|
Post by wrestlemania on Oct 19, 2020 17:13:57 GMT -5
I was also a little concerned by some of the comments, but only if it is true that no explanation was offered to questions from a player, but ultimately it's Ewing's team, and Ewing's recruits and he gets to make the decisions. Last year is virtually impossible to evaluate, but the two prior years help to offer glimpses as to what Ewing might be or not be as a coach. He has a desire to play quickly. He would like to use a deeper rotation than he could last year. He has failed yet to improve the defense of the team even though each year has featured a very different set and type of player. He has an ambitious approach to recruiting by offering many players, including very highly ranked players, but has at least this year had to settle for a collection of very unheralded recruits and transfers. Lots of questions, few answers and the hopes of Hoya nation riding on his success. Keep saying that this is a very important year for Ewing and I do not believe that results should be ignored. Expectations are probably as low as they have been in my memory and the bar is set very low. If he cannot exceed that low level of expectations then he is probably not the right guy to turn this around. I think that that is a very reasonable means by which to evaluate the coach and one that would not be questioned if his last name was not Ewing and his coaching roots were not traceable to Big John. You raise a key issue -- if the next couple years really go south, will the Board stick to the legacy in tribute to Big John (which would be understandable) or will they look elsewhere now that he is gone? Obviously too early to think about but I do believe it will factor into how much rope Patrick will get.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 17:25:05 GMT -5
I was also a little concerned by some of the comments, but only if it is true that no explanation was offered to questions from a player, but ultimately it's Ewing's team, and Ewing's recruits and he gets to make the decisions. Last year is virtually impossible to evaluate, but the two prior years help to offer glimpses as to what Ewing might be or not be as a coach. He has a desire to play quickly. He would like to use a deeper rotation than he could last year. He has failed yet to improve the defense of the team even though each year has featured a very different set and type of player. He has an ambitious approach to recruiting by offering many players, including very highly ranked players, but has at least this year had to settle for a collection of very unheralded recruits and transfers. Lots of questions, few answers and the hopes of Hoya nation riding on his success. Keep saying that this is a very important year for Ewing and I do not believe that results should be ignored. Expectations are probably as low as they have been in my memory and the bar is set very low. If he cannot exceed that low level of expectations then he is probably not the right guy to turn this around. I think that that is a very reasonable means by which to evaluate the coach and one that would not be questioned if his last name was not Ewing and his coaching roots were not traceable to Big John. You raise a key issue -- if the next couple years really go south, will the Board stick to the legacy in tribute to Big John (which would be understandable) or will they look elsewhere now that he is gone? Obviously too early to think about but I do believe it will factor into how much rope Patrick will get. If what you're saying you really do believe, than Ewing might as well get fired today because the Hoyas are picked to finish dead last in the Big East this year, according to the pundits. And because of the talent we have relative to what the other schools have in the Big East, chances are we will be at the bottom (South). According to your logic, it makes no sense for Georgetown to go forward with Ewing. Who do you want to coach the Hoyas to get us from down "South"?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,297
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 19, 2020 17:47:15 GMT -5
Pretty simple. We lost all our long atheltic wings (Galen, Myron) and a power forward (LeBlanc) Who is going to get the rebounds if Yurt7 is camping behind the 3pt line. We didn't have a problem with ORBs. As a team, and even though Omer missed 6 games or so, we were a pretty good ORB team in general (47th). Omer had 3.8 OR/g. That's not exactly irreplaceable with more of Qudus, Pickett and last year's experienced squad (what was left). What we could have used was another threat and mismatch from 3FG. IMO, Ewing could have mixed it up more with Qudus as 5 and Omer as a threat from the perimeter.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,749
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 19, 2020 18:15:30 GMT -5
You raise a key issue -- if the next couple years really go south, will the Board stick to the legacy in tribute to Big John (which would be understandable) or will they look elsewhere now that he is gone? Obviously too early to think about but I do believe it will factor into how much rope Patrick will get. The Board of Directors does not act out of tribute, they act on financials. They see numbers on the numbers going in and out of the program that we do not--NCAA post-season revenues, ticket sales, fundraising, and ultimately performance to expectations for a school with the 10th or 11th largest basketball budget in the nation. But the board only acts on renewals. Craig Esherick missed three NCAA tournaments and Jack let him go. JTII missed two and Jack let him go, too. There is far too much on Georgetown's plate right now to give this any concern in 2020-21, but the potential of a fourth straight miss at the post-season in 2020-21 is not good for anyone, especially in an era of growing cost containment throughout higher education.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 18:16:09 GMT -5
