prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 14, 2024 21:36:09 GMT -5
Going to repeat this question in this thread because a) no one had any reply and b) this came up the next day: x.com/a_mont04/status/1845509485097341052Question: what role, if any, does/will Austin Montgomery play for the team this season? Is/Was he a walk-on? I remember him having a decent three-point shot last year, and he seems like a hard worker. From practice shots/photos, he looks like he's been keeping up with conditioning and is focused and intense in practice. Just wondering. I believe he is a walk-on, at least according to the Recruiting scholarship thread. He had hardly any role last year. This year, our talent is much better. So, aside from garbage time and practice, he shouldn't be playing any meaningful minutes. It would be great to get a walk on who turns into the next Jon Wallace, but that's very unlikely to happen. If Montgomery sees real minutes, it likely means our team is doing very badly. Or he can shoot the 3 on a team in need of 3-pt shooters… |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 14, 2024 21:44:01 GMT -5
I believe he is a walk-on, at least according to the Recruiting scholarship thread. He had hardly any role last year. This year, our talent is much better. So, aside from garbage time and practice, he shouldn't be playing any meaningful minutes. It would be great to get a walk on who turns into the next Jon Wallace, but that's very unlikely to happen. If Montgomery sees real minutes, it likely means our team is doing very badly. Or he can shoot the 3 on a team in need of 3-pt shooters… We needed three point shooters last year too. Why didn't he play? The explanations are (1) he was a walk on who really isn't that good of a three point shooter, (2) he can shoot but has such bad liabilities otherwise that he cannot play, or (3) Cooley is so incompetent that he had a three point sniper on the bench and did not use him for some unknown reason. Occam's razor would weigh in favor of #1. If he really can shoot threes well, I am all for it. But I am skeptical. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 14, 2024 22:12:48 GMT -5
Or he can shoot the 3 on a team in need of 3-pt shooters… We needed three point shooters last year too. Why didn't he play? The explanations are (1) he was a walk on who really isn't that good of a three point shooter, (2) he can shoot but has such bad liabilities otherwise that he cannot play, or (3) Cooley is so incompetent that he had a three point sniper on the bench and did not use him for some unknown reason. Occam's razor would weigh in favor of #1. If he really can shoot threes well, I am all for it. But I am skeptical. The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach. Cooley decided to live or die with Massoud. Anyone could have been as average as Massoud on offense, and less of a liability on defense, plus he was a weak rebounder for his size. As to this year, for whatever reason, Cooley could not sign a shooter in the offseason. Also, as you have pointed out numerous times, we have a very weak non-conference slate. Therefore, Cooley should use the non-conf to try Montgomery et al. vs. the KenPom 237+s (8 games) to see who can help/shoot in real games, not just in practice. It cannot hurt. Ideally, Cooley will find another gametime 3-pt shooter to help Fielder and Mack before the game at Syracuse, which is the last non-conf game before the early start of the BE. |
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,431
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 15, 2024 9:23:13 GMT -5
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,007
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 15, 2024 10:28:53 GMT -5
The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach. Cooley decided to live or die with Massoud. Anyone could have been as average as Massoud on offense, and less of a liability on defense, plus he was a weak rebounder for his size. As to this year, for whatever reason, Cooley could not sign a shooter in the offseason. Also, as you have pointed out numerous times, we have a very weak non-conference slate. Use the non-conf to try Montgomery et al. vs. the KenPom 237+s (8 games) to see who can help/shoot in real games, not just in practice. It cannot hurt. Ideally, Cooley will find another gametime 3-pt shooter to help Fielder and Mack before the game at Syracuse, which is the last non-conf game before the early start of the BE. You make a lot of claims that you aren't an absurdly negative poster and troll like your boy balla, but good lord, this post is hilarious. Your thesis, just to confirm, is that because Cooley once sat out a time out, that every decision he made was bad and a walk on that you've never really seen play was clearly better than Massoud all season and Cooley is just an idiot. That is an amazing leap to make. I assume you just wanted to talk about him sitting out a time out and decided to shoehorn that in in the least logical way possible. Furthermore, now that you can't rant about number of scholarships or big man depth, we're now going to see 10,000 posts about how Cooley "for whatever reason, could not sign a shooter" in the offseason. Oooooh, I'm looking forward to you rehashing that 15 times a day for the next year as you find something to pick on every single second. Please, please, please die on the hill of Austin Montgomery. This is going to be hilarious. DAE think Cooley's a moron for not starting Austin Montgomery?!?! He was three for three in garbage time last year! Why IS Cooley such a moron!?!?! |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 11:02:00 GMT -5
