hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Jan 14, 2007 14:42:34 GMT -5
Actually, unlike you I have seen every game this year. Roy has consistently been both blocking and altering shots at a very high rate. Apparently unless he is Ewing, Mourning or Okafor he isn't an acceptable shot blocker.
I didn't see anything last night that made me think we were better on defense with Roy out; we were getting killed either way. Another point you seem to be missing is that many of the worst matchups for Roy are against garbage teams that have 6'4" three point shooting centers - so there is no reason to think that for some reason against bad teams we are better with Roy in and against good teams we are worse.
The FACT is that teams have a harder time scoring against us when Roy is in than when he isn't, and I really see zero reason to believe that was padded against weaker teams. Sorry that I trust facts more than the eyes of a ranting message board poster. Perhaps if Macklin starts blocking shots and rebounding better than our guards (because so far, his defensive rebounding has been the worst on the team), but right now Roy is our best rebounder and by far our best shotblocker.
I'm getting extremely tired of people making up their minds about the team's problems (offensive system is bad, Roy is bad on defense, the guards are terrible, Macklin needs to play more), and harping on them after every loss - even when they weren't true for that particular game.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Jan 14, 2007 14:50:02 GMT -5
guys - we shot 60% last night. PITT is a good team when they're motivated. While i agree that we need an upgrade in guard play i think that that we will be okay like i said Ewing will be pretty good. I am disappointed that our inside is a tad weak. Guard play and weak inside does spell danger...and we haven't yetrecruited size for when hibbs leaves...
chi
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,995
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Jan 14, 2007 14:50:31 GMT -5
the guards did not rotate back well on d off of missed shots, allowing pitt to get some easy layups on the other end.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Jan 14, 2007 15:02:54 GMT -5
okay, thanks.
chi
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 14, 2007 15:44:20 GMT -5
MCI, I wasn't referring to you about the production of a player being more important then winning-but it does seem that way. We actually AGREE with how Roy is being held back by this offense and if you read what I'm saying--I'm referring specifically to the fact that if you plan on using this "Georgetown offense" it's best to not have a traditional low post player. It's not helping to have a good back to basket offensive player in the paint if he's not going to be focal point and if the guys he's kicking the ball out to are not good shooters. You are better off having court opened up and allow people to constantly cut backdoor and just free up the middle.
I agree with your take on Jeff. I told Dan yesterday that I actually view this season as Green's worst as a Hoya to this point. Why that is, have no idea? He stays in due to fact he's ideal fit for III's system of offense, but this team doesn't fit that style and won't until you get more consistent outside threats. So I agree with you again.
From what I've seen, this style of play doesn't fit the personnel or give it best chance to win against the caliber of team Hoyas will need to beat to accomplish anything. That doesn't mean you scrap it or change it forever, but a good coach alters things to fit his team--and I just believe our staff forces their style of play upon the roster--which isn't going to work in big games. When you have 2 talented upperclassmen and they are not players you can count on consistently, there is something wrong. It's not as if the guys have not shown flashes of their ability but you can't deny this team seems to be minimizing some of their strengths by forcing a style of play instead of utilizing their strengths in terms of personnel. Everyone on this site has said the personnel of this team is more like one of Pops old teams-and to limit possessions by holding ball isn't best--why not use the size to punish teams on glass and size to punish them? Why have your bigs both away from hoop and limit opportunities getting offensive rebounds?
It's not saying I never want to see the offense used, it's just that I feel it is not best suited for this year's team. Defensively, I completely disagree with what Hoyas do based on the physical limitations of the roster right now.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 14, 2007 16:00:48 GMT -5
Actually, unlike you I have seen every game this year. Roy has consistently been both blocking and altering shots at a very high rate. Apparently unless he is Ewing, Mourning or Okafor he isn't an acceptable shot blocker. I didn't see anything last night that made me think we were better on defense with Roy out; we were getting killed either way. Another point you seem to be missing is that many of the worst matchups for Roy are against garbage teams that have 6'4" three point shooting centers - so there is no reason to think that for some reason against bad teams we are better with Roy in and against good teams we are worse. The FACT is that teams have a harder time scoring against us when Roy is in than when he isn't, and I really see zero reason to believe that was padded against weaker teams. Sorry that I trust facts more than the eyes of a ranting message board poster. Perhaps if Macklin starts blocking shots and rebounding better than our guards (because so far, his defensive rebounding has been the worst on the team), but right now Roy is our best rebounder and by far our best shotblocker. I'm getting extremely tired of people making up their minds about the team's problems (offensive system is bad, Roy is bad on defense, the guards are terrible, Macklin needs to play more), and harping on them after every loss - even when they weren't true for that particular game. 1. Guards aren't terrible. They are physically limited in terms of quickness and nobody is a good penetrator or draws enough attention or is a consistent scorer. 2. Roy isn't a factor on defense--he is against Towson's of world but I've watched games against 1/4 of the teams GU has played--and 2 of those teams are best we've seen GU face. Roy was no factor at all on defense--those are the type of teams you have to beat if you want to accomplish things. 3. Did you watch last night? Who was on the court when Georgetown made the run to cut lead from 15 to 6? Which defensive group did a better job last night? Go back against Nova, which group did a better job on court together? Go back against Duke, which group did a better job on defensive end? Watch the game--it's out there for anyone who has eyes --that aren't tinted with homerism. 