calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,352
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 19, 2020 17:58:17 GMT -5
Clearly the Coaching staff was struggling to use the 10-11 rotation early in the season, but I am not certain that is an indictment of deeper rotations. I think that it as made more difficult by the personalities and the punishment of LeBlanc. Specifically, LeBlanc was held out of a starting role and Akinjo was not willing to assume the role he had been given. As was often the case last year the pairing of Akinjo and McClung was trying to force fit incompatible pieces. Too much selfish play and it hurt everyone. Had only two of the players left, I think keeping Alexander and Gardner would have enabled Ewing to implement the offense and defense we saw only glimpses of at he beginning of the year. We will never know but i hope that this is the last time I have to watch Georgetown lose games because the kids run out of gas.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 19, 2020 18:57:48 GMT -5
What I do know, based on comments by Ewing, is that guys do not want to come and not play significant minutes. Let's face it, these guys all want to be on the court. If they don't feel that their numbers are being called often they leave. Example, Akinjo. This is true to some extent, but it's easier to sell more limited minutes on guys when you have a good team like Villanova. It's a harder sell otherwise. On the rotation point, I think much of this is academic. It's rare for a good team to go more than 8-9 deep. The advantage of depth is that it allows you to figure out who should play, while providing backups when people go down for injury, etc. The problem isn't that we now have 7-8 players, it's that it's extremely imbalanced, with 3 centers, 4 guards, and 1 wing. While Akinjo and LeBlanc were big losses, the loss of Gardner/Alexander hurt a lot because they were wings, and we have Pickett now alone at that position.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Jan 19, 2020 19:51:32 GMT -5
What I do know, based on comments by Ewing, is that guys do not want to come and not play significant minutes. Let's face it, these guys all want to be on the court. If they don't feel that their numbers are being called often they leave. Example, Akinjo. You'll do a 180 so fast your head will spin if we lose someone to injury. You can do a 7-8 man rotation. You shouldn't have only 7-8 players you can use on your roster. If you look back at my earlier post, I did say we do not want to be in the current situation. However, I was speaking more qualitatively than quantitatively. I would appreciate 7-8 in the rotation and sort of like a second squad. Some have also raised the issue of having a spread across the classes. I agree with that.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,381
|
Post by drquigley on Jan 19, 2020 19:52:15 GMT -5
I think it depends on what you consider a great game from Pickett is. A great game from him would be a disappointing game from any of our BE opponents who have quality power forwards. I agree he has improved this year but he has a long way to go before he is mistaken for Saddiq Bey or Bryce Nze. And this depth discussion suffers from the same false equivalency. It depends on the quality of your bench not the quantity. If we had LeBlanc and/or Gardner instead of Muresan I'd agree that a 7 man rotation would be fine. I'm beginning to love this team's guts but can't ignore its shortcomings since the transfers. Was at yesterdays game with 7 friends. They all agreed that in the last 5 minutes our guys looked gassed. Nze? He's averaging 6.8 points & 6.6 rebounds so far in conference play. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/bryce-nze-1.htmlPickett is averaging 11.3 points & 7.0 rebounds so far in conference play. Sure he's not Bey but Pickett's numbers are very similar to Jermaine Samuels who's averaging 11.6 & 5.6 in conference play. Paul Reed is the best PF in the conference imo especially since I think of Bey as an Sf/wing so other than Reed Pickett holds his own pretty easily. Unfortunately there isn't a stat for bonehead plays (out of bounds pass to opponent), ridiculous shot attempts, and passes bouncing off head and hands, or Jamorko would lead the league. Overall Nze is slightly ahead of Jamorko in points and rebounds per game and I haven't seen enough of Nze to know if he is close in the "holding your breath while he is dribbling" category. I agree Jamorko has improved this year and may develop into a dangerous power forward next year but right now this team desperately needs one and he isn't it.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,901
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 19, 2020 20:12:26 GMT -5