The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach. Cooley decided to live or die with Massoud. Anyone could have been as average as Massoud on offense, and less of a liability on defense, plus he was a weak rebounder for his size. As to this year, for whatever reason, Cooley could not sign a shooter in the offseason. Also, as you have pointed out numerous times, we have a very weak non-conference slate. Use the non-conf to try Montgomery et al. vs. the KenPom 237+s (8 games) to see who can help/shoot in real games, not just in practice. It cannot hurt. Ideally, Cooley will find another gametime 3-pt shooter to help Fielder and Mack before the game at Syracuse, which is the last non-conf game before the early start of the BE. You make a lot of claims that you aren't an absurdly negative poster and troll like your boy balla, but good lord, this post is hilarious. Your thesis, just to confirm, is that because Cooley once sat out a time out, that every decision he made was bad and a walk on that you've never really seen play was clearly better than Massoud all season and Cooley is just an idiot. That is an amazing leap to make. I assume you just wanted to talk about him sitting out a time out and decided to shoehorn that in in the least logical way possible. Furthermore, now that you can't rant about number of scholarships or big man depth, we're now going to see 10,000 posts about how Cooley "for whatever reason, could not sign a shooter" in the offseason. Oooooh, I'm looking forward to you rehashing that 15 times a day for the next year as you find something to pick on every single second. Please, please, please die on the hill of Austin Montgomery. This is going to be hilarious. DAE think Cooley's a moron for not starting Austin Montgomery?!?! He was three for three in garbage time last year! Why IS Cooley such a moron!?!?! Lol! Such a drama queen! No, that’s not my “thesis”. Reading comprehension is important. I wrote that Cooley admitted he did a terrible coaching job last year. I never said he’s a bad coach. Two different things… Don’t be silly. I applauded that Cooley used his scholarships and signed several big men. I also said that we needed at least one experienced big man and Cooley has gone with freshmen. I’ve been very clear that this is not a balanced team. As for our three-point shooting for next year, I know you feel the same way that I do in that it is a big question mark for this year’s team. Who will help Fielder and Mack? Will it be Mulready and/or McKenna? Will it be one of the Williams? Or an improved Peavy? Will Cooley have to search all the way to Montgomery? I remember when some posters mocked the idea of trying Bradley Hayes. |
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,007
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 15, 2024 11:52:03 GMT -5
Lol! Such a drama queen! No, that’s not my “thesis”. Reading comprehension is important. I wrote that Cooley admitted he did a terrible coaching job last year. I never said he’s a bad coach. Two different things… Don’t be silly. I applauded that Cooley used his scholarships and signed several big men. I also said that we needed at least one experienced big man and Cooley has gone with freshmen. I’ve been very clear that this is not a balanced team. As for our three-point shooting for next year, I know you feel the same way that I do in that it is a big question mark for this year’s team. Who will help Fielder and Mack? Will it be Mulready and/or McKenna? Will it be one of the Williams? Or an improved Peavy? Will Cooley have to search all the way to Montgomery? I remember when some posters mocked the idea of trying Bradley Hayes. It's a bizarre non-sequitur to talk about Cooley sitting out a time out in relation to a discussion about Austin Montgomery; the only purpose can be the usual ranting. It's also ridiculous to blast a coach for not playing a walk-on over even a crappy player like Massoud when you've never really seen the walk-on play. But this is par for the course. I do have concerns about three point shooting. But weirdly, when I talk about it, I don't make complaints about completely unrelated things or make outlandish arguments about walk-ons. I simply talk about my concerns. This isn't that hard if your goal is discussion instead of whining. And for the record, while I'd love more shooting on the team, I will take Cooley's incoming talent over DePaul's strategy anyday. Young, athletic players with upside who fit Cooley's style of play is a far better offseason plan than chasing upperclass three point shooters who may not be able to defend and won't be around after a year. I don't think that's a terrible strategy for DePaul, for sure, but the question becomes ... is that what you keep doing or how do you transition it, even if works? And if it doesn't ... what's the plan? It'd be nice to have another shooter. But if they can't defend, I'm not sure they get a lot of time on this team anyway. I would not take another Massoud or Heath over what we've got. |
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,604
|
Post by MCIGuy on Oct 15, 2024 12:11:18 GMT -5
Wouldn’t Epps help with the three-point shooting?