Pretty simple. We lost all our long atheltic wings (Galen, Myron) and a power forward (LeBlanc) Who is going to get the rebounds if Yurt7 is camping behind the 3pt line. We didn't have a problem with ORBs. As a team, and even though Omer missed 6 games or so, we were a pretty good ORB team in general (47th). Omer had 3.8 OR/g. That's not exactly irreplaceable with more of Qudus, Pickett and last year's experienced squad (what was left). What we could have used was another threat and mismatch from 3FG. IMO, Ewing could have mixed it up more with Qudus as 5 and Omer as a threat from the perimeter. I totally agree with you that coach should have used Q at the center and had Omer playing a wing like position. It seems Omer was more concerned about shooting threes than playing the center position. As far as Omer's so called rebounding, when he was matched up against the kid from Seton Hall, he didn't do so well. Q is going to bang inside and get a lot of rebounds and put backs. When Q and Mutombo play and hopefully sometimes at the same time, we will see both Mutombo and Q banging inside like coach wanted Omer to do. Mutombo will be able to step out and hit the mid range jumper sometimes while Q is banging inside as well. With Omer, Patrick made the mistake of thinking he was a physical player. It turns out Omer was more a finesse player who prefer to shoot threes instead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 18:31:36 GMT -5
Now that I think about it, maybe coach should have had Omer playing the small forward position or even the shooting guard position. That way he wouldn't have had to worry about Omer complaining about hedging high (to cut off the guards) and chasing the center back inside the key and then trying to establish his ground against his opponent. Also, Omer would have been much happier launching threes instead of banging. The only problem with that, is there is more to the game than just shooting threes.
As a small forward, shooting guard, you have to be able to come off picks and shoot the mid range shot and sometimes drive to the basket. So I don't think that could have worked for Omer if he was complaining about hedging. Doing all that other stuff takes even more work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 18:46:09 GMT -5
You raise a key issue -- if the next couple years really go south, will the Board stick to the legacy in tribute to Big John (which would be understandable) or will they look elsewhere now that he is gone? Obviously too early to think about but I do believe it will factor into how much rope Patrick will get. The Board of Directors does not act out of tribute, they act on financials. They see numbers on the numbers going in and out of the program that we do not--NCAA post-season revenues, ticket sales, fundraising, and ultimately performance to expectations for a school with the 10th or 11th largest basketball budget in the nation. But the board only acts on renewals. Craig Esherick missed three NCAA tournaments and Jack let him go. JTII missed two and Jack let him go, too. There is far too much on Georgetown's plate right now to give this any concern in 2020-21, but the potential of a fourth straight miss at the post-season in 2020-21 is not good for anyone, especially in an era of growing cost containment throughout higher education. Captain, it's not going to happen this year either. If they fire Ewing, as you all are insinuating that they do, for the next coach that comes in....it ain't gonna happen for them either. As a matter of fact, we probably won't see the NCAA tournament in the next couple of years unless we land some high fours and a five within the next couple of years. Even if we got a new coach today, it will take some time to get those highly sought after recruits. Whosever the coach that were to come in after Ewing, will need some time to get there and that is just the bottom line. Our genesis of our problems go way back to Coach Thompson Jr. era. Coach made too many recruiting errors that permeated with succeeding coaches. When we had the momentum (meaning the best wanted to play for Coach Thompson), we could have built a dynasty like Duke did. We were ahead of Duke with talent. Coach K, took advantage of Coach Thompson allowing our talented guys leave the area and so did other coaches. We lost our momentum and that is why Eshrick had it so hard. JTIII had it (kids wanting to play at Georgetown) and was starting to build it back up again (recruiting) but his offensive philosophy doomed him as the best kids did not want to play in that system after either seeing how complex it was or how boring it was to play in it. Whoever we get after Ewing, if y'all want Ewing to go, y'all gonna have to give that coach some time or hope they got some boosters or is willing to cheat to bring the program back quickly cause it ain't gonna happen tomorrow (us getting back to the NCAA tournament).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 22:29:50 GMT -5
You raise a key issue -- if the next couple years really go south, will the Board stick to the legacy in tribute to Big John (which would be understandable) or will they look elsewhere now that he is gone? Obviously too early to think about but I do believe it will factor into how much rope Patrick will get. If what you're saying you really do believe, than Ewing might as well get fired today because the Hoyas are picked to finish dead last in the Big East this year, according to the pundits. And because of the talent we have relative to what the other schools have in the Big East, chances are we will be at the bottom (South). According to your logic, it makes no sense for Georgetown to go forward with Ewing. Who do you want to coach the Hoyas to get us from down "South"?I’ll bite. Shaka Smart - this message board’s savior ...
