|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 3, 2018 19:39:53 GMT -5
The biggest things was the rules change (Freedom of Movement). Jay Wright was thrown a huge bone with the rules change because his 4 guard/small ball style, dribble penetrate with spacing and kick for the open 3 benefitted the most out of any style out there. The way to combat his style before the rules changes were to be really physical and impede the movement but that's no longer possible because it will result in a foul. So it's not that he revolutionized the game or adapted or anything like that. He was already playing this style and recruiting for this style. The single component that made his style lethal and unstoppable was the Freedom of Movement rules change. And vice versa for III. The rules changes really hurt the Princeton as addressed in other posts. That and the early eliminations (which Wright also had), led to worse recruits, lower morale and defections but at the core it was the rule changes that dooomed his system. He never did "figure it out" with the rules changes. Wright went to 2 Sweet 16's, an Elite 8 & a Final Four prior to the freedom of movement rules, hard for me to pin a lot of his success to the new rules.. The Princeton offense requires more off the ball motion than most offenses so I don'e get why the new rules would have had a negative impact on it.. That's all fine and good but 2 S16's, 1 E8, and 1 F4 vs 2 National Championships and total domination I would say that freedom of movement moved his teams from good teams to dominating (dynasty like teams). So yeah, Jay Wright hit the lottery with the Freedom of Movement. I just call it as I see it. I've always liked Jay Wright, good coach but out of all the teams and all the styles, Freedom of Movement helped his style the most and I have been saying that for years now since Freedom of M.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Posts: 3,391
|
Post by drquigley on Apr 3, 2018 21:00:54 GMT -5
Sorry guys, rules change shmules change. Since Otto left who are our NBA players? Who have we had on our team that would start on Nova or any NCAA quality team? Face it, we have recruited players who just aren't the complete package. Yes, with a little luck with McClung and a big improvement from Pickett we may be a 9-9 BE team next year. But our athletes still leave a lot to be desired. Jesse is just too slow and too much of a defensive liability and MD can't score off the dribble. I really believe that with the right recruits we will be a much better team in 2 years without them. PE has done a great job with what JT3 left him but he needs to look around and find some true top D1 (and potential NBA) quality players.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,039
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 3, 2018 21:10:50 GMT -5
Wright went to 2 Sweet 16's, an Elite 8 & a Final Four prior to the freedom of movement rules, hard for me to pin a lot of his success to the new rules.. The Princeton offense requires more off the ball motion than most offenses so I don'e get why the new rules would have had a negative impact on it.. That's all fine and good but 2 S16's, 1 E8, and 1 F4 vs 2 National Championships and total domination I would say that freedom of movement moved his teams from good teams to dominating (dynasty like teams). So yeah, Jay Wright hit the lottery with the Freedom of Movement. I just call it as I see it. I've always liked Jay Wright, good coach but out of all the teams and all the styles, Freedom of Movement helped his style the most and I have been saying that for years now since Freedom of M. The new rules have been in place since 2013-14, How'd Nova do in the tourney in the first couple of years of the new rules? Villanova isn't the only team that plays smaller or a motion/drive & kick/read & react offense, they just do it much better.. That's primarily due to coaching/teaching in my view.. Wright has stated many times that he felt he needed to be rebuild his program after the 2011-12 season and imo this is the culmination of that rebuild..
