|
|
Post by jctnhoya4ever on Dec 8, 2018 22:15:49 GMT -5
I know you didn’t like the hiring of Ewing, but why write stuff like that on front page.if you feel like that u should shut down this web site. That was ridiculous.if you feel that u can’t be more positive then shut it down.true hoya fan wouldn’t trash the head coach after a tough road game.damn man come on is that really necessary.why ? Damn support the team. We can’t even come together to support Ewing and the team that’s pathetic. Go ahead and jerk my post off because I tell the truth. Go Hoyas forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by CountAardvark on Dec 8, 2018 22:21:34 GMT -5
I gotta admit I'm not sure what post you're talking about
|
|
|
|
Post by jctnhoya4ever on Dec 8, 2018 22:26:51 GMT -5
The main front page on hoyasaxacombasketball
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2018 22:28:26 GMT -5
I know you didn’t like the hiring of Ewing, but why write stuff like that on front page.if you feel like that u should shut down this web site. That was ridiculous.if you feel that u can’t be more positive then shut it down.true hoya fan wouldn’t trash the head coach after a tough road game.damn man come on is that really necessary.why ? Damn support the team. We can’t even come together to support Ewing and the team that’s pathetic. Go ahead and jerk my post off because I tell the truth. Go Hoyas forever. Some people are passive-aggressive (see what I did there?). You haven’t figured that out in 22 years? |
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402 
|
Post by iowa80 on Dec 8, 2018 22:38:36 GMT -5
I'm unclear why this front page is worthy of a thread. It's opinion, but defensible opinion. Or is Pat above criticism?
|
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 8, 2018 23:33:11 GMT -5
|
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,762
|
Post by blueandgray on Dec 9, 2018 9:34:28 GMT -5
I’m a fan of big pat but also see nothing wrong with the homepage article. He’s right! We have control of the game but had the wrong personnel in to close it out. That’s closer to fact than opinion. I understand that we were a 10 point underdog going into the game and that we perhaps exceeded expectations in that we controlled most of the game...but come March, if we are on the bubble, it’s this game that would have been a difference maker.
|
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Dec 9, 2018 9:56:57 GMT -5
I’m a fan of big pat but also see nothing wrong with the homepage article. He’s right! We have control of the game but had the wrong personnel in to close it out. That’s closer to fact than opinion. I understand that we were a 10 point underdog going into the game and that we perhaps exceeded expectations in that we controlled most of the game...but come March, if we are on the bubble, it’s this game that would have been a difference maker. Exactly. This was our chance at a quality OOC win, and on the road to boot. Patrick is 40 games into his college coaching career. There is a learning curve for him as well. But he made critical mistakes at the end of the game that cost us yesterday, and could cost us more dearly come selection time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 10:20:01 GMT -5
Why do you guys think the game came down to that one play? Why does nothing else matter but that one play when evaluating the Coach?
What if he switched our guards and Syracuse still won, what would be your narrative then?
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 9, 2018 10:26:07 GMT -5
I would say end-of-game matters more. I tend not to look back at a missed layup in the first half and say “what if?”