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,899
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 19, 2020 22:42:06 GMT -5
Yeah, every so often a major red flag comes up with Coach Ewing that I try to ignore. The whole "totally ignore player input" thing is a big one. I met Omer, he is a nice guy. However, we are hearing him tell his side of the story. We haven't heard Coach's story. Was it "I want to learn both ways so I can figure out how to position myself better in both defensive schemes"? Or what is "Coach why don't we just play this one particular scheme instead of this one"? Sometimes kids want to take the easy way out and not necessarily buy into something. Maybe one defensive scheme was much easier for him and he would rather play that easier scheme. Besides all of that, if I were a coach and I am asking you to do one thing, I don't need you asking me about some other thing while we are working on this one thing. I need you to focus on that one thing that we are working on. As an employer, I've had to get rid of employees who want to do things their way and not do what I ask of them. Most of the time, when I would turn my back and trust them to get done what I want done, they would do it their way and screw up and cost me money and time. It is okay to question but at least give the coach's way a chance first. Like Mutombo says, "trust the system folks". Yurtseven was asking about Ewing’s philosophy behind hedging which seems like a reasonable question. Especially when you take how bad the team was defensively into consideration... It didn’t read to me that he was asking about playing another defense...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 23:55:29 GMT -5
If what you're saying you really do believe, than Ewing might as well get fired today because the Hoyas are picked to finish dead last in the Big East this year, according to the pundits. And because of the talent we have relative to what the other schools have in the Big East, chances are we will be at the bottom (South). According to your logic, it makes no sense for Georgetown to go forward with Ewing. Who do you want to coach the Hoyas to get us from down "South"?I’ll bite. Shaka Smart - this message board’s savior ... LOL!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 0:13:31 GMT -5
I met Omer, he is a nice guy. However, we are hearing him tell his side of the story. We haven't heard Coach's story. Was it "I want to learn both ways so I can figure out how to position myself better in both defensive schemes"? Or what is "Coach why don't we just play this one particular scheme instead of this one"? Sometimes kids want to take the easy way out and not necessarily buy into something. Maybe one defensive scheme was much easier for him and he would rather play that easier scheme. Besides all of that, if I were a coach and I am asking you to do one thing, I don't need you asking me about some other thing while we are working on this one thing. I need you to focus on that one thing that we are working on. As an employer, I've had to get rid of employees who want to do things their way and not do what I ask of them. Most of the time, when I would turn my back and trust them to get done what I want done, they would do it their way and screw up and cost me money and time. It is okay to question but at least give the coach's way a chance first. Like Mutombo says, "trust the system folks". Yurtseven was asking about Ewing’s philosophy behind hedging which seems like a reasonable question. Especially when you take how bad the team was defensively into consideration... It didn’t read to me that he was asking about playing another defense... If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Oct 20, 2020 6:43:53 GMT -5
If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets. We just see the game differently. This was the game that proved how flawed the hard hedge was as a defense imo. It forces a 3rd defender to be involved to help tag the roller and leaves 3 point shots. The end result was either a dunk or a 3, which is ironic given the thread on midrange shots we're having. This defense yields the most efficient shots an offense could want. 20 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Pass over the top, the help was late and Gil dunks. What do you want Yurt to do there? His job is to stop the ball handler, he can't block the pass while recovering simultaneously, there has to be help from the weakside. 40 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Allen correctly helps to avoid the dunk that occurred on the other play. End result? Skip pass to Allen's man for an open 3 bc he can't recover in time 50 second mark: Pickett effectively hedges but it's a pick and pop and there's nobody who can help on the weak side. Wide open 3 2 min mark: This one is questionable and probably on Yurt7. The screen is going away from middle but Yurt7 stays high in preparation to hard hedge. When the guard rejects / dribbles middle he's out of position for the roll from Gil. This is one of the risks of hard hedging, big man is exposed to slipping the screen. This was a VERY delayed slip so would put some of it on Yurt but it's because he's out there so far to anticipate a hedge 2:15 mark: Q does EXACTLY the same thing Yurt does at the 40 second mark. Effective hedge, guard tags the roller to help, result is wide open wing 3. Doesn't matter whether Yurt7 or Q, same result. All the highlights in the 2nd half are when Yurt7 is not hedging, it was the only time this year the coaching staff aborted the hedge, because it was simply abused to no end in the first half. The first SH game is always brought up, for some reason the 2nd one never is. 19 and 15 against Gil. www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401168400