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,435
|
Post by MCIGuy on Apr 3, 2018 21:14:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Apr 3, 2018 21:16:35 GMT -5
Sorry guys, rules change shmules change. Since Otto left who are our NBA players? Who have we had on our team that would start on Nova or any NCAA quality team? Face it, we have recruited players who just aren't the complete package. Yes, with a little luck with McClung and a big improvement from Pickett we may be a 9-9 BE team next year. But our athletes still leave a lot to be desired. Jesse is just too slow and too much of a defensive liability and MD can't score off the dribble. I really believe that with the right recruits we will be a much better team in 2 years without them. PE has done a great job with what JT3 left him but he needs to look around and find some true top D1 (and potential NBA) quality players. No one is arguing that the cupboard is full but combining point offensively and rebounding JG and MD were among the elites in the NCAA this year. In any other conference in college basketball JG would have been on the all conference team as well as MD. The last several years we have not had a top 25 recruiting class, prior to that we were consistently at that level. Clearly to reach the level where we would all be at least content if not happy on this board, the Hoyas need to return to that level of recruiting.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,435
|
Post by MCIGuy on Apr 3, 2018 22:41:42 GMT -5
Sorry guys, rules change shmules change. Since Otto left who are our NBA players? Who have we had on our team that would start on Nova or any NCAA quality team? Face it, we have recruited players who just aren't the complete package. Yes, with a little luck with McClung and a big improvement from Pickett we may be a 9-9 BE team next year. But our athletes still leave a lot to be desired. Jesse is just too slow and too much of a defensive liability and MD can't score off the dribble. I really believe that with the right recruits we will be a much better team in 2 years without them. PE has done a great job with what JT3 left him but he needs to look around and find some true top D1 (and potential NBA) quality players. This is nonsense. Govan is not slow. He may lack great speed but he is far from being "too slow". If he was that slow he could not get off the shots he gets off or beat defenses as well as he doesn't He wouldn't be able to rebound as nearly as well as he does. He isn't quick nor is he an explosive athlete. But he is a highly coordinated 6'10 plus guy who is also about 260 pounds. Ed Cooley called him the best scoring big man in the conference and was the first Hoya since Sweetney to average a double-double. He was eighth in the Big East in points per game, fourth in field goal percentage despite taking so many shots outside the paint including long two-point shots, sixth in free throw attempts seventh in free throws made, second in rebounds per game, third in blocks per game, was fourth in the conference in Player Efficiency Rating, fifth in offensive rebounding percentage, second in defensive rebounding percentage, second in total rebounding percentage, and SOMEHOW, despite playing for a team that didn't have tons of positive success on court, ended up being eighth in Win Shares Per 40 Minutes. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/conferences/big-east/2018.htmlThere are some areas he could have performed better in for sure (turnover percentage). Heck if he was Ayton-good he wouldn't still be in college. But the stats above are very impressive for a guy who came into the season as an afterthought from the people who cover and coach in the BE conference. The guy made big shots for the team, performed admirably in leading the team in scoring and rebounding despite being the main focus of defenses and playing with inconsistent perimeter teammates, he did not slow down Ewing's offense, he ran the court well, and he didn't bog down the flow in the offense because he wasn't always occupying the paint, he was able to score anywhere on the court. And yet you talk about him as if he was a detriment to the team instead of a valuable asset. The only consistent players our opponents were worried about all season long were him and Derrickson. Period. With my own eyes I saw teams advance in this tourney to the Sweet 16, Final Eight, Final Four and even final game with big men who weren't as all around effective or productive as Govan (that big German on Michigan got gassed after four or so minutes against Villanova for God's sake). And that's far enough evidence to me that Govan wasn't the problem, the problematic and/or inexperienced perimeter players were. I could go and make a similar case for Derrickson but I'll limit it to just a few words: Second Team All Big East. You worry about him scoring off the dribble when he puts up big buckets when he is arguably the most clutch Hoya in a long time? The Hoyas are likely to never have such a potent scoring frontcourt duo like this again, one who can spread the court like this current version of basketball requires as well as get buckets on the inside off post moves when needed. And yet you spend more time and energy dogging these guys. I don't get it. Lastly the hyperbole that no one on our team is good enough to start on any NCAA quality team (which I take to mean any NCAA team that made the NCAA tournament?)? Ridiculous.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,435
|
Post by MCIGuy on Apr 3, 2018 23:17:08 GMT -5
Also while I have given the players of Villanova their just due, I'm going to defend the guys on the Hoya team a bit. Not only did these current Hoyas not join a thriving program with a new winning culture like the guys on Villanova did, they also weren't redshirted their first season to allow them to get stronger, get better and learn the system of play. It seems like Brunson is the lone guy who is actually of the class he is associated with. How much better would our young guys be if they could sit out a year and learn from the bench?
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Apr 4, 2018 1:23:00 GMT -5
Also while I have given the players of Villanova their just due, I'm going to defend the guys on the Hoya team a bit. Not only did these current Hoyas not join a thriving program with a new winning culture like the guys on Villanova did, they also weren't redshirted their first season to allow them to get stronger, get better and learn the system of play. It seems like Brunson is the lone guy who is actually of the class he is associated with. How much better would our young guys be if they could sit out a year and learn from the bench? Agreed. There are 13 scholarships in CBB. Ideally, you would have: 1 project, 8-10 rotation players and 2 RS. Those RS could be freshman or due to injury. If any of your rotation guys get majorly injured early, you RS them. If your team is decimated, you activate one of the FR RS players. The RS guys can still practice and will sit on the bench to feel the atmosphere. One year older doesn't seem like much but it's more time with the weight staff, comfort with your surroundings, and confidence. Look at Villanova's roster construction, do they even go past 8-9 deep? Some teams even go 6 deep if those players are your best chance to win (I don't think so in tournament play).
