EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,875
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 16, 2024 13:56:51 GMT -5
We're told the donors like him so what's stopping him from following the path he took at PC? It's not 2011-2012 anymore when few players transferred, and NIL did not exist. Those two factors have drastically changed the ability to retain players. Back in the day players' major reason for not leaving despite some feelings of being unhappy was that they didn't want to sit on the bench a year. Now, not only do they not need to sit, but they can get paid to leave! There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,281
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 16, 2024 14:00:07 GMT -5
It's not 2011-2012 anymore when few players transferred, and NIL did not exist. Those two factors have drastically changed the ability to retain players. Back in the day players' major reason for not leaving despite some feelings of being unhappy was that they didn't want to sit on the bench a year. Now, not only do they not need to sit, but they can get paid to leave! There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well. Key words: "my opinion"
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,737
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 16, 2024 14:05:49 GMT -5
If we had more than one higher volume scorer / penetrator coming in for certain, the conversation might be different. But even with Mack coming in, the number of players who can get their own shot off the dribble on this team will only go to two. It's very tough to create offense without being able to win one on one matchups. If only coaches were allowed to draw up plays to create open shots, rather than have players be forced to go 1-on-1 in the halfcourt. We drew up plays and ran them. But if your offense is only shots generated by movement, you're going to have a terrible time of it. Having one on one players not only gives you an outlet when other choices aren't working, but it creates help scenarios that open everything up. This is pretty basic basketball. I don't really know how you pick your favorites and whipping boys. When Akinjo was here and you loved him (mostly because Mac McClung screwed your mother or something), you raved about his one on one ability and how important it was. And I'm pretty sure you were anti-JT3, who was the king of generating chances through team play. So is it only important when it's someone you like? Was Epps chosen over one of your favored transfers? It certainly doesn't make sense that you think running plays can replace dribble penetration completely. Our offense was vastly improved year over year, even with massive imperfections. But a very good offense can score in a multitude of ways. Dribble drive penetration is a really, really important one, and it is difficult to create a strong offense without it. JT3's early offenses only had a few decent guys, but we had NBA-level post play. Cook did not provide that. But we know this is just you continuing to grind your constant axe.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,399
|
Post by iowa80 on Apr 16, 2024 14:06:10 GMT -5
Styles shot 36.3% from 3fg in Big East play while Epps shot 25.5%. Styles made 7 fewer threes than Epps on 61 fewer attempts. guhoyas.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2023?path=mbballBrumbaugh shot 44.7% from 3fg in Big East play. We're losing 2 of our best outside shooters and we're keeping our worst. Not sure that's a real bright strategy in 2024. Styles wouldn’t launch unless the stars aligned and he was alone on the offensive side of the court. That was why he was so ineffective really - got the ball dozens of times in rhythm and on the spot but didn’t pull the trigger. Epps had to pick up the slack and was forced to take far more challenging opportunities. That was by far the most frustrating thing about both Ish and Trez. Truth. There is a player inside Mr. Styles but waiting for that person to come out was one of the more frustrating aspects of a frustrating season. He worked underneath and, for that, I wish him well, but his role seems to be more bench piece than focal point.
|
|
wolveribe
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 337
|
Post by wolveribe on Apr 16, 2024 14:17:32 GMT -5
When you say "outside" shooters, are you only talking about 3 point percentage because some of the guys you listed had very poor outside shooting numbers.
Rowan was not one of our best outside shooters, you can't use him with such low volume.
24% of Epps shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 40%. 33% of Rowans shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 28%. 32% of Styles shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 44% (good).