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,297
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 20, 2020 8:03:25 GMT -5
So true, rhw.
Now, if one of the keys to the season is keeping Q from picking up cheap fouls, will Ewing expose him on the hedge?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 8:17:26 GMT -5
If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets. We just see the game differently. This was the game that proved how flawed the hard hedge was as a defense imo. It forces a 3rd defender to be involved to help tag the roller and leaves 3 point shots. The end result was either a dunk or a 3, which is ironic given the thread on midrange shots we're having. This defense yields the most efficient shots an offense could want. 20 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Pass over the top, the help was late and Gil dunks. What do you want Yurt to do there? His job is to stop the ball handler, he can't block the pass while recovering simultaneously, there has to be help from the weakside. 40 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Allen correctly helps to avoid the dunk that occurred on the other play. End result? Skip pass to Allen's man for an open 3 bc he can't recover in time 50 second mark: Pickett effectively hedges but it's a pick and pop and there's nobody who can help on the weak side. Wide open 3 2 min mark: This one is questionable and probably on Yurt7. The screen is going away from middle but Yurt7 stays high in preparation to hard hedge. When the guard rejects / dribbles middle he's out of position for the roll from Gil. This is one of the risks of hard hedging, big man is exposed to slipping the screen. This was a VERY delayed slip so would put some of it on Yurt but it's because he's out there so far to anticipate a hedge 2:15 mark: Q does EXACTLY the same thing Yurt does at the 40 second mark. Effective hedge, guard tags the roller to help, result is wide open wing 3. Doesn't matter whether Yurt7 or Q, same result. All the highlights in the 2nd half are when Yurt7 is not hedging, it was the only time this year the coaching staff aborted the hedge, because it was simply abused to no end in the first half. The first SH game is always brought up, for some reason the 2nd one never is. 19 and 15 against Gil. www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401168400Yeah I guess you right, we see the game totally different. the 20 sec mark shows to me how half assed of a hedge Yurt was playing. He didn't even commit to it to me. He trotted back to get to Gil and before that, he gave a half of an effort to stall the guards movement by barely sticking his hand out and he didn't even "act" like he wanted to get out there. This allow the guard to easily read the pass to a rolling Gil. The part where you're talking about Q, to me Q did everything right. He came out there fully committed to the hedge. He was aggresssive with his hands up. He completely help stopped the guards movement. He hustled back to his guy so he had a chance to defend the interior. Yeah the guard made the right read by getting it out to the wing. But, if I were the coach after seeing the way Seton Hall played it and our reaction to it which led to the three, I would have told Terrel for the next time wait a half a second before you dump down to help out with Gil rolling to the basket. Gil ain't the threat, the three point shooter is. Also, I would have Picket dumping down from the weakside of the ball some times just to mix the defense up. Though it isn't undoable, It would be harder for the Seton Hall guard to pass the ball across court to Picket's man with Mac sitting in that zone area. Therefore, on some plays, I could sacrifice Picket by asking him to dump down on the Gil rolling to the basket. I'm not sure what happened in the second half. I just know Yurt was exposed. As far as the hedge goes, from what I can see with my novice eyes, the big man has to be committed to hedging. That's the bottom line. For hedging to be effective, the big man must be aggressive (help stop the guard's movement and have your hands up to help prevent an easy pass inside). The big man must hustle back inside to get to his man. The big man must establish his ground inside the key to reposition himself with his man (opponent). Because of the three point line which led to spacing, I believe this is why coaches came up with this defensive scheme called hedging. I could be wrong but I don't remember seeing this 20 years ago. Every coach in the Big East uses this hedging scheme and probably most college coaches uses it. So for college basketball, unless coaches can come up with some other schemes that will replace hedging, hedging is here to stay. Big men will have to get used to playing it. We will see how Q plays it this year and we will see how committed he will be to it and therefore how effective he will be in it. Or, we will see how non committed he will be to it and therefore how ineffective he will be in it. He will be effective if he can prevent easy two's from the point guard driving into the lanes and the guard either making an easy shot himself or getting a dump off pass to Q's man (opponent) for an easy basket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 8:21:46 GMT -5
Boy, these highlights make us really realize how much we miss Mac. That boy was a beast!