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,515
|
Post by SSHoya on Oct 15, 2024 12:24:19 GMT -5
Wouldn’t Epps help with the three-point shooting? I fully expect that Epps will have better shot selection playing off the ball with Mack as distributor. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 12:25:40 GMT -5
Lol! Such a drama queen! No, that’s not my “thesis”. Reading comprehension is important. I wrote that Cooley admitted he did a terrible coaching job last year. I never said he’s a bad coach. Two different things… Don’t be silly. I applauded that Cooley used his scholarships and signed several big men. I also said that we needed at least one experienced big man and Cooley has gone with freshmen. I’ve been very clear that this is not a balanced team. As for our three-point shooting for next year, I know you feel the same way that I do in that it is a big question mark for this year’s team. Who will help Fielder and Mack? Will it be Mulready and/or McKenna? Will it be one of the Williams? Or an improved Peavy? Will Cooley have to search all the way to Montgomery? I remember when some posters mocked the idea of trying Bradley Hayes. It's a bizarre non-sequitur to talk about Cooley sitting out a time out in relation to a discussion about Austin Montgomery; the only purpose can be the usual ranting. It's also ridiculous to blast a coach for not playing a walk-on over even a crappy player like Massoud when you've never really seen the walk-on play. But this is par for the course. I do have concerns about three point shooting. But weirdly, when I talk about it, I don't make complaints about completely unrelated things or make outlandish arguments about walk-ons. I simply talk about my concerns. This isn't that hard if your goal is discussion instead of whining. And for the record, while I'd love more shooting on the team, I will take Cooley's incoming talent over DePaul's strategy anyday. Young, athletic players with upside who fit Cooley's style of play is a far better offseason plan than chasing upperclass three point shooters who may not be able to defend and won't be around after a year. I don't think that's a terrible strategy for DePaul, for sure, but the question becomes ... is that what you keep doing or how do you transition it, even if works? And if it doesn't ... what's the plan? It'd be nice to have another shooter. But if they can't defend, I'm not sure they get a lot of time on this team anyway. I would not take another Massoud or Heath over what we've got. For the record, I did see all of Montgomery’s 17 minutes last year.  In those minutes (15 against BE teams), he shot 3 times and made all of his shots, all from 3. His shooting form looked solid. He also didn’t look out of place and didn’t turn the ball over. It’s not unreasonable to give him a shot against those bad KenPom teams to see what he can do. It cannot hurt, esp. when we need 3-pt shooting. I agree with you that we don’t need another Massoud and I could see a use for Heath, but not as a starter. We’ll see how DePaul’s strategy works out. It’s interesting how differently our conference foes have built their teams (DePaul focusing on transfers and 3-pt shooting; Xavier with no freshmen; MU with no transfers; SH with “10-11 I can play with” according to Holloway; Cooley looking to build with underclassmen; etc…). But that’s for another post. Keep it civilized. |
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,007
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 15, 2024 12:31:34 GMT -5
Wouldn’t Epps help with the three-point shooting? I think it's valid to question Epps as a three point shooter. He's shot 30% as a college player. Now, some of that is forced shot selection -- he was our only option and no one could create an easy set shot for him -- and some of that was probably Epps' personal shot selection (which may or may not change. Either way, we have Fielder returning at 40% on mid-volume and Mack at about 35% on good volume and ... not much else proven at a decent %. Given that it is one of the best ways for an outmatched team to beat another, and given that a lack of it can allow a defense to collapse on drives, pick n rolls and low post play, I think it's a legitimate concern. But it's also possible that between Fielder, Mack, an improvement from Epps, and passable shooting from Peavy (31% last year) and others ... we at least keep people honest. A LOT of our better games last year were Epps and/or Heath getting hot from three. Styles was a better shooter than Peavy. Brumbaugh almost certainly a better shooter than Mulready or whomever gets the backup guard minutes. So it's likely to be a downgrade unless Epps really improves. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 12:34:36 GMT -5