Styles 3 point volume was still relatively low but his biggest issue was he only shot 50% at the rim despite his size.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,335
|
Post by daveg023 on Apr 16, 2024 14:26:48 GMT -5
When you say "outside" shooters, are you only talking about 3 point percentage because some of the guys you listed had very poor outside shooting numbers. Rowan was not one of our best outside shooters, you can't use him with such low volume. 24% of Epps shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 40%. 33% of Rowans shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 28%. 32% of Styles shots were 2 point jumpers where he shot 44% (good). Styles 3 point volume was still relatively low but his biggest issue was he only shot 50% at the rim despite his size. He missed an uncanny amount of layups and shots at the rim it seemed. Almost as if he had too much spin on these shots...
|
|
bluechi
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 634
|
Post by bluechi on Apr 16, 2024 14:27:12 GMT -5
My thing with styles is he did not seem to have elite anything like he wasn't an elite defender he wasn't athletically elite at least with Epps you knew that whenever he wanted he could get to the bucket Georgetown needs a lot more of that to be successful or they would just continue to be easy to defend just by using tough defense and I think they have some pieces that are headed in the right direction like a sorber like you need some creativity and something about your game that's hard to defend whether it be offensively or defensively like the guy who came off the bench for St John's he was just making plays dunking shooting getting past people and styles was not really that type of player and you would need that and a tournament setting and even throughout the season
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,875
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 16, 2024 14:48:49 GMT -5
Styles worked hard, and was a solid player. But yeah, he would definitely disappear at times (and I think it's unfair to pin that all on Jayden). Jayden was our only legit threat to score. He was an interesting player, but not a huge loss (although I would like for him to have stuck around). His 3-point shooting was okay, but I also never know if he was going to swish a 3, or throw up a brick. He (and Ish as well) missed some key wide open 3's down the stretch of BE games we had a chance of winning. He also struggled with his handles. He was pretty good getting to his spot and hitting the mid-rang J, but if he had to handle it all the way to the hoop, he tended to turn it over. Same said when he bullrushed when he was playing smaller guards that he would try to post up, he was usually a bit out of control and would lose the ball. He was also a dawg on the court for 5 minutes, and then you just didn't see him making plays at either end for long stretches. With that being said, a solid player for us, but not a big loss either (depending on who we bring in). Best of luck to Dontrez. Overall, he was solid Hoya who worked hard and never complained. If he tightens up his handles, I definitely think he can take another step this season @ NC State. He has shaky handles and couldn’t dribble penetrate or create his own shot. They made him a stand around 3 pt spacer or someone in the post who had a good short midrange (worst shot in basketball according to 2003). His weapons were more Effective against smaller lower level opponents than bigger big east caliber forwards. He’s a bit undersized to be an elite power forward but lacks the handles to be a good wing. This is why he was inconsistent and could disappear. So how do you explain that his overall stats are almost identical to his conference stats? As a side note he was below his season averages in both Depaul games. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/dontrez-styles-1.html
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 15:25:59 GMT -5
It's not 2011-2012 anymore when few players transferred, and NIL did not exist. Those two factors have drastically changed the ability to retain players. Back in the day players' major reason for not leaving despite some feelings of being unhappy was that they didn't want to sit on the bench a year. Now, not only do they not need to sit, but they can get paid to leave! There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well. It is objective fact that 2011-2012 recruiting was significantly different than it is now. Transfers had to sit. The only transfers who could play immediately were graduates. There was no way to make money off basketball other than going abroad or making the NBA. Now, players do not need to sit--even if they transfer every year. And they can get NIL payments, too. I am not "blaming" anybody. The changes that have happened are not the faults of the players. I do not blame them for transferring, nor do I blame them for getting money they can get from NIL to transfer. Most of us would likely do the same thing in their shoes. But, the reality is that the recruiting landscape is far more tilted toward the players than it was in 2011-2012 when Cooley started at Providence. And coaches' jobs are way harder now in keeping a roster together. Do coaching staffs have a say in some of the transfers? Probably. But, keep in mind in 2011, a coach might have said, "we like you, but you're unlikely to start next year" and a player might have begrudingly stayed wanting to avoid sitting a year and thereby delaying playing professional ball. Now, that player can easily leave, go somewhere else immediately, and get paid to do it. The two situations are wildly different. It is no surprise that the guys who traditionally stayed for 4 years only to play as an upperclassman (after they matured/got better) are becoming rarer and rarer. I am thinking of guys like Aaron Bowen, Jabril Trawick, Henry Sims, Bradley Hayes, Moses Ayegba, etc. Because of the rules, those guys had one option--transfer and sit out, or suck it up, stay, and hope for better playing time later in your career. I am 100% confident that if the current rules existed then, one or many of those guys would not have made it past one or two years at Georgetown.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,297
|
Post by hoyaboya on Apr 16, 2024 15:31:56 GMT -5
The point is Cooley's methodology cannot be Hurley's or Shaka's right now. If we have success, and the rules haven't changed, I expect Cooley's methodology to be very similar to the other two. Two points: 1. Talking about historical teams, even a few years ago has less value than normal because this is literally the first college basketball year ever where it has been clear from the start that guys can transfer twice without sitting. Even at this time last year, this was up in the air, and not a given.