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,899
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 20, 2020 8:39:58 GMT -5
Yurtseven was asking about Ewing’s philosophy behind hedging which seems like a reasonable question. Especially when you take how bad the team was defensively into consideration... It didn’t read to me that he was asking about playing another defense... If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets. I agree that Yurt knows what hedging is all about but he wanted to know about PE's philosophy on hedging. Again, it seems like a good question for a player to ask his coach...
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Oct 20, 2020 9:15:59 GMT -5
Yeah I guess you right, we see the game totally different. the 20 sec mark shows to me how half assed of a hedge Yurt was playing. He didn't even commit to it to me. He trotted back to get to Gil and before that, he gave a half of an effort to stall the guards movement by barely sticking his hand out and he didn't even "act" like he wanted to get out there. This allow the guard to easily read the pass to a rolling Gil. The part where you're talking about Q, to me Q did everything right. He came out there fully committed to the hedge. He was aggresssive with his hands up. He completely help stopped the guards movement. He hustled back to his guy so he had a chance to defend the interior. Yeah the guard made the right read by getting it out to the wing. But, if I were the coach after seeing the way Seton Hall played it and our reaction to it which led to the three, I would have told Terrel for the next time wait a half a second before you dump down to help out with Gil rolling to the basket. Gil ain't the threat, the three point shooter is. Also, I would have Picket dumping down from the weakside of the ball some times just to mix the defense up. Though it isn't undoable, It would be harder for the Seton Hall guard to pass the ball across court to Picket's man with Mac sitting in that zone area. Therefore, on some plays, I could sacrifice Picket by asking him to dump down on the Gil rolling to the basket. I'm not sure what happened in the second half. I just know Yurt was exposed. As far as the hedge goes, from what I can see with my novice eyes, the big man has to be committed to hedging. That's the bottom line. For hedging to be effective, the big man must be aggressive (help stop the guard's movement and have your hands up to help prevent an easy pass inside). The big man must hustle back inside to get to his man. The big man must establish his ground inside the key to reposition himself with his man (opponent). Because of the three point line which led to spacing, I believe this is why coaches came up with this defensive scheme called hedging. I could be wrong but I don't remember seeing this 20 years ago. Every coach in the Big East uses this hedging scheme and probably most college coaches uses it. So for college basketball, unless coaches can come up with some other schemes that will replace hedging, hedging is here to stay. Big men will have to get used to playing it. We will see how Q plays it this year and we will see how committed he will be to it and therefore how effective he will be in it. Or, we will see how non committed he will be to it and therefore how ineffective he will be in it. He will be effective if he can prevent easy two's from the point guard driving into the lanes and the guard either making an easy shot himself or getting a dump off pass to Q's man (opponent) for an easy basket. Respectfully disagree, don't see anything different between what Wahab did and Yurt7 but that's fine. We've both made our points. But hedging is simply not the only option here. Here's an article outlining the top 5 pick and roll defense teams for 2019: team.fastmodelsports.com/2019/03/19/ball-screen-defense-methods/Yes, the hedge and recover is here because it's used by UVa as part of their broader pack line defense. This defense can certainly be effective if executed properly, although the article here explicitly points out the risk of what we saw Seton Hall do. Teaching tip: most teams works on taking away the roller with the same side defender. If you aren’t already, you better start working on “tagging” the roller, then recovering quickly to the shooter filling up from behind the screen. You’ve seen this for years in the NBA and more recently in college. If you aren’t already seeing high school offenses pass back to the fill player, you better believe they’re going to start soon.When I watch college hoops I see more and more teams ICE screens like Texas Tech because it simplifies the rotations and doesn't leave open 3 point shooters. If we were really a good defensive team, the answer is probably multiple options that are listed here depending on the strength of the opponent. We've played one coverage and it's very predictable and attackable. We're past a Yurt7 discussion so I'll stop now. We'll see if the defense takes a massive leap with Yurt7 gone, just like we were waiting for that leap after Govan left.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 10:25:50 GMT -5