Wouldn’t Epps help with the three-point shooting? 🙏 I’m hoping that with Mack, the opponent’s perimeter defense will not be able to focus solely on Epps and he will have more space to take better shots while improving his efficiency with less usage. I can see him around 35-37% this year. My question is Fielder. If he’s as good as 41% from 3, then Cooley has got to find a way to get him to shoot a lot more. It will create mismatches, open up his drives to the basket and space the half-court for the rest of the team. Hopefully McKenna and Mulready (or anyone else) can help too. |
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,007
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 15, 2024 13:38:16 GMT -5
For the record, I did see all of Montgomery’s 17 minutes last year. In those minutes (15 against BE teams), he shot 3 times and made all of his shots, all from 3. His shooting form looked solid. He also didn’t look out of place and didn’t turn the ball over. It’s not unreasonable to give him a shot against those bad KenPom teams to see what he can do. It cannot hurt, esp. when we need 3-pt shooting. That's all fine. His form is solid. Those also weren't high leverage minutes, and there's lot of other aspects to basketball. If he gets minutes, he gets minutes. But I'm not sure how anyone can be upset he didn't get minutes based on what we've seen or you've said. That's my point. I will also be more than fine if he gets zero minutes this year. We have a large roster of guys who could use developmental minutes -- I don't need to see Austin Montgomery over Drew McKenna, for example. I don't have any reason to believe that's a good idea and while all coaches make mistakes, I really have no idea why this would be one if we don't see him. The problem with Heath is that he was only shooting well 50% of the time and was a defensive liability 100% of the time. There's more value in the offense when it is working, but with Epps and Mack here, as well as a center with offense, I'd rather have the defense. I think DePaul's strategy is a decent one for DePaul. I don't think they had much of a choice in terms of recruiting freshmen or incredibly well-rounded players; much like Cooley in year one. But I also think that it is a lot of players all at once who haven't defended in a high major conference, and the few transfers who have been in high majors aren't the shooters. Once the veterans are gone, I'm not sure there's all that much there. All in all, it probably makes sense given the restrictions, and it might make more sense for Holtmann, but I don't know that it is going to excite the Chicagoland area, especially local coaches. More relevantly to Georgetown, that doesn't fit Cooley. I don't think Cooley is a spectacular coach nor is his style of play necessarily advantaged ... but nearly every coach has a preferred style of play and to ask them to coach a team that can't play theirs is a mistake. I don't know if Cooley didn't have better options last year or if he thought he could coach guys up -- probably a bit of both and more of the former -- but there's little doubt that this team is much more in Cooley's image. Now, longer term, I think Cooley needs to find ways to ensure there's a bit more outside shooting out there. But he's a guy who plays extended defense to limit threes, and relies on athletic length to defend the rim and rebound. This isn't a bad defensive strategy in college. On offense, he's always done best with a penetrator or two and some brawlers down low. I think we're much closer to that. He's not John Beilein; there's no point in recruiting that way. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 15, 2024 14:26:32 GMT -5
We needed three point shooters last year too. Why didn't he play? The explanations are (1) he was a walk on who really isn't that good of a three point shooter, (2) he can shoot but has such bad liabilities otherwise that he cannot play, or (3) Cooley is so incompetent that he had a three point sniper on the bench and did not use him for some unknown reason. Occam's razor would weigh in favor of #1. If he really can shoot threes well, I am all for it. But I am skeptical. The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach. Cooley decided to live or die with Massoud. Anyone could have been as average as Massoud on offense, and less of a liability on defense, plus he was a weak rebounder for his size. As to this year, for whatever reason, Cooley could not sign a shooter in the offseason. Also, as you have pointed out numerous times, we have a very weak non-conference slate. Therefore, Cooley