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,406
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 4, 2018 7:17:37 GMT -5
Also while I have given the players of Villanova their just due, I'm going to defend the guys on the Hoya team a bit. Not only did these current Hoyas not join a thriving program with a new winning culture like the guys on Villanova did, they also weren't redshirted their first season to allow them to get stronger, get better and learn the system of play. It seems like Brunson is the lone guy who is actually of the class he is associated with. How much better would our young guys be if they could sit out a year and learn from the bench? Agreed. There are 13 scholarships in CBB. Ideally, you would have: 1 project, 8-10 rotation players and 2 RS. Those RS could be freshman or due to injury. If any of your rotation guys get majorly injured early, you RS them. If your team is decimated, you activate one of the FR RS players. The RS guys can still practice and will sit on the bench to feel the atmosphere. One year older doesn't seem like much but it's more time with the weight staff, comfort with your surroundings, and confidence. Look at Villanova's roster construction, do they even go past 8-9 deep? Some teams even go 6 deep if those players are your best chance to win (I don't think so in tournament play). Wright's recruiting and player path are worth a deeper look. I'll just add that, on Monday, Nova went 7 deep and had the luxury to use 4-star Philly player Cosby just 4 minutes.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,890
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 4, 2018 7:24:17 GMT -5
All this talk of Freedom of Movement helping Villanova. Am I the only one who remembers Villanova's "foul constantly, because the refs won't call every one, and eventually they'll give you some make-up calls to even it out" defense that was in place around the Scottie Reynolds era? I honestly can't believe we're saying that the new rules were JTIII's downfall and Wright's salvation, in light of the offense we ran and the defense they used. There's obviously a lot more to it than the rule change.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,406
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 4, 2018 7:30:17 GMT -5
That FoM defense, the size or style of play of a center, etc... are all excuses for not putting on the floor 5 players who are solid both ways. Coaches who do look like geniuses. If one of those players is an All-Star, and you have one or two solid players coming off the bench, then it’s championship stuff.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,811
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 4, 2018 7:32:07 GMT -5
Also while I have given the players of Villanova their just due, I'm going to defend the guys on the Hoya team a bit. Not only did these current Hoyas not join a thriving program with a new winning culture like the guys on Villanova did, they also weren't redshirted their first season to allow them to get stronger, get better and learn the system of play. It seems like Brunson is the lone guy who is actually of the class he is associated with. How much better would our young guys be if they could sit out a year and learn from the bench? In theory, Ewing could have redshirted Walker and Sodom in 2018 and perhaps LeBlanc next year; in reality, with the exception of track and field, Georgetown doesn't use non-medical redshirts. Why, I'm not sure, although football could really, really use it, but I (again) digress. Villanova's 2017-18 bench? Deep. Donte DiVincenzo (6-5 redshirt sophomore): People quickly forgot about Ryan Arcidiacono when they saw Donte arrive. Now we all know why. Collin Gillespie (6-2 freshman): Lots of upside. Will see time alongside DiVicenzo next year. Dhmir Cosby-Roundtree (6-9 freshman): Bridges' successor at the 4. Lots of talent. Tim Delaney (6-9 redshirt sophomore): Battled through injury but will give minutes on defense, think Julian Vaughn. Dylan Painter (6-9 redshirt sophomore): Will see more time next year. The Wildcats graduate three walk-ons. There may be some mid-major kids out there that will want to go there just for the opportunity.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Apr 4, 2018 8:34:00 GMT -5
All this talk of Freedom of Movement helping Villanova. Am I the only one who remembers Villanova's "foul constantly, because the refs won't call every one, and eventually they'll give you some make-up calls to even it out" defense that was in place around the Scottie Reynolds era? I honestly can't believe we're saying that the new rules were JTIII's downfall and Wright's salvation, in light of the offense we ran and the defense they used. There's obviously a lot more to it than the rule change. Well, can't really speak on the defensive end, but the new rules helped teams that are guard-focused. That has been Wright's style from day one. He didn't have to change his offensive style. And trying to defend his offense was more difficult in man-to-man. Fouls will pile up. You need a team like WVA, physical, rugged on the defensive end. How many teams play like WVA. Very hard to do and recruit athletes that can be both physical and defenders. III was never a guard-focused type coach. His recruiting reflected it. The players he put in the NBA reflected that. At least offensively, he never really took advantage of the new rules, he didn't have the man power to do it.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Posts: 3,391
|
Post by drquigley on Apr 4, 2018 10:02:04 GMT -5