If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets. I agree that Yurt knows what hedging is all about but he wanted to know about PE's philosophy on hedging. Again, it seems like a good question for a player to ask his coach... Okay, I'm gonna let you have it and I am going to leave it alone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 10:37:27 GMT -5
Yeah I guess you right, we see the game totally different. the 20 sec mark shows to me how half assed of a hedge Yurt was playing. He didn't even commit to it to me. He trotted back to get to Gil and before that, he gave a half of an effort to stall the guards movement by barely sticking his hand out and he didn't even "act" like he wanted to get out there. This allow the guard to easily read the pass to a rolling Gil. The part where you're talking about Q, to me Q did everything right. He came out there fully committed to the hedge. He was aggresssive with his hands up. He completely help stopped the guards movement. He hustled back to his guy so he had a chance to defend the interior. Yeah the guard made the right read by getting it out to the wing. But, if I were the coach after seeing the way Seton Hall played it and our reaction to it which led to the three, I would have told Terrel for the next time wait a half a second before you dump down to help out with Gil rolling to the basket. Gil ain't the threat, the three point shooter is. Also, I would have Picket dumping down from the weakside of the ball some times just to mix the defense up. Though it isn't undoable, It would be harder for the Seton Hall guard to pass the ball across court to Picket's man with Mac sitting in that zone area. Therefore, on some plays, I could sacrifice Picket by asking him to dump down on the Gil rolling to the basket. I'm not sure what happened in the second half. I just know Yurt was exposed. As far as the hedge goes, from what I can see with my novice eyes, the big man has to be committed to hedging. That's the bottom line. For hedging to be effective, the big man must be aggressive (help stop the guard's movement and have your hands up to help prevent an easy pass inside). The big man must hustle back inside to get to his man. The big man must establish his ground inside the key to reposition himself with his man (opponent). Because of the three point line which led to spacing, I believe this is why coaches came up with this defensive scheme called hedging. I could be wrong but I don't remember seeing this 20 years ago. Every coach in the Big East uses this hedging scheme and probably most college coaches uses it. So for college basketball, unless coaches can come up with some other schemes that will replace hedging, hedging is here to stay. Big men will have to get used to playing it. We will see how Q plays it this year and we will see how committed he will be to it and therefore how effective he will be in it. Or, we will see how non committed he will be to it and therefore how ineffective he will be in it. He will be effective if he can prevent easy two's from the point guard driving into the lanes and the guard either making an easy shot himself or getting a dump off pass to Q's man (opponent) for an easy basket. Respectfully disagree, don't see anything different between what Wahab did and Yurt7 but that's fine. We've both made our points. But hedging is simply not the only option here. Here's an article outlining the top 5 pick and roll defense teams for 2019: team.fastmodelsports.com/2019/03/19/ball-screen-defense-methods/Yes, the hedge and recover is here because it's used by UVa as part of their broader pack line defense. This defense can certainly be effective if executed properly, although the article here explicitly points out the risk of what we saw Seton Hall do. Teaching tip: most teams works on taking away the roller with the same side defender. If you aren’t already, you better start working on “tagging” the roller, then recovering quickly to the shooter filling up from behind the screen. You’ve seen this for years in the NBA and more recently in college. If you aren’t already seeing high school offenses pass back to the fill player, you better believe they’re going to start soon.When I watch college hoops I see more and more teams ICE screens like Texas Tech because it simplifies the rotations and doesn't leave open 3 point shooters. If we were really a good defensive team, the answer is probably multiple options that are listed here depending on the strength of the opponent. We've played one coverage and it's very predictable and attackable. We're past a Yurt7 discussion so I'll stop now. We'll see if the defense takes a massive leap with Yurt7 gone, just like we were waiting for that leap after Govan left. Good article. That Tony guy plays hedge 45% of the time. I would love to know what other schools are doing. Would love to know what are their percentages for the defensive schemes they play on pick and roll.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Oct 20, 2020 11:50:15 GMT -5