Nze? He's averaging 6.8 points & 6.6 rebounds so far in conference play. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/bryce-nze-1.htmlPickett is averaging 11.3 points & 7.0 rebounds so far in conference play. Sure he's not Bey but Pickett's numbers are very similar to Jermaine Samuels who's averaging 11.6 & 5.6 in conference play. Paul Reed is the best PF in the conference imo especially since I think of Bey as an Sf/wing so other than Reed Pickett holds his own pretty easily. Unfortunately there isn't a stat for bonehead plays (out of bounds pass to opponent), ridiculous shot attempts, and passes bouncing off head and hands, or Jamorko would lead the league. Overall Nze is slightly ahead of Jamorko in points and rebounds per game and I haven't seen enough of Nze to know if he is close in the "holding your breath while he is dribbling" category. I agree Jamorko has improved this year and may develop into a dangerous power forward next year but right now this team desperately needs one and he isn't it. They're close overall but Pickett has outplayed him in conference play so far, Nze is averaging 2.8 turnovers per game too which is higher than Pickett's 1.8 in conference play. Plus Nze doesn't stretch the floor at all, he's 1-2 from 3 for the year. Meanwhile, Pickett is 17 of 43 from beyond the arc. Pickett may not be the "dangerous PF" folks covet but Nze wouldn't be that guy @ Gtown either if you're being even a little objective.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,132
|
Post by RBHoya on Jan 19, 2020 21:01:15 GMT -5
Interesting comments by Arkansas coach Eric Musselman the other day that I recommend watching:
I always hesitate to talk about something being "overrated", because how it's "rated" is so subjective and not at all empirical. There are certainly benefits to a smaller rotation, as Musselman lays out--it eliminates a lot of potential chemistry issues, and gives players the confidence of a "long leash."
That said, as we've seen, the unexpected happens sometimes. Whether it's injuries, illness, academic issues, in-season transfers (increasingly common), or behavior problems, the team you think you're going to head into the season with in May or June may not be exactly the same by January or February. Plus, sometimes guys just don't perform the way you'd expect. Whether it's a freshman who you expected to contribute early who isn't ready or an upperclassmen who you expected to improve but hasn't, it's helpful to have some other options. For that reason you really don't want to cut it too close.
Really the best way to handle this is to bring in a full roster kids with the right type of disposition. If you bring in too few kids, you're susceptible to injuries, etc. If you bring in 13 kids with attitudes like James Akinjo's, you're absolutely going to have locker room issues. But if you bring in a roster full of kids who are not entitled and willing to "pay their dues" and earn a role, you're well-positioned. They won't pout or complain or transfer if they don't get their minutes and their touches, but they can be called upon if there are unexpected departures or injuries.
Obviously this is easier said than done. More and more kids today are worried about managing their brand, think warming the bench is a sign of disrespect and are quick to bail if they are not immediately featured. I think it's especially difficult to find kids with this disposition when you are relying heavily on kids who you've only recruited for a couple weeks and are making a major push to sign in the spring (which is a high % of our roster at the beginning of this year). Really good college coaches like Jay Wright, Tony Bennett, John Beilien, Coach K, etc. are recruiting not just based on a kids highlight reel but also for a certain type of culture. I don't feel like we're there yet, but it's possible, and IMHO what we should be shooting for.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Jan 20, 2020 1:40:44 GMT -5
Interesting comments by Arkansas coach Eric Musselman the other day that I recommend watching: I always hesitate to talk about something being "overrated", because how it's "rated" is so subjective and not at all empirical. There are certainly benefits to a smaller rotation, as Musselman lays out--it eliminates a lot of potential chemistry issues, and gives players the confidence of a "long leash." That said, as we've seen, the unexpected happens sometimes. Whether it's injuries, illness, academic issues, in-season transfers (increasingly common), or behavior problems, the team you think you're going to head into the season with in May or June may not be exactly the same by January or February. Plus, sometimes guys just don't perform the way you'd expect. Whether it's a freshman who you expected to contribute early who isn't ready or an upperclassmen who you expected to improve but hasn't, it's helpful to have some other options. For that reason you really don't want to cut it too close. Really the best way to handle this is to bring in a full roster kids with the right type of disposition. If you bring in too few