, and 4th & 3rd in least total 3FGA. Perhaps we're due for another correction. I’m not going to quibble with a lot of this because most of it makes sense. This is a good offensive team anyway you slice it. We’re losing games on defense not offense. The one comment I will make is that not all 2s are created equal. There’s a reason the mid range jumper has completely disappeared from the NBA. I watch a fair amount of college basketball and I don’t think I’ve seen another team take as many long, contested, difficult mid-range jumpers as we do. They’re bad, inefficient shots and clearly the guys aren’t being coached not to do it because they keep doing it. It’s very frustrating. But like I said, I’m not implying that our offense is broken or anything, just a small quibble with part of the approach. The defense is completely broken for multiple reasons and that’s why we’re quickly falling out of contention.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 23, 2020 8:14:51 GMT -5
Just so hard to know where this team is headed. I think that the loss of 4 players clearly clouds the issue of what type of coach Ewing can be. During the immediate aftermath he showed the upside in terms of how to use what he had left. Ball movement and unselfish play produced some of the best basketball the Hoyas have played in several years. But other teams adapt and so far the Hoyas have not. Love the kids he still has and the effort they give, but too often lately at the start of games they seem overwhelmed by the moment and revert to selfish play that resembles more of a pick-up game than a major college basketball program. Is there any hope for the defense to ever improve or must every game come to a race to see which team outscores the other? Is it all because there are simply not enough bodies left to make the changes? Or is it a more ominous sign that Ewing has not adjusted to this college game, which is much more reliant upon strategy and coaching than the professional game where talent overcomes all else?
I have not seen the recruiting results that I expected as the major upside of the Ewing hire. That is probably my fault for not understanding that kids are more likely to know Otto Porter than Pat Ewing. Even Ewing acknowledges that his fame and background have been more effective with the parents than the kids he is recruiting. Also worry about the recruiting philosophy. Recruiting Akinjo and McClung and force-fitting them into the same line-up was a clear mistake. Where are the perimeter shooters--so important to the pro-style game that Ewing wants to run? Three bigs in one class with two of them clearly projects. Another undersized PG for next year? Inability to maintain the local talent.
I know it does not matter what anyone thinks about Ewing and his upside because there is no way this school is jettisoning him after 3 years and there is no way he is going to take the hit for the 4 transfers, given the circumstances. However, that leaves us at the beginning of yet another rebuild, with very little coming back, and far more questions than answers about the future of the program. At this point there is little to be excited about for the remainder of this season and little to look forward to for next.
|
|
|
Post by wponds on Jan 23, 2020 8:29:55 GMT -5
If my math is right, we're 9-31 - 22.5% - when scoring under 80 in Ewings 2.5 years (0-7 this year)
Pretty much, if we're not firing on all cylinders on offense, we lose. The combination of personnel and scheme really holds back our defense, but if we want to go anywhere (not just this year, but upcoming years), that end of the floor needs to step it up consistently
|
|
dchoya72
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,488
|
Post by dchoya72 on Jan 23, 2020 8:30:36 GMT -5
I think the prospects for next year depend on the players he recruits. I think his style of play is evident. If we had more talented players he would have better results. I can't at this point get too uptight with our current results. They are disappointing. But I believe if we had a remnant of the talent that left, the team would be more successful. So I have hope for the future. Our current team is limited, with little flexibility. I hope that coach can get some of the players he is recruiting and that those who come and those who stay in addition to developing their basketball skills, maintain their character and develop healthy relationships on campus. I am very saddened by what happened early in the season. Very! We had adequate talent to be successful!