2. The worst team Hurley had at Connecticut was the first one in the AAC, ranked 98 (KenPom). His worse defensive team was the same year, ranked 129. Marquette may have surprised in 2022-2023, but that year they were ranked 56. The year before Smart took over, Wojo's team was ranked 83, with an 83rd ranked defense. In contrast, this year's Georgetown team was ranked 192, with defense overall ranked 321st. Ewing's last team was ranked 219, with 240 ranked defense. The type of rebuild facing Cooley (and yes, I give him responsibility for the poor season last year, it's not just Ewing) now is significantly different than the one faced by Hurley, Marquette, or anybody else in the Big East. Really, Holtmann at DePaul is the only situation even remotely comparable to our current one. We'll see how that goes. 2003, you can't have it both ways. You consistently point to Cooley's "success" at Providence as reason to believe he's going to be successful at Georgetown. Yet on the other side of your mouth, you say you can't look to history to evaluate the present because college basketball has changed so much. So which is it? Personally, I think Cooley's most likely going to have a modicum of success at Georgetown, and we'll be a middle of the road Big East team with some years that are slightly better than that. But it looks like he's pursuing a different route to that success than what he used at Providence. At Providence, he built tough teams over time that had players who developed within his system. 2 offseasons into his career at Georgetown, it looks like he's got a revolving door and will have only 2-3 players on next year's roster who have contributed for him previously. Whatever "culture" he's trying to build, he's lost a year already on that front.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,297
|
Post by hoyaboya on Apr 16, 2024 15:35:30 GMT -5
"Tyrese Hunter, DJ Wagner, Johnell Davis highlight top available lead guards in transfer portal Scouting reports and the latest buzz for the top uncommitted lead guards in the college basketball transfer portal... NO. 18 OVERALL: MALIK MACK, FROM HARVARD The scoop: Mack was one of the top freshmen in the country, averaging 17.2 points, 4.8 assists and 4.0 rebounds for Harvard. The lefty can create his own shot in a hot second and he is a terrific playmaker for others. Mack graded out in the 75th percentile in ball screens, according to Synergy, and he drew 5.0 fouls per 40 minutes. Mack torched high-major teams like Indiana and Boston College in non-conference play. His jumper went awry in Ivy League play, but he still finished over 34% from downtown on high volume while shouldering a huge role for an iffy Harvard offense. Georgetown has emerged as the leader for Mack in a hotly-contested recruitment. Ed Cooley envisions Mack joining soon-to-be-junior Jayden Epps to form a high-upside backcourt duo of bucket-getters. Mack and Epps don't have a ton of positional size, but both can absolutely fill it up, and two lead guards is better than one. The Hoyas have earned multiple crystal balls for Mack's services." 247sports.com/longformarticle/tyrese-hunter-dj-wagner-johnell-davis-highlight-top-available-lead-guards-in-college-basketballs-transfer-portal-230512080/#2407656
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 15:40:34 GMT -5
2003, you can't have it both ways. You consistently point to Cooley's "success" at Providence as reason to believe he's going to be successful at Georgetown. Yet on the other side of your mouth, you say you can't look to history to evaluate the present because college basketball has changed so much. So which is it? Personally, I think Cooley's most likely going to have a modicum of success at Georgetown, and we'll be a middle of the road Big East team with some years that are slightly better than that. But it looks like he's pursuing a different route to that success than what he used at Providence. At Providence, he built tough teams over time that had players who developed within his system. 