kids, you're susceptible to injuries, etc. If you bring in 13 kids with attitudes like James Akinjo's, you're absolutely going to have locker room issues. But if you bring in a roster full of kids who are not entitled and willing to "pay their dues" and earn a role, you're well-positioned. They won't pout or complain or transfer if they don't get their minutes and their touches, but they can be called upon if there are unexpected departures or injuries. Obviously this is easier said than done. More and more kids today are worried about managing their brand, think warming the bench is a sign of disrespect and are quick to bail if they are not immediately featured. I think it's especially difficult to find kids with this disposition when you are relying heavily on kids who you've only recruited for a couple weeks and are making a major push to sign in the spring (which is a high % of our roster at the beginning of this year). Really good college coaches like Jay Wright, Tony Bennett, John Beilien, Coach K, etc. are recruiting not just based on a kids highlight reel but also for a certain type of culture. I don't feel like we're there yet, but it's possible, and IMHO what we should be shooting for. I think the quote from Muss is pretty perfect. He's an excellent coach and has used the transfer market very well. He's gotten the most out of guys and you can see why. He lets them be free and control the game. He knows the type of guy he can recruit and knows who can play how much. He's a very high energy guy and you can see that in his players. I think anything under 8/9 really can hurt a team and keep guys tired. But his use of nine and having four guys who are watching and can play next year really opens up and allows players to see what they can and can't do. He did really well at Nevada and you can see why.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Jan 20, 2020 9:59:40 GMT -5
That’s a philosophical man, right there. Didn’t see that one coming. Thank you, man, for sharing. Where do you guys dig up these stuff. You always manage to elevate and enrich the conversations. Love this board for that!
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,381
|
Post by drquigley on Jan 20, 2020 10:08:17 GMT -5
Unfortunately there isn't a stat for bonehead plays (out of bounds pass to opponent), ridiculous shot attempts, and passes bouncing off head and hands, or Jamorko would lead the league. Overall Nze is slightly ahead of Jamorko in points and rebounds per game and I haven't seen enough of Nze to know if he is close in the "holding your breath while he is dribbling" category. I agree Jamorko has improved this year and may develop into a dangerous power forward next year but right now this team desperately needs one and he isn't it. They're close overall but Pickett has outplayed him in conference play so far, Nze is averaging 2.8 turnovers per game too which is higher than Pickett's 1.8 in conference play. Plus Nze doesn't stretch the floor at all, he's 1-2 from 3 for the year. Meanwhile, Pickett is 17 of 43 from beyond the arc. Pickett may not be the "dangerous PF" folks covet but Nze wouldn't be that guy @ Gtown either if you're being even a little objective. I guess my problem is I see Pickett play every game while I've only seen Nze play occasionally and it happens that when I do see him play he looks much stronger and more polished than Pickett. And probably Pickett's bad plays tend to stick with me more than his good ones. Last Saturday for example Mac drove the lane, had two guys step out to stop him so he passes underneath to Pickett but the ball bounces off Pickett's hands - not because Pickett has bad hands but because he wasn't paying attention and wasn't ready for it. This has happened several times this year. But I'll try to be more objective and hopefully Pickett will dazzle me and outplay Nze when we play Butler next week.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Jan 20, 2020 10:11:38 GMT -5
Interesting comments by Arkansas coach Eric Musselman the other day that I recommend watching: I always hesitate to talk about something being "overrated", because how it's "rated" is so subjective and not at all empirical. There are certainly benefits to a smaller rotation, as Musselman lays out--it eliminates a lot of potential chemistry issues, and gives players the confidence of a "long leash." That said, as we've seen, the unexpected happens sometimes. Whether it's injuries, illness, academic issues, in-season transfers (increasingly common), or behavior problems, the team you think you're going to head into the season with in May or June may not be exactly the same by January or February. Plus, sometimes guys just don't perform the way you'd expect. Whether it's a freshman who you expected to contribute early who isn't ready or an upperclassmen who you expected to improve but hasn't, it's helpful to have some other options. For that reason you really don't