Sorry guys, rules change shmules change. Since Otto left who are our NBA players? Who have we had on our team that would start on Nova or any NCAA quality team? Face it, we have recruited players who just aren't the complete package. Yes, with a little luck with McClung and a big improvement from Pickett we may be a 9-9 BE team next year. But our athletes still leave a lot to be desired. Jesse is just too slow and too much of a defensive liability and MD can't score off the dribble. I really believe that with the right recruits we will be a much better team in 2 years without them. PE has done a great job with what JT3 left him but he needs to look around and find some true top D1 (and potential NBA) quality players. This is nonsense. Govan is not slow. He may lack great speed but he is far from being "too slow". If he was that slow he could not get off the shots he gets off or beat defenses as well as he doesn't He wouldn't be able to rebound as nearly as well as he does. He isn't quick nor is he an explosive athlete. But he is a highly coordinated 6'10 plus guy who is also about 260 pounds. Ed Cooley called him the best scoring big man in the conference and was the first Hoya since Sweetney to average a double-double. He was eighth in the Big East in points per game, fourth in field goal percentage despite taking so many shots outside the paint including long two-point shots, sixth in free throw attempts seventh in free throws made, second in rebounds per game, third in blocks per game, was fourth in the conference in Player Efficiency Rating, fifth in offensive rebounding percentage, second in defensive rebounding percentage, second in total rebounding percentage, and SOMEHOW, despite playing for a team that didn't have tons of positive success on court, ended up being eighth in Win Shares Per 40 Minutes. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/conferences/big-east/2018.htmlThere are some areas he could have performed better in for sure (turnover percentage). Heck if he was Ayton-good he wouldn't still be in college. But the stats above are very impressive for a guy who came into the season as an afterthought from the people who cover and coach in the BE conference. The guy made big shots for the team, performed admirably in leading the team in scoring and rebounding despite being the main focus of defenses and playing with inconsistent perimeter teammates, he did not slow down Ewing's offense, he ran the court well, and he didn't bog down the flow in the offense because he wasn't always occupying the paint, he was able to score anywhere on the court. And yet you talk about him as if he was a detriment to the team instead of a valuable asset. The only consistent players our opponents were worried about all season long were him and Derrickson. Period. With my own eyes I saw teams advance in this tourney to the Sweet 16, Final Eight, Final Four and even final game with big men who weren't as all around effective or productive as Govan (that big German on Michigan got gassed after four or so minutes against Villanova for God's sake). And that's far enough evidence to me that Govan wasn't the problem, the problematic and/or inexperienced perimeter players were. I could go and make a similar case for Derrickson but I'll limit it to just a few words: Second Team All Big East. You worry about him scoring off the dribble when he puts up big buckets when he is arguably the most clutch Hoya in a long time? The Hoyas are likely to never have such a potent scoring frontcourt duo like this again, one who can spread the court like this current version of basketball requires as well as get buckets on the inside off post moves when needed. And yet you spend more time and energy dogging these guys. I don't get it. Lastly the hyperbole that no one on our team is good enough to start on any NCAA quality team (which I take to mean any NCAA team that made the NCAA tournament?)? Ridiculous. Sorry but neither MD nor Govan could score off the dribble. And Jesse was downright awful defensively more than 5 feet from the basket. That's why he didn't make first or second team all BE, why he isn't a legitimate NBA draft pick, and why Jay Wright wouldn't want him on his team. Sure he helped us to an impressive 5-13 record this year and put up good numbers but he is not the model for any team aspiring for national prominence. You can't have the motion offense it takes to win today with big men whose mobility with the ball is limited. In watching him the last 3 years I think I've seen him actually take his man to the hoop and score less than 10 times. Sure, get him the ball in the paint and he has the footwork (especially with PE working with him) to score. But having to run our offense around getting him the ball in the paint is classic old school basketball and what made us look so hapless at times. And his defensive liabilities contributed a lot to our awful defensive numbers. Hey, I'm not posting this because I like knocking the Hoyas or am a Jesse Govan hater. I give him credit for working his tail off and improving remarkably since last year. I'm posting it because watching Nova the last few years has convinced me that they are the model we have to work towards and that the era of the classic big man is over. I'm hoping that next year we see more of Walker and hopefully another more mobile, agile perhaps not as big big recruit.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,331
|
Post by vv83 on Apr 4, 2018 10:22:21 GMT -5
I think you can still win with a big man who plays purely low post offense, and who can't create off the dribble. But you can't win with zero players who can create off the dribble - which is basically what we were trying to do last year. Mosely and Dickerson could occasionally create off the dribble, but they turned the ball over or ended up throwing up terrible shots far too often to be able to run a truly functional offense. The fact that we were able to cobble together a halfway decent offense without having this tool in our offensive toolbox is a real testament to Ewing's first year offensive coaching. He figured out how to build an offense around two good low post players who could also step out and hit a jump shot. Believe me, this is not the desired offensive structure for any team anymore.