should use the non-conf to try Montgomery et al. vs. the KenPom 237+s (8 games) to see who can help/shoot in real games, not just in practice. It cannot hurt. Ideally, Cooley will find another gametime 3-pt shooter to help Fielder and Mack before the game at Syracuse, which is the last non-conf game before the early start of the BE. Cooley has expressed that he was not satisfied with the job he did coaching. That does not mean that everything Cooley did last year was a mistake, or that his failure to play Austin Montgomery was a mistake. To my knowledge, Cooley has not discussed playing Austin Montgomery one way or another. So I would hardly call that the simplest explanation, particularly since Cooley tried a whole bunch of different lineups throughout the year (but he stopped short of Austin Montgomery and the other walk ons...for no reason?). As for Massoud, no I don't think Cooley decided to "live or die" with Massoud. Toward the end of the season, Massoud got much less playing time. In the last ten games, Massoud averaged 13.2 minutes per game (most minutes was 21, and lowest was 4). He only started 3 of 10 games. I hardly call that living and dying by Massoud. As far as finding three point shooters, we do need to find them if they exist. But, I would trust we would find them among the many new members of the team that Cooley recruited on scholarship before moving to walk ons. As I said, if Montgomery really can shoot threes well, I am fine with him playing. I just think that if there is an answer to three point shooting woes it won't be Montgomery, at least based solely on a 3-3 from three mark in 17 minutes.* But I would be happy to be wrong. *I would note that Georgetown has a history of small sample size guys who turn out not to be that good. Take Trey Mourning, for example, who was 11-17 from two in 2016, and never lived up to being that good in later years. Or Ryan Mutombo who went 12-16 in the 2023 season, and then looked lost last year (to be fair, he had other things going on like his father's health, but the point still holds that small samples are...small samples). |
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,431
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 15, 2024 14:45:25 GMT -5
Crazy that they haven't promoted in anyway but I'm ready to hear from Cooley & Staff
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 14:51:22 GMT -5
Cooley has expressed that he was not satisfied with the job he did coaching. That does not mean that everything Cooley did last year was a mistake, or that his failure to play Austin Montgomery was a mistake. To my knowledge, Cooley has not discussed playing Austin Montgomery one way or another. So I would hardly call that the simplest explanation, particularly since Cooley tried a whole bunch of different lineups throughout the year (but he stopped short of Austin Montgomery and the other walk ons...for no reason?). No one said that "everything Cooley did last year was a mistake, or that his failure to play Austin Montgomery was a mistake." That's a dramatic departure from what I wrote. As for Massoud, no I don't think Cooley decided to "live or die" with Massoud. Toward the end of the season, Massoud got much less playing time. In the last ten games, Massoud averaged 13.2 minutes per game (most minutes was 21, and lowest was 4). He only started 3 of 10 games. I hardly call that living and dying by Massoud. Yes, by that time, it was too late. The season was dead, some players were not giving it their all, body language was bad, there was a lot of selfish play, etc... Massoud's minutes should've decreased even more, i.e. see if he's hot and if not, sit him. As far as finding three point shooters, we do need to find them if they exist. But, I would trust we would find them among the many new members of the team that Cooley recruited on scholarship before moving to walk ons. As I said, if Montgomery really can shoot threes well, I am fine with him playing. I just think that if there is an answer to three point shooting woes it won't be Montgomery, at least based solely on a 3-3 from three mark in 17 minutes.* But I would be happy to be wrong. Remember what you said about Hayes when we were in desperate need of a center? Now, should a coach who has a need for 3-pt shooting and has a 6'6" walk-on who made 3-3 from 3 against BE foes in 17 total minutes played last year not try to see what he has by playing him more minutes in non-conf games (not practice)? It cannot hurt to try all eligible players in those 8 games. It's a long season and injuries will happen, players will be tired, etc... *I would note that Georgetown has a history of small sample size guys who turn out not to be that good. Take Trey Mourning, for example, who was 11-17 from two in 2016, and never lived up to being that good in later years. Or Ryan Mutombo who went 12-16 in the 2023 season, and then looked lost last year (to be fair, he had other things going on like his father's health, but the point still holds that small samples are...small samples). Trey and Ryan are bad examples. Remember JT3/Trey/Miami? That was some personal s%^&. As to Ryan, a player goes from being helpful as a 12 mpg frosh to totally useless as a junior on a terrible team and a need in his position? Something else was going on. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 15, 2024 15:36:36 GMT -5