want to cut it too close. Really the best way to handle this is to bring in a full roster kids with the right type of disposition. If you bring in too few kids, you're susceptible to injuries, etc. If you bring in 13 kids with attitudes like James Akinjo's, you're absolutely going to have locker room issues. But if you bring in a roster full of kids who are not entitled and willing to "pay their dues" and earn a role, you're well-positioned. They won't pout or complain or transfer if they don't get their minutes and their touches, but they can be called upon if there are unexpected departures or injuries. Obviously this is easier said than done. More and more kids today are worried about managing their brand, think warming the bench is a sign of disrespect and are quick to bail if they are not immediately featured. I think it's especially difficult to find kids with this disposition when you are relying heavily on kids who you've only recruited for a couple weeks and are making a major push to sign in the spring (which is a high % of our roster at the beginning of this year). Really good college coaches like Jay Wright, Tony Bennett, John Beilien, Coach K, etc. are recruiting not just based on a kids highlight reel but also for a certain type of culture. I don't feel like we're there yet, but it's possible, and IMHO what we should be shooting for. Thanks for answering your own question. My thoughts, as I read your post, was precisely where are we going to find those kids?! In this age of meism, a sense of entitlement you can forget it. Now we are seeing kids transfer for reasons that would have been unheard of 20-30 years ago. Many of these kids today think they are stars already. They think they deserve maximum playing time and the ball in their hands the majority of the time with them taking 75% of the shots. I do agree with what I perceive to be one of your key points: Give me a quality 7-8 guys and have 4-5 others who know and accept their roles—and, perhaps most important, earn their right to step into the vacated spots when the time comes.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,381
|
Post by drquigley on Jan 20, 2020 10:17:26 GMT -5
Interesting comments by Arkansas coach Eric Musselman the other day that I recommend watching: I always hesitate to talk about something being "overrated", because how it's "rated" is so subjective and not at all empirical. There are certainly benefits to a smaller rotation, as Musselman lays out--it eliminates a lot of potential chemistry issues, and gives players the confidence of a "long leash." That said, as we've seen, the unexpected happens sometimes. Whether it's injuries, illness, academic issues, in-season transfers (increasingly common), or behavior problems, the team you think you're going to head into the season with in May or June may not be exactly the same by January or February. Plus, sometimes guys just don't perform the way you'd expect. Whether it's a freshman who you expected to contribute early who isn't ready or an upperclassmen who you expected to improve but hasn't, it's helpful to have some other options. For that reason you really don't want to cut it too close. Really the best way to handle this is to bring in a full roster kids with the right type of disposition. If you bring in too few kids, you're susceptible to injuries, etc. If you bring in 13 kids with attitudes like James Akinjo's, you're absolutely going to have locker room issues. But if you bring in a roster full of kids who are not entitled and willing to "pay their dues" and earn a role, you're well-positioned. They won't pout or complain or transfer if they don't get their minutes and their touches, but they can be called upon if there are unexpected departures or injuries. Obviously this is easier said than done. More and more kids today are worried about managing their brand, think warming the bench is a sign of disrespect and are quick to bail if they are not immediately featured. I think it's especially difficult to find kids with this disposition when you are relying heavily on kids who you've only recruited for a couple weeks and are making a major push to sign in the spring (which is a high % of our roster at the beginning of this year). Really good college coaches like Jay Wright, Tony Bennett, John Beilien, Coach K, etc. are recruiting not just based on a kids highlight reel but also for a certain type of culture. I don't feel like we're there yet, but it's possible, and IMHO what we should be shooting for. Wow, excellent observation and post. Gotta agree that carrying too many guys who will never see the kind of pt they think they deserve has to hurt team chemistry. But I agree that this means you might want to cut a few scholarships but also, as you point out, you need to recruit guys who fit this culture and understand that their time to shine might not come in their first two years but rather in their junior or senior year.