If I do remember it correctly, he made mention of one version of hedging that was played by a previous player who played the position before himself. Ewing decided for Yurt, for whatever reason, he wanted to play a different version. I'm almost certain that Yurt knows what hedging is all about. It is very clear the purpose of hedging even to a novice such as myself so I know Yurt knows what hedging is all about. He wanted to know why he couldn't hedge the way it was done when Govan was playing. The reason why the defense was lacking especially in Big East play is because Yurt was exposed. That is the bottom line. Go back and watch those games, especailly the late games and you will see that what I am saying is true. Check out this Seton Hall game where his defense was clearly exposed. He didn't hedge hard enough to stop the point guard's movement and he couldn't stop the point guard from passing the ball inside to his man for easy buckets. We just see the game differently. This was the game that proved how flawed the hard hedge was as a defense imo. It forces a 3rd defender to be involved to help tag the roller and leaves 3 point shots. The end result was either a dunk or a 3, which is ironic given the thread on midrange shots we're having. This defense yields the most efficient shots an offense could want. 20 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Pass over the top, the help was late and Gil dunks. What do you want Yurt to do there? His job is to stop the ball handler, he can't block the pass while recovering simultaneously, there has to be help from the weakside. 40 second mark: Yurt effectively hedges and forces the guard to dribble away from the basket. Allen correctly helps to avoid the dunk that occurred on the other play. End result? Skip pass to Allen's man for an open 3 bc he can't recover in time 50 second mark: Pickett effectively hedges but it's a pick and pop and there's nobody who can help on the weak side. Wide open 3 2 min mark: This one is questionable and probably on Yurt7. The screen is going away from middle but Yurt7 stays high in preparation to hard hedge. When the guard rejects / dribbles middle he's out of position for the roll from Gil. This is one of the risks of hard hedging, big man is exposed to slipping the screen. This was a VERY delayed slip so would put some of it on Yurt but it's because he's out there so far to anticipate a hedge 2:15 mark: Q does EXACTLY the same thing Yurt does at the 40 second mark. Effective hedge, guard tags the roller to help, result is wide open wing 3. Doesn't matter whether Yurt7 or Q, same result. All the highlights in the 2nd half are when Yurt7 is not hedging, it was the only time this year the coaching staff aborted the hedge, because it was simply abused to no end in the first half. The first SH game is always brought up, for some reason the 2nd one never is. 19 and 15 against Gil. www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401168400I completely agree with everything said here. Just to add, I remember Myles Cale had a really good game here because he was open on every play with Allen helping down. Them putting Allen in the helper spot made this much more difficult since he's so much smaller than Gill and would have to fully commit and either get a steal or poke at Gill enough to let Yurt fully recover, and in that time if Gill could turn around he had two points. Seton hall spaced the floor really well this game and attacked the hedge relentlessly. I hate the hard hedge and really hope Ewing realizes how often it was exposed and lets it go, or at least either changes how we want to rotate on the weak side and uses it much less often. Also, to not drag up this thread too much, I completely agree that we are going to miss Mac so much more than we realize. His ability to create shots for himself and others was so vital to our teams success in that 6 game stretch. Carey is probably our best creator now, and he's not the creator Mac is. Hopefully either Pickett or Blair really improved in this department, or Dante steps in and just gets buckets (which if he can from the level he was playin at, oh man that's a steal), but I'm not too sure.
|
|