But if you surround a low post player with 3 or 4 other guys who can create off the dribble and hit the 3 - then you have the foundation of a good offense. . Hopefully Pickett will develop his dribble drive game, and McClung can adjust to BE level play quickly. Plus if we can add a real point guard before November - even better. If this happens, then Govan and Derrickson will have more space to operate down low, and their ability to step out and shoot from 3 will open up space for the drivers.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 4, 2018 10:33:48 GMT -5
I think you can still win with a big man who plays purely low post offense, and who can't create off the dribble. I think you're right in a literal sense (that a team can have a big man who plays in the low post and win), but I think it's more a matter of whether that strategy makes sense in the modern game. Is a team better positioned when all 5 players can shoot from anywhere, or when one or 2 of your players can only score from the low post? It's almost certainly the former. If you gave me Roy Hibbert, sure, I think that team could succeed because he was a really, really, good offensive player, AND he defended well too. Instead, if you look at guys like Hayes or Hopkins, they were bigger liabilities because were not that good post players and they couldn't shoot at all, either. Govan is a much more well rounded player because he can score from anywhere on the court - it's his defense that really is the bigger thing keeping him from getting to the next level. I would note, however, that Govan actually struggled the most this season when he was parked in the post - when Ewing began bringing him out to the three point line and getting him in position for more layups, his offense improved markedly in the latter half of the Big East. The biggest reason NOT to feature a post player is that even the best post players are usually less efficient in the post than guards and players who shoot threes. I seem to remember someone on Casual did an article where it showed that Marcus Derrickson was one of the most efficient post players, and he still was scoring less than a point per possession (which is not good). Post play can be useful in giving a different look from time to time, or taking advantage of some mismatches (especially against really bad teams), but it should not be a major component of a modern offense.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Apr 4, 2018 10:40:00 GMT -5
III didn't now what to do once they changed the rules with Freedom of Movement. He no longer could play the physical man to man (FG% defense) that was his trademark and was necessary to limit scoring to make his Princeton Offense work (which was low scoring in itself). Without the stifling defense he was faced with a situation where he had to outscore the opponent and that wasn't possible when you are eating clock to look for the most efficient shot. No, that wasn't possible because we were playing 2 or 3 vs. 5. JT3 recruited players who couldn't or wouldn't shoot, or couldn't play defense or couldn't play offense or were soft and lacked the hunger to be like what we saw last night from the Nova players. His players reflected JT3's personality. Yes, he got one or two good/great ones, but he didn't create a team or give it balance to build a consistently, successful program. Early departures, injuries, etc are realities of the game, not excuses. Good to great coaches prepare for those circumstances. Wright has at least 7 overly confident players. So, a program like Georgetown can have that too, but it depends on the head coach and his plan. JT3 got lost offensively and defensively. He couldn't adjust and couldn't understand how his teams were getting destroyed in the Tournament, or at least that's what he said in the post-games. In offense, he tried to shift to a more dynamic style and sold it as such to Tremont and other recruits. Yet, he couldn't sign any recruits, except Tremont (and Walker but he basically recruited GU - and he's one of my favorites for it), and had to fill the gaps with grads. Then, when things got tough during the year, JT3 shifted back to what he knew in offense, and Tremont had to start answering questions about if he could play in that type of offense. He looked awkward in that video interview. Duke was looking for a guard, Tremont saw the GU mess and made himself available. As to defense, you're right in that he never adjusted. I remember when some here (maybe the ones who have left) declared that the game had shifted to favor the bigger public schools over the smaller private schools. They couldn't have been more wrong and you don't see anyone making that argument anymore. You made a lot of points so I wanted to highlight some things: No, that wasn't possible because we were playing 2 or 3 vs. 5. JT3 recruited players who couldn't or wouldn't shoot,:
Nate Lubick, Stephen Domingo, Reggie Cameron, Issac Copeland, Tre Campbell come to mind These players all seemed to regress and lose their shot the more they played, but Lubick is the biggest culprit as he avg. 4.9 pts/gm for his career III never recruited over him and started him for 4 years Even in both of his NCAA Tourney games Lubick never scored more than 4 pts He couldn't adjust and couldn't understand how his teams were getting destroyed in the Tournament, or at least that's what he said in the post-games. :The interview which stood out the most to me was after being humiliated by FGCU in 2013, CBS reporter asked "Why does this keep happening"? JTIII replied "I don't know, I don't know". I started thinking I am going to have grand kids before we see another Sweet 16 and I did not have any kids. when things got tough during the year, JT3 shifted back to what he knew in offense, and Tremont had to start answering questions about if he could play in that type of offense. He looked awkward in that video interview.:I did not know that this had happened. When and where? Is there a video of this. I checked Youtube and could not find it. JT3 got lost offensively and defensively. As to defense, you're right in that he never adjusted.