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 23, 2020 9:23:56 GMT -5
I think the prospects for next year depend on the players he recruits. I think his style of play is evident. If we had more talented players he would have better results. I can't at this point get too uptight with our current results. They are disappointing. But I believe if we has a remnant of the talent that left, the team would be more successful. So I have hope for the future. Our current team is limited, with little flexibility. I hope that coach can get some of the players he is recruiting and that those who come and those who stay in addition to developing their basketball skills, maintain their character and develop healthy relationships on campus. I am very saddened by what happened early in the season. Very! We had adequate talent to be successful! A lot of recruiting is done at this point. Yes there's a few players still out there (and I'm sure there will be decommits if there's coaching changes), we'll try and access the grad transfer market and even the regular transfer market and try and get waivers. But going into the spring with this many holes to fill is a dangerous proposition. I understand the transfers put him in this position, but thinking there's just a ton of talent out there that is signing with us in April and those players will be key contributors to get us to the tourney next year is difficult. It's all we have at this point but I think it's what makes this season so important.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2020 9:38:48 GMT -5
Those shot charts show nothing about how to win, simply that the game is evolving overall. -- 2 of the top 4 teams in 3FGA didn't make the NBA playoffs last year. The bottom 3 all did. -- None of the top 10 KenPom offenses are even in the top 120 in 3FGA/Total FGA. Only 2 are in the top 200. -- To borrow from other sports... Jimmy G and the 49ers passed the ball just 8 times on Sunday and dominated. Compare that to passing trends of the last 30 years. As for us (currently 330 of 353 in 3FGA/FGA)... is that a problem? I don't see why it would be - we're 19th overall in total offense. Other major conference teams are in the same ballpark as us in that category (Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, WVU) and Top 25 Rutgers is one spot below us. We shoot the three well - 66th in 3FGP at 35.9%. But we also shoot it well from inside the arc -- just above 50%. That's a bit of an edge in Effective FG% for our 3-point shooting which is genuinely negated by the positives (offensive rebounding, increased foul shot attempts, opponent fouls, etc) of getting the ball inside. Quick & dirty analysis suggests we're pretty efficient offensively vis a vis 3s vs 2s. If you're the Warriors and you can shoot it at a 39/40 percent clip from 3, then you do... And you win titles... And everybody copies you. This year, the Lakers & Nuggets are 1st & 2nd in the Western Conference standings, and 4th & 3rd in least total 3FGA. Perhaps we're due for another correction. I’m not going to quibble with a lot of this because most of it makes sense. This is a good offensive team anyway you slice it. We’re losing games on defense not offense. The one comment I will make is that not all 2s are created equal. There’s a reason the mid range jumper has completely disappeared from the NBA. I watch a fair amount of college basketball and I don’t think I’ve seen another team take as many long, contested, difficult mid-range jumpers as we do. They’re bad, inefficient shots and clearly the guys aren’t being coached not to do it because they keep doing it. It’s very frustrating. But like I said, I’m not implying that our offense is broken or anything, just a small quibble with part of the approach. The defense is completely broken for multiple reasons and that’s why we’re quickly falling out of contention. My point was really a response to the this is how it's done now, why don't we get more shooters and shoot more threes crowd. But yes - there are "worse" shots and these charts show that pro guys are getting the message. I don't know that we aren't under Coach Pat. I'm kind of skeptical that we take any more long 2-pt jumpers than other teams. Seems to me we wouldn't be able to keep up the efficiency & high shooting percentages very long w/o shooting the "right" shots. I have the distance data from previous seasons that I could check on, but I doubt I can find anything reliable on the contested part.
|
|
HoyaDr
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 616
|
Post by HoyaDr on Jan 23, 2020 10:12:57 GMT -5
I think the prospects for next year depend on the players he recruits. I think his style of play is evident. If we had more talented players he would have better results. I can't at this point get too uptight with our current results. They are disappointing. But I believe if we has a remnant of the talent that left, the team would be more successful. So I have hope for the future. Our current team is limited, with little flexibility. I hope that coach can get some of the players he is recruiting and that those who come and those who stay in addition to developing their basketball skills, maintain their character and develop healthy relationships on campus. I am very saddened by what happened early in the season. Very! We had adequate talent to be successful! A lot of recruiting is done at this point. Yes there's a few players still out there (and I'm sure there will be decommits if there's coaching changes), we'll try and access the grad transfer market and even the regular transfer market and try and get waivers. But going into the spring with this many holes to fill is a dangerous proposition. I understand the transfers put him in this position, but thinking there's just a ton of talent out there that is signing with us in April and those players will be key contributors to get us to the tourney next year is difficult. It's all we have at this point but I think it's what makes this season so important. We need length on the perimeter/wings. We lost 3 forwards and it's VERY evident in BE play. We cannot create any mismatches with our current roster nor can we adjust to the different lineups that our opposition can send out there. We don't have the luxury to bench a struggling player and still win like Xavier did last night. We can't even create a small ball lineup because we only have one viable forward currently. We also have no backup PG. Mac is SG and so are Blair and Moseley. They are asked to handle the ball way more and thus the stupid turnovers in transition. The next 4-6 months of recruiting will make or break Ewings tenure here. I don't think it should be this season.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 23, 2020 12:04:56 GMT -5