2 offseasons into his career at Georgetown, it looks like he's got a revolving door and will have only 2-3 players on next year's roster who have contributed for him previously. Whatever "culture" he's trying to build, he's lost a year already on that front. Actually, I can have it both ways. You are comparing apples and oranges. You are missing the context entirely. The post I was responding to was specifically about building a roster, and whether you can build a team like Marquette or Creighton. EtomicB asked why Cooley cannot do what he did at Providence. Specifically with respect to building a roster, my point is merely that you cannot simply look at how Cooley built a roster at Providence (in 2011-2012) and say he should do that here when one considers that the transfer and NIL rules are hugely different now (and NIL didn't even exist then). I think trying to use an older model (in which players were not able to leave easily) is silly when a new model (where players can leave very easily and get money too) is not going to work, especially for a team that has been as bad as ours. If you read the thread above you will see that. This is entirely different from evaluating a coach's ability. Recruiting has changed. The game itself on the court has not changed much, and so it's easier to take what a coach did 5-10 years ago and use it as an indicator of how that coach will coah now. Did he coach good offense? Did he coach good defense? Did he make the NCAA tournament? Does he have a consistent record of success? Simply because there is a transfer portal does not change that good defense is good defense. The same on offense. Sure, putting a roster in place is crucial, but so are the other elements (which is why I am worried about defense). Generally, a coach's prior success or failure is the best indicator we have of their future results. Will there be coaches who simply do not succeed in the NIL era simply because they cannot get rosters together at all? Probably. I have no evidence that will be Cooley, though. In fact, Cooley used the portal to bring in Hopkins and Carter, both of whom led Providence to the tournament, and very well likely would have again if Hopkins did not get hurt and Cooley stayed there.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,875
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 16, 2024 17:25:38 GMT -5
There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well. It is objective fact that 2011-2012 recruiting was significantly different than it is now. Transfers had to sit. The only transfers who could play immediately were graduates. There was no way to make money off basketball other than going abroad or making the NBA. Now, players do not need to sit--even if they transfer every year. And they can get NIL payments, too. I am not "blaming" anybody. The changes that have happened are not the faults of the players. I do not blame them for transferring, nor do I blame them for getting money they can get from NIL to transfer. Most of us would likely do the same thing in their shoes. But, the reality is that the recruiting landscape is far more tilted toward the players than it was in 2011-2012 when Cooley started at Providence. And coaches' jobs are way harder now in keeping a roster together. Do coaching staffs have a say in some of the transfers? Probably. But, keep in mind in 2011, a coach might have said, "we like you, but you're unlikely to start next year" and a player might have begrudingly stayed wanting to avoid sitting a year and thereby delaying playing professional ball. Now, that player can easily leave, go somewhere else immediately, and get paid to do it. The two situations are wildly different. It is no surprise that the guys who traditionally stayed for 4 years only to play as an upperclassman (after they matured/got better) are becoming rarer and rarer. I am thinking of guys like Aaron Bowen, Jabril Trawick, Henry Sims, Bradley Hayes, Moses Ayegba, etc. Because of the rules, those guys had one option--transfer and sit out, or suck it up, stay, and hope for better playing time later in your career. I am 100% confident that if the current rules existed then, one or many of those guys would not have made it past one or two years at Georgetown. I get why you're using 2011 and I agree the rules in place were much different then but it still doesn't change the basic fact that coaches with the resources Cooley has can still hang onto players in 2024 if they choose to in my opinion of course. No one thought much of Bowman, Cook & Owens coming into the 04-05 season however linked up with Green, Wallace & Hibbert they shined. Who's to say this group wouldn't have gotten a burst out of the incoming class & a couple of strategic portal pick-ups? Trawick played a lot from his frosh year on so he shouldn't be on your list. As for the rest, they were all out of the rotation players which shouldn't be compared with RB or Styles who were both heavy-rotation players this past season. To me, the transfer rules are perfect for 9-13 on a roster who want to play more. Why stick around when your eligibility is so finite?