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,508
|
Post by bostonfan on Jan 20, 2020 10:17:35 GMT -5
I think depth matters more to some programs than others, depending on the style of play they want to employ. Early in the year the Hoyas used some full court pressure in pretty much every game, but since the transfers we have not seen it at all. I think Coach Ewing would like to utilize that pressure to speed the game up for other teams, but he knows he does not have the depth needed to do it effectively any longer. Team like Syracuse and other teams that play a lot of zone defense and typically want to play offensively in the half court can get by with a 7-8 rotation, but if you want to play an uptempo style and utilize pressure defense (either in the half court or full court) you really need at least 9 consistent contributors to keep the energy levels where they need to be in order to be effective.
I also think trying to find consistent playing time for 11 guys every game is a really difficult thing to do for any staff and is going to lead to some guys being upset about lack of minutes. The type of high level recruits that you want to bring in are used to playing a lot of minutes every game and settling for 5 -10 minutes a game is not something that most of their egos can accept. There is something to be said for having the last few guys on your bench be development/project guys who understand they are going to see limited minutes for the start of their college career as they develop their game and get stronger, as long as they DO develop and become useful parts of the program for the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Feb 8, 2020 14:50:30 GMT -5
Well, I guess today answered that question.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Feb 8, 2020 16:10:37 GMT -5
Well, I guess today answered that question. I think next game would be a much better indicator. Or the games after. Today was just spot minutes, with a few. Depth is season long, not just one game.
|
|
|
Post by wponds on Feb 8, 2020 16:37:06 GMT -5
I think it depends on how you look at it. IMO depth hurt us early in the season bc the guys really struggled to get into a rhythm. However, if we didn't have any depth to start the season, what would we have done when we had four guys leave the program?
When it comes to on the court stuff, I prefer an 8 man rotation with a 9th guy that's capable of playing competent minutes when needed
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Feb 8, 2020 16:43:33 GMT -5
Depth is important to deal with injuries, foul trouble and matchups.
We are getting hurt because we lack long athletic wings. Having anyone of LeBlanc/Alexander/Myron would’ve taken care of that weakness.
It also allows you to press aggressively without worrying about fouls.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Feb 8, 2020 16:45:05 GMT -5
A tourney winning team needs depth because of the inevitable injury, foul trouble, and matchup problem somewhere along the line of winning 6 straight games.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,297
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 8, 2020 17:21:49 GMT -5
I think it depends on how you look at it. IMO depth hurt us early in the season bc the guys really struggled to get into a rhythm. However, if we didn't have any depth to start the season, what would we have done when we had four guys leave the program? When it comes to on the court stuff, I prefer an 8 man rotation with a 9th guy that's capable of playing competent minutes when needed Depth was not the problem early in the season. The problem was who was here. Depth with team chemistry, balance and experience = championships.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Feb 8, 2020 17:29:11 GMT -5
Depth is great because you have more chances to figure out who your best 8-9 guys are. It also helps with injuries and transfers. Depth is not great when your coach ignores all evidence of who his best guys/lineups are and just tries to make people happy. You can never make everyone happy all the time.
|
|
|
Post by wponds on Feb 8, 2020 17:39:30 GMT -5
I think it depends on how you look at it. IMO depth hurt us early in the season bc the guys really struggled to get into a rhythm. However, if we didn't have any depth to start the season, what would we have done when we had four guys leave the program? When it comes to on the court stuff, I prefer an 8 man rotation with a 9th guy that's capable of playing competent minutes when needed Depth was not the problem early in the season. The problem was who was here. Depth with team chemistry, balance and experience = championships. Agree that depth wasn't THE problem, just saying that it can hurt when you're trying to find playing time for 10+ guys
|
|