Cooley has expressed that he was not satisfied with the job he did coaching. That does not mean that everything Cooley did last year was a mistake, or that his failure to play Austin Montgomery was a mistake. To my knowledge, Cooley has not discussed playing Austin Montgomery one way or another. So I would hardly call that the simplest explanation, particularly since Cooley tried a whole bunch of different lineups throughout the year (but he stopped short of Austin Montgomery and the other walk ons...for no reason?). No one said that "everything Cooley did last year was a mistake, or that his failure to play Austin Montgomery was a mistake." That's a dramatic departure from what I wrote. As for Massoud, no I don't think Cooley decided to "live or die" with Massoud. Toward the end of the season, Massoud got much less playing time. In the last ten games, Massoud averaged 13.2 minutes per game (most minutes was 21, and lowest was 4). He only started 3 of 10 games. I hardly call that living and dying by Massoud. Yes, it was. By that time, the season was dead, some players were not giving it their all, body language was bad, there was a lot of selfish play, etc... Massoud's minutes should've decreased even more, i.e. see if he's hot and if not, sit him. As far as finding three point shooters, we do need to find them if they exist. But, I would trust we would find them among the many new members of the team that Cooley recruited on scholarship before moving to walk ons. As I said, if Montgomery really can shoot threes well, I am fine with him playing. I just think that if there is an answer to three point shooting woes it won't be Montgomery, at least based solely on a 3-3 from three mark in 17 minutes.* But I would be happy to be wrong. Remember what you said about Hayes when we were in desperate need of a center? Now, should a coach who has a need for 3-pt shooting and has a 6'6" walk-on who made 3-3 from 3 against BE foes in 17 total minutes played last year not try to see what he has by playing him more minutes in non-conf games (not practice)? It cannot hurt to try all eligible in those 8 games. It's a long season and injuries will happen, players will be tired, etc... *I would note that Georgetown has a history of small sample size guys who turn out not to be that good. Take Trey Mourning, for example, who was 11-17 from two in 2016, and never lived up to being that good in later years. Or Ryan Mutombo who went 12-16 in the 2023 season, and then looked lost last year (to be fair, he had other things going on like his father's health, but the point still holds that small samples are...small samples). Trey and Ryan are bad examples. Remember JT3/Trey/Miami? That was some personal s%^&. As to Ryan, a player goes from being helpful as a 12 mpg frosh to totally useless as a junior on a terrible team and a need in his position? Something else was going on. There is no dramatic departure from what you said. You literally said, "The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach." Then you said that Cooley decided to live and die by Massoud (not true). As I read your post, you're saying that Cooley did not play Montgomery because he coached badly and decided to go with Massoud. Will you at least acknowledge that it's possible that Cooley and the staff saw Austin Montgomery play many hours (perhaps hundreds of hours) in practice and decided that he was not a good option? To me, that is the most likely explanation for why he did not play. Keep in mind that Austin Montgomery is a walk on. It's not like he was a much-touted 4 or 5 star recruit who didn't play, but who has talent. No. He was passed over by basically every high major program (and probably many mid-majors, at least) for a scholarship (if not, he'd be at one of those schools likely). Georgetown took him as a walk-on. Even Bradley Hayes, who you mention, was not even a walk-on, but a scholarship player. To me, that's meaningful. As for Massoud, his minutes did decrease. He