|
|
thedragon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 2,304
|
Post by thedragon on Apr 16, 2024 20:03:17 GMT -5
Interesting. A KJ pull to URI.
|
|
astrohoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 303
|
Post by astrohoya on Apr 16, 2024 20:22:25 GMT -5
There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well. It is objective fact that 2011-2012 recruiting was significantly different than it is now. Transfers had to sit. The only transfers who could play immediately were graduates. There was no way to make money off basketball other than going abroad or making the NBA. Now, players do not need to sit--even if they transfer every year. And they can get NIL payments, too. I am not "blaming" anybody. The changes that have happened are not the faults of the players. I do not blame them for transferring, nor do I blame them for getting money they can get from NIL to transfer. Most of us would likely do the same thing in their shoes. But, the reality is that the recruiting landscape is far more tilted toward the players than it was in 2011-2012 when Cooley started at Providence. And coaches' jobs are way harder now in keeping a roster together. Do coaching staffs have a say in some of the transfers? Probably. But, keep in mind in 2011, a coach might have said, "we like you, but you're unlikely to start next year" and a player might have begrudingly stayed wanting to avoid sitting a year and thereby delaying playing professional ball. Now, that player can easily leave, go somewhere else immediately, and get paid to do it. The two situations are wildly different. It is no surprise that the guys who traditionally stayed for 4 years only to play as an upperclassman (after they matured/got better) are becoming rarer and rarer. I am thinking of guys like Aaron Bowen, Jabril Trawick, Henry Sims, Bradley Hayes, Moses Ayegba, etc. Because of the rules, those guys had one option--transfer and sit out, or suck it up, stay, and hope for better playing time later in your career. I am 100% confident that if the current rules existed then, one or many of those guys would not have made it past one or two years at Georgetown. I would add this is going to change the dynamic in another way. A Henry Sims type may end up for GTown his senior year like real Henry Sims. However, instead of rotting on the bench at GTown for three years, he will get development time at another school those years. This will make Henry Sims a better player and more valuable to GTown. At some point, if it hasn’t already, big school will actually recruit guys for two years down the line and encourage them to get reps elsewhere in the meantime. Inevitably, unless the system is changed some schools will end up being de facto minor league teams for other schools.
|
|
hoyajmw
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by hoyajmw on Apr 16, 2024 21:35:53 GMT -5
Interesting. A KJ pull to URI. Duke’s Jeremy Roach — also a Paul VI local kid — just reported to be entering the portal too for his last year. I think Roach would be the better get, given who we may be be able to land next year (one of the Lewis juniors) at the point. But not sure Roach will want to be a part of a building team for his last year, and although small (listed at a generous 5’10” I think) Hammond would be a fine addition/hopefully get our foot very firmly in the door at Paul VI. I saw him play quite a few times and it was clear to me he was far better than Rhode Island (recall his teammates included two Duke, a UCONN and an ND commit) so i’m not surprised — even without Johnson coming here — he is looking to trade up…
|
|
thedragon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 2,304
|
Post by thedragon on Apr 16, 2024 22:18:42 GMT -5
Interesting. A KJ pull to URI. Duke’s Jeremy Roach — also a Paul VI local kid — just reported to be entering the portal too for his last year. I think Roach would be the better get, given who we may be be able to land next year (one of the Lewis juniors) at the point. But not sure Roach will want to be a part of a building team for his last year, and although small (listed at a generous 5’10” I think) Hammond would be a fine addition/hopefully get our foot very firmly in the door at Paul VI. I saw him play quite a few times and it was clear to me he was far better than Rhode Island (recall his teammates included two Duke, a UCONN and an ND commit) so i’m not surprised — even without Johnson coming here — he is looking to trade up… Roach has UK and Nova already offering big dollars. He won't be looking at us.
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,096
|
Post by hoyas315 on Apr 17, 2024 9:03:08 GMT -5
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,328
|
Post by SDHoya on Apr 17, 2024 9:14:08 GMT -5
Great to see this confirmed!
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,096
|
Post by hoyas315 on Apr 17, 2024 9:18:37 GMT -5
|
|