Wish JTIII had changed his offensive/defensive strategy years earlier as in the NCAA Tourney some of the losses was due to the opposing teams having better guard play (Davidson, Ohio, VCU, NC State, FGCU)
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,406
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 4, 2018 10:58:00 GMT -5
when things got tough during the year, JT3 shifted back to what he knew in offense, and Tremont had to start answering questions about if he could play in that type of offense. He looked awkward in that video interview.:I did not know that this had happened. When and where? Is there a video of this. I checked Youtube and could not find it. IIRC the video and/or article is in the Tremont thread here. I'm not sure the Duke thing is there, but it's easily "google-able". Duke ended up signing Duval in May after Duke missed its top pg target (Green?). Tremont thought Duke would be highly interested, but they passed on him.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Apr 4, 2018 11:34:25 GMT -5
I think you can still win with a big man who plays purely low post offense, and who can't create off the dribble. I think you're right in a literal sense (that a team can have a big man who plays in the low post and win), but I think it's more a matter of whether that strategy makes sense in the modern game. Is a team better positioned when all 5 players can shoot from anywhere, or when one or 2 of your players can only score from the low post? It's almost certainly the former. If you gave me Roy Hibbert, sure, I think that team could succeed because he was a really, really, good offensive player, AND he defended well too. Instead, if you look at guys like Hayes or Hopkins, they were bigger liabilities because were not that good post players and they couldn't shoot at all, either. Govan is a much more well rounded player because he can score from anywhere on the court - it's his defense that really is the bigger thing keeping him from getting to the next level. I would note, however, that Govan actually struggled the most this season when he was parked in the post - when Ewing began bringing him out to the three point line and getting him in position for more layups, his offense improved markedly in the latter half of the Big East. The biggest reason NOT to feature a post player is that even the best post players are usually less efficient in the post than guards and players who shoot threes. I seem to remember someone on Casual did an article where it showed that Marcus Derrickson was one of the most efficient post players, and he still was scoring less than a point per possession (which is not good). Post play can be useful in giving a different look from time to time, or taking advantage of some mismatches (especially against really bad teams), but it should not be a major component of a modern offense. You want balance. You don't want to be all perimeter oriented,and you don't don't want to be all post play. If you relay only on outside shooting, you are going to go cold from outside eventually. Then you are pretty much out of luck (no pun) ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) If you rely only on the post, you will be like us this year with Govan and Marcus. Inside-outside game is the best. Nova's "bigs" can score in the paint when necessary. Nova can also shoot lights out from 3. And the times they don't, they have other areas, like defense, they can make up for it. They don't really have a go-to-guy in that if their main guy struggles, they fall apart as we saw in the championship game. In other words, Nova can beat you in different ways. Good balance. The Big Man is still relevant today. Ironically, Ewing would be perfect in today's era. His ability to run the floor and move like a 6'5 wing player at 7'0" tall was rare. Wouldn't even have to shoot 3's. Just defend and get his touches inside.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2018 12:05:29 GMT -5
UNC went to the championship game two years in a row with bigmen who couldn't shoot beyond 15ft...Their 2 starting bigs Meeks and Hicks didn't even attempt 1 three pointer their entire careers.
|
|