As per negativity, I feel all the moderators are too critical. Not ideal for fan sites.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 10:32:52 GMT -5
I would say end-of-game matters more. I tend not to look back at a missed layup in the first half and say “what if?” As per negativity, I feel all the moderators are too critical. Not ideal for fan sites. It doesn't. That's why teams that understand this win more than teams that don't. Nova, UVA etc... The play every possession like it's the last possession. It's also why Chris Mack trains his team to play in 4 minute segments and stresses the game within the game. The problem with evaluating a game by the last possession is you ignore everything that got you up to that point imo.. "He should have put them in." Ok, but if he had kept them in after the way the started the second we probably would not be down 10 and not in that position. That's also coaching. |
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,352
|
Post by daveg023 on Dec 9, 2018 10:50:40 GMT -5
I would say end-of-game matters more. I tend not to look back at a missed layup in the first half and say “what if?” As per negativity, I feel all the moderators are too critical. Not ideal for fan sites. It doesn't. That's why teams that understand this win more than teams that don't. Nova, UVA etc... The play every possession like it's the last possession. It's also why Chris Mack trains his team to play in 4 minute segments and stresses the game within the game. The problem with evaluating a game by the last possession is you ignore everything that got you up to that point imo.. "He should have put them in." Ok, but if he had kept them in after the way the started the second we probably would not be down 10 and not in that position. That's also coaching. I'd also argue that a successful season will not be defined by one result. Good teams, and coaches for that matter, prevail over bigger sample size where a missed layup, failed timeout, bad call by an official, etc. can change the result of that single game, but not the narrative of a season. In the long run over the course of a 30+ game season those things tend to work themselves out and good teams will simply lose more of these than they win. I get this was our only OOC game to hang our hat on for resume purposes, and to Syracuse nonetheless. But it will take pretty specific circumstances (ie being squarely on the bubble come March) for this single loss to be the difference. I think the tournament was a long shot this year, and if we do find ourselves on the bubble come Selection Sunday, it's meant we've had a good season and will have at least won 10 games in conference and 20 games overall. If the 1 pt loss is what keeps us out, yes that will be brutally painful, but I tend to think that circumstance is pretty remote. For some reason my gut feeling is that team is either going to be Top 4 in the conference and go on a great run and be easily in the tournament field, or on the flip-side be in the Wednesday game at MSG again with a conference record similar to last year. The middle ground of going like 9-9 in conference (and kinda in the mix with a weaker resume) feels like the least likely outcome. I don't know why I think that, but I feel like the standard deviation on this year's team is massive. I'm hoping for the former, but tempering expectations if it turns out to be the latter. |
|
DanMcQ
Moderator 
Posts: 30,596
|
Post by DanMcQ on Dec 9, 2018 11:10:06 GMT -5
As per negativity, I feel all the moderators are too critical. Not ideal for fan sites. Excuse me, what? |
|
|
|
Post by bereal on Dec 9, 2018 11:33:37 GMT -5
Why do you guys think the game came down to that one play? Why does nothing else matter but that one play when evaluating the Coach? What if he switched our guards and Syracuse still won, what would be your narrative then? The coach is responsible for putting the team in the best position to win, if the kids don't execute then you question his personnel choice not strategy of play on versus timeout . In the game yesterday, he wanted to get the two freshman back in and had a timeout to do so. Everybody was expecting a timeout to change personnel even the kids on the court, but he didn't call it, so the criticism for his coaching strategy is fair. Everyone focuses on end of game because that's where players and coaches make their names, I think Coach calls it Cahones  . |
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,762
|
Post by blueandgray on Dec 9, 2018 12:01:53 GMT -5
Why do you guys think the game came down to that one play? Why does nothing else matter but that one play when evaluating the Coach? What if he switched our guards and Syracuse still won, what would be your narrative then? At the end of the day, we did what we had to do the first 39 and a half minutes of the game to put us in a position to win the game. That last 30 seconds has to be treated much differently than the previous 2370 seconds....and Ewing did nothing different to close it out. The result was that players did not know what they were running and it showed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 12:08:51 GMT -5
Why do you guys think the game came down to that one play? Why does nothing else matter but that one play when evaluating the Coach? What if he switched our guards and Syracuse still won, what would be your narrative then? At the end of the day, we did what we had to do the first 39 and a half minutes of the game to put us in a position to win the game. T hat last 30 seconds has to be treated much differently than the previous 2370 seconds....and Ewing did nothing different to close it out. The result was that players did not know what they were running and it showed. Why? |
|
|
|
Post by bereal on Dec 9, 2018 12:10:38 GMT -5