even played under 10 minutes a game in two games. In case you are forgetting, we had a dearth of players last year (and I agree with you that was bad), and so I am not sure how much more his minutes could have gone down, especially if the rumor about Fielder having some injuries was true. Trey and Ryan are perfectly fine examples. But I'll even leave Ryan out of it given his circumstances. Trey Mourning had a small sample size, very strong two point result, and then when Ewing (not JT3) actually played him a lot, he was not a Big East caliber player. That's the whole point--a small sample size of success does not extrapolate to success in a bigger role. This should be obvious. There are really also two separate issues here: (1) Austin Montgomery's playing time last year, and (2) Austin Montgomery's playing time this year. One could have argued in favor of Montgomery last year given how bad Massoud was all around. I still doubt Montgomery would have improved on Massoud much, but you never know. So if you're saying Cooley should have tried Montgomery more when we were so bad, I can understand that. But after Cooley recruited many new players, including a bunch of guards, I just do not see the answer for the 2024-2025 season in a walk-on. As I said, if that's what we need to do to score, we are in deep trouble. The blunt fact is that solely based on a guy hitting 3 of 3 from three point range in garbage time and your assessment of his shooting form, you are saying the guy deserves playing time. I am perfectly fine giving that decision to the staff and not second-guessing it. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 16:11:20 GMT -5
There is no dramatic departure from what you said. You literally said, "The simple explanation is that Cooley did a terrible job last year and he recognized it publicly. Remember him sitting out a time-out for all to see? Reminded me of Akinjo sitting deflated near the paint after the time-out break and the rest of the players and staff already in the bench area, but worse because Cooley is the coach." Then you said that Cooley decided to live and die by Massoud (not true). As I read your post, you're saying that Cooley did not play Montgomery because he coached badly and decided to go with Massoud. Cooley admitted he did a bad job, why not believe him? And no, Montgomery had nothing to do with it. It started from building the team, etc... Will you at least acknowledge that it's possible that Cooley and the staff saw Austin Montgomery play many hours (perhaps hundreds of hours) in practice and decided that he was not a good option? To me, that is the most likely explanation for why he did not play. Keep in mind that Austin Montgomery is a walk on. It's not like he was a much-touted 4 or 5 star recruit who didn't play, but who has talent. No. He was passed over by basically every high major program (and probably many mid-majors, at least) for a scholarship (if not, he'd be at one of those schools likely). Georgetown took him as a walk-on. Even Bradley Hayes, who you mention, was not even a walk-on, but a scholarship player. To me, that's meaningful. Who knows why he didn't play, just as Mutombo. Don't expect explanations. As for Massoud, his minutes did decrease. He even played under 10 minutes a game in two games. In case you are forgetting, we had a dearth of players last year (and I agree with you that was bad), and so I am not sure how much more his minutes could have gone down, especially if the rumor about Fielder having some injuries was true. More minutes for Bristol? More minutes for other players? Just not 13.2 mpg of departing Massoud over the last ten games... Trey and Ryan are perfectly fine examples. But I'll even leave Ryan out of it given his circumstances. Trey Mourning had a small sample size, very strong two point result, and then when Ewing (not JT3) actually played him a lot, he was not a Big East caliber player. That's the whole point--a small sample size of success does not extrapolate to success in a bigger role. This should be obvious. What is obvious is that if a coach doesn't give a player the opportunity on game day, he will not know what he has. Just like with Hayes... There are really also two separate issues here: (1) Austin Montgomery's playing time last year, and (2) Austin Montgomery's playing time this year. One could have argued in favor of Montgomery last year given how bad Massoud was all around. I still doubt Montgomery would have improved on Massoud much, but you never know. So if you're saying Cooley should have tried Montgomery more when we were so bad, I can understand that. But after Cooley recruited many new players, including a bunch