A lot of recruiting is done at this point. Yes there's a few players still out there (and I'm sure there will be decommits if there's coaching changes), we'll try and access the grad transfer market and even the regular transfer market and try and get waivers. But going into the spring with this many holes to fill is a dangerous proposition. I understand the transfers put him in this position, but thinking there's just a ton of talent out there that is signing with us in April and those players will be key contributors to get us to the tourney next year is difficult. It's all we have at this point but I think it's what makes this season so important. We need length on the perimeter/wings. We lost 3 forwards and it's VERY evident in BE play. We cannot create any mismatches with our current roster nor can we adjust to the different lineups that our opposition can send out there. We don't have the luxury to bench a struggling player and still win like Xavier did last night. We can't even create a small ball lineup because we only have one viable forward currently. We also have no backup PG. Mac is SG and so are Blair and Moseley. They are asked to handle the ball way more and thus the stupid turnovers in transition. The next 4-6 months of recruiting will make or break Ewings tenure here. I don't think it should be this season. Sorry to be clear, when I say recruiting is done, I didnt mean Gtown recruiting, as we clearly need to fill the spots and agree with your assessment of what we're missing. My point was the best players are mostly off the board as they've committed, so the players we're going to get in this phase are most likely a lower caliber (I'm sure there can be exceptions such as decommits) and ultimately lower expectations for immediate impact (grad transfers you'd expect to contribute immediately as we generally have them for one year). Ewing has shown he can find diamonds in the rough but its tough if that's always the expected plan
|
|
HoyaDr
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 616
|
Post by HoyaDr on Jan 23, 2020 12:34:06 GMT -5
We need length on the perimeter/wings. We lost 3 forwards and it's VERY evident in BE play. We cannot create any mismatches with our current roster nor can we adjust to the different lineups that our opposition can send out there. We don't have the luxury to bench a struggling player and still win like Xavier did last night. We can't even create a small ball lineup because we only have one viable forward currently. We also have no backup PG. Mac is SG and so are Blair and Moseley. They are asked to handle the ball way more and thus the stupid turnovers in transition. The next 4-6 months of recruiting will make or break Ewings tenure here. I don't think it should be this season. Sorry to be clear, when I say recruiting is done, I didnt mean Gtown recruiting, as we clearly need to fill the spots and agree with your assessment of what we're missing. My point was the best players are mostly off the board as they've committed, so the players we're going to get in this phase are most likely a lower caliber (I'm sure there can be exceptions such as decommits) and ultimately lower expectations for immediate impact (grad transfers you'd expect to contribute immediately as we generally have them for one year). Ewing has shown he can find diamonds in the rough but its tough if that's always the expected plan Oh I see what you're saying. I agree there's not much high caliber talent right now out there but I don't think high caliber talent is absolutely necessary to be a tourney team. If we just had one or two more decent wings I think we would be a tourney team this year. Gardner and Alexander were those two that could have really helped. When they left, I was just pushing hope that we could be a bubble team for the sake of being optimistic. In reality, we have won three times against good comp since those two left? I really don't see us winning a road game for the rest of the season except against SJU or DePaul. Even those wins would be a surprise at this point. I think we can get competitive wings for next year, we already have a good one in Sibley and we need at least one more decent wing, probably someone with experience who can come in as a transfer. We have no idea what we will get out of Harris but if he could at the least hit a couple of those wide open baseline 3s we missed last night, I would be happy with that. We missed way too many wide open shots last night, the lack of shooting talent was very evitable. We need another PG, hopefully one with size that can defend and can also shoot the 3. I just said need a lot in this post, Ewing has his work cut out for him.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,967
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 23, 2020 14:25:15 GMT -5
The biggest key to success in my view...
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,339
|
Post by SDHoya on Jan 23, 2020 15:19:27 GMT -5
Notwithstanding the disastrous first 10 minutes, the reason why we lost yesterday is twofold:
(1) Wide open three pointers at key times did not fall (e.g., Jagan missing at the end of the first half that would have cut the lead to 6; a couple towards the end of the game that would have made things tight with a few minutes to play); and
(2) We got murdered on the boards.
Once Ewing got the team to adjust to Xavier's somewhat surprise big line-up, the defense was actually pretty decent. Xavier just managed to kill us by getting a ton of O-boards. I'm not sure there was much that Ewing could have done about that--the fact is that having lost three players in the 6'7"-ish range, we are not a terribly big or physical team.
Even so, if a couple threes at key moments fell, we could have won. Unfortunately they didn't fall yesterday.
The rebounding thing is going to be a problem for us the rest of the year, and other coaches will copy the model used by MU and XU. The only possible solution may be to put Q and Yurt on the court at the same time--something Ewing has been loath to do so far. I think it could have worked yesterday as X is not a great perimeter shooting side, but in other situations it would leave us vulnerable.
Ewing has to deal with the hand he was dealt (or the hand he dealt himself, depending on how you view things). I still think he has done a pretty impressive job considering the situation--but the X game seems to give the appearance that the mountain may just be too big to climb this year.
|
|