The coach is responsible for putting the team in the best position to win, if the kids don't execute then you question his personnel choice not strategy of play on versus timeout . In the game yesterday, he wanted to get the two freshman back in and had a timeout to do so. Everybody was expecting a timeout to change personnel even the kids on the court, but he didn't call it, so the criticism for his coaching strategy is fair. Everyone focuses on end of game because that's where players and coaches make their names, I think Coach calls it Cahones . Nobody is above criticism. Pat knew who he had in the game, he decided to go with the guys that got him there. What's the narrative If he put them in and we still lost? There seems to be some weird belief that we win if he makes that move. What if he puts them in and they make an error that people view as costing us the game. Would he be praised for making the switch? No. We would have folks saying he should have gone with the guys who got us there. Win by 1- genius Lose by 1- idiot |
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,783
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 9, 2018 12:11:20 GMT -5
The coach is responsible for putting the team in the best position to win, if the kids don't execute then you question his personnel choice not strategy of play on versus timeout . In the game yesterday, he wanted to get the two freshman back in and had a timeout to do so. Everybody was expecting a timeout to change personnel even the kids on the court, but he didn't call it, so the criticism for his coaching strategy is fair. Everyone focuses on end of game because that's where players and coaches make their names, I think Coach calls it Cahones . Nobody is above criticism. Pat knew who he had in the game, he decided to go with the guys that got him there. What's the narrative If he put them in and we still lost? There seems to be some weird belief that we win if he makes that move. What if he puts them in and they make an error that people view as costing us the game. Would he be praised for making the switch? No. We would have folks saying he should have gone with the guys who got us there. Win by 1- genius Lose by 1- idiot That choice was a mistake. Not because Jagan committed an offensive foul with five seconds left on the clock, but because that was incredibly likely outcome and calling a timeout would have given him a chance to get a ton better and more likely outcomes. Criticizing that choice isn't about outcome, it's about process. That said, Pat's coaching overall in this game was good. I don't think this was a good decision, and I don't think it was all that close. I think he realized he only had one timeout and coached by wishful thinking, frankly. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't get credit for the move to zone, for his change up of the lineup which stopped the bleeding, for just a general gameplan that gave us a chance to win a game where we were double digit underdogs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5
Nobody is above criticism. Pat knew who he had in the game, he decided to go with the guys that got him there. What's the narrative If he put them in and we still lost? There seems to be some weird belief that we win if he makes that move. What if he puts them in and they make an error that people view as costing us the game. Would he be praised for making the switch? No. We would have folks saying he should have gone with the guys who got us there. Win by 1- genius Lose by 1- idiot That choice was a mistake. Not because Jagan committed an offensive foul with five seconds left on the clock, but because that was incredibly likely outcome and calling a timeout would have given him a chance to get a ton better and more likely outcomes. Criticizing that choice isn't about outcome, it's about process. That said, Pat's coaching overall in this game was good. I don't think this was a good decision, and I don't think it was all that close. I think he realized he only had one timeout and coached by wishful thinking, frankly. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't get credit for the move to zone, for his change up of the lineup which stopped the bleeding, for just a general gameplan that gave us a chance to win a game where we were double digit underdogs. That's fair, but there's also a philosophy that if you call a timeout that allows the defense to set so some coaches don't like to do that. Going into that play that same lineup had scored on Edit 3-4 of their last possessions. I think he went with his gut, the same gut that got him to that point. It's fair to scrutinize the play but I don't see it as being more significant than other moves. The team needs to learn to play every possession like the game is on the line, and if they did that we probably don't lose a 15 point lead in 5 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by bereal on Dec 9, 2018 12:22:30 GMT -5
I think he needed to call a timeout to get the freshman in the game who were at the scorers table waiting to check in. I thought he made the decision to get them into the game, but was waiting for a stoppage instead of using the timeout. The timeout would have also allowed him to discuss what he wanted done, we were up 1 with only a 5 second differential in the game. If they don't foul, we run the clock down and take a shot with 2 seconds and put the pressure on them to rebound, get the ball up the court and score, probably a half court heave. If you lose with that strategy we tip our hat and move on. I'll be honest, when we had the ball up 1 and they decided not to foul and there was only a 5 second difference in the game and shot clock I thought we were home free. Call timeout, put in ball handlers and free throw shooters, calm everybody down, explain all we have to do is take a shot with 2 seconds and don't commit a foul. They should have been taking that half court shot that Blair took.
|
|
. 