of guards, I just do not see the answer in a walk-on. Of the roster players, the only ones with NCAA experience are 6'2" Epps (64-210!, 31%), 6'2" Mack (45-132, 34%), 6'10" Fielder (22-54, 41%), 6'6" C. Williams Jr. (35-122, 29%), 6'6" Montgomery (3-3, 100%), 6'9" Peavy (27-87, an improving 31%) and 6'9" Burks (2-5, 40%). Is short-sample Burks an alternative? Will Peavy continue his trajectory of improving every season? Will Epps improve efficiency? How much more will Fielder shoot and will he maintain his average? In sum, and this is my last post because I'm tired of the back-&-forth, I'm saying that Cooley should use those 8 games to find another 3-pt shooter, scholarship player or not. Try everything while you have the opportunity. Btw, it will improve morale while helping against injury, tired legs, etc... |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 15, 2024 16:29:54 GMT -5
Cooley admitted he did a bad job, why not believe him? And no, Montgomery had nothing to do with it. It started from building the team, etc... If Cooley says he did a bad job, then I will believe him. The results speak for themselves, they were terrible. But you're going in circles. If this has nothing to do with Austin Montgomery, then why you brought it up in the first place? Who knows why he didn't play. Cooley hasn't said why Mutombo didn't play. Don't expect explanations. You say "who knows why he didn't play" as if all explanations are equally likely--or that we cannot know if Cooley doesn't explain. Come on. If I said that Cooley didn't play Austin Montgomery because Cooley didn't like his haircut, that could be right (who knows, right?), but it also has no credibility. Do you know who coaches across Division 1 rarely play in real game situations? Walk ons. To me that seems like a pretty plausible explanation here. But for some reason, you have a hang up and cannot admit that the reason he didn't play is because he is a walk on. What is obvious is that if a coach doesn't give a player the opportunity on game day, he will not know what he has. Just like with Hayes... I actually disagree with this. There are some people who are such large projects (like Hayes, for his first 3 years), that no amount of playing time is going to transform a stiff into a good Big East player. Hayes developed into a serviceable center after 3-4 years, but he was still never a very good Big East player. And he certainly did not deserve big minutes as a freshman, for example. Again, the coaching staff sees these guys every day. They watch them work out. They see their work ethic. They see their dedication. You don't. Which is why I give the staff the benefit of the doubt on things like this. I'm saying that Cooley should use those 8 games to find another 3-pt shooter, scholarship player or not. Of the roster players, the only ones who have NCAA experience are 6'2" Epps (64-210!, 31%), 6'2" Mack (45-132, 34%), 6'10" Fielder (22-54, 41%), 6'6" C. Williams Jr. (35-122, 29%), 6'6" Montgomery (3-3, 100%), 6'9" Peavy (27-87, an improving 31%) and 6'9" Burks (2-5, 40%). Is short-sample Burks an alternative? How much more will Fielder shoot and will he maintain his average? Try everything while you have the opportunity. I agree that Cooley needs to cast a wide net. We have a lot of new players, and I hope most of them get a shot if deserved. I could not justify putting Montgomery ahead of any of these scholarship players though. I am totally game for trying many, many, things. But, I am not game for wasting time on having walk ons try to play real game time that will take away development time from guys who will actually contribute this year. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,643
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 15, 2024 16:38:34 GMT -5
We're clogging up the page here. Wallace was a walk-on and he played. Hayes was an end-of-the-bench player and he produced. I brought Montgomery up because he shot it well in very limited minutes. I have no hang-ups with it. It happens. Why not find out in games?
In sum, and this is my last post because I'm tired of the back-&-forth, I'm saying that Cooley should use those 8 games to find another 3-pt shooter, scholarship player or not. Try everything while you have the opportunity. Btw, it will improve morale while helping against injury, tired legs, etc...
|
|
In those minutes (15 against BE teams), he shot 3 times and made all of his shots, all from 3. His shooting form looked solid. He also didn’t look out of place and didn’t turn the ball over. It’s not unreasonable to give him a shot against those bad KenPom teams to see what he can do. It cannot hurt, esp. when we need 3-pt shooting.