4. Roy Hibbert is a fine offensive player. That is strength of his game and always will be. What's wrong with saying that and that his defensive ability isn't strength of his game? Georgetown's defense isn't great at any position. They statistically do well in FG % defense due to the fact they limit possessions in game with their methodical approach on offense. Stats don't tell the entire story. It's like saying Time of Possession matters in FB--it only does if game is close--if you turn it over and I've had ball for 1 minute but have 28 points--I'll gladly give you TOP "victory". In basketball, if you are shooting 60% from field, and opposing team is getting 15 more shot attempts and shooting 5 percentage points less, I'd take that trade off. 5. Great defense CREATES offense by causing turnovers. Does GU cause turnovers on consistent basis? Everyone talks about Notre Dame game, but thing that stood out was hearing how posters mentioned the FAST BREAKING And attacking off missed shots. Did GU do this against Nova? Did they do it against Pitt? No. The offense was executed well last night, but you can't win a game if you are limiting your possessions and other team is knocking shots down--and especially in face of your anchor--but it's not all Roy's fault-he's physically limited by lack of athleticism and guards are too. How is that a wrong statement? How is that a rant when it's reality? Was it not reality that Macklin played well against Nova and Michigan, and didn't get a chance to do anything against Duke and didn't get much time against Pitt? Ranting is something I admittedly do-but discussing last night's game and games I've seen this year--I'd like to see how exactly I've been proven wrong. Unless you can prove--and watching the game last night-I'd like to know what some people watch or consider "good defense"-that Roy is helping this defense, how is it what I've said been wrong? Or is that you don't like the fact I'm not hyping all things Blue and Grey and just are Editeded off? Seeing GU basketball for 25 years as many have, we've seen some really great defense. This is not a good defensive team. Quickness is most important aspect in being a good defense in any sport. Hoyas are limited there and that's a FACT. Ken Pomeroy can dream up any scenario, stat, etc.. but watching the games I have and just watching the personnel that Hoyas have, I'll stick with my guns until proven wrong.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,668
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jan 14, 2007 16:13:02 GMT -5
While I don't like us to lose any games, this game was a lot easier to take than the Nova game. We have the good losses and the bad losses this year, but I think we better start getting some W's now to insure our tourney chances. If not, we will have to win the BE tourney, which I think we can, but I would rather not have us depend on that. Bottom line: no more bad losses!!! GO HOYAS!!!
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Jan 14, 2007 16:34:45 GMT -5
RDF, three questions about your post -
1 - Why does our slow offensive pace help our FG% allowed?
2 - What does everything else you listed under point 4 mean? I see no connection between FG% allowed and TOP, or what our pace has to do with the other team getting more shots off.
3 - Why can't you win a team win a game if it is limiting posessions and the other team is knocking down shots? Couldn't we knock down more? I think you are missing that the number of posessions we and our opponents have are directly linked.
I know you aren't the type to be swayed with facts, so I'll just allow you to continue thinking Roy hurts us on defense based on the 4 games that your glorious and all powerful eyes have seen.
Edit - 1 more thing, since I saw you mention this a few times. I just checked the play by play, and Roy left the game in the 2nd half when we were down 13, came back in when we were down 9, and left again before the final three. We lost 3 points when he was out in the first half. This magic "15 point lead being cut to 6 without Roy" moment never happened. This makes me doubt your eyes with regards to Roy's defense even more.
|
|
HealyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Victory!!!
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by HealyHoya on Jan 14, 2007 17:09:32 GMT -5
My thoughts on this game and (fortunately/unfortunately) I was in the lovely Petersen Events Center:
As has been noted in this thread and eslewhere, Wallace, Sapp and Rivers were absolutely eaten alive by Fields, Graves and Ramon. The Pitt guards were able to penetrate at will. When they didn't take the ball all the way to the rim and score or get fouled, they dropped it off to Gray, Kendall, et al for dunks, lay-ups. We aren't nearly quick enough to defend the perimeter and Pitt exposed this unlike any team we've seen to date this season.
That ability to penetrate made it seem as if Hibbs and Green couldn't defend the interior. In truth, our bigs were playing 3-on-2, 3-on-1 in the paint all night in an effort to stop penetration. Thompson tried to address this by giving Rivers more run (where was Bam Bam?) but, at this point IMO, Rivers is just too much of a liability on the offensive end. He had a back-breaking turnover late in the game. On the offensive side, the game is moving too fast for Rivers.
As we get into the meat of the BE schedule, if this Pitt game was an accurate indication, we would do much better with PEII's experience and energy in the starting line-up and Summers bringing his great (but inconsistent) offense off the bench.
Finally, Jeff Green. I'm sorry but if GU is the biggest disappointment so far this college basketball season, than Green is one of the most disappointing players. He cannot disappear for stretches. This is exactly the kind of game he needs to step up in and win outright. 15pts 3rbds isn't going to do it. He's capable of 25pts 10rbds. He has the talent but lacks that killer instinct. That kind of game and we come away with a win.
|
|
HoyaInsomniac
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
This is it. Don't get scared now.
Posts: 360
|
Post by HoyaInsomniac on Jan 14, 2007 17:15:18 GMT -5
Remember after we beat Duke last year, everyone (including Coack K) was saying you just can't beat a team that isn't missing shots. With both us and Pitt shooting over 60% from the floor, you can consider it either way: a good win for them or a good loss for us.
Side notes: Losing to Nova sucks way worse than losing to Pitt. Gray looks like Frankenstein.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 14, 2007 20:31:27 GMT -5
I don't want Hibbert to lose his 25 or so minutes, but would like to see the team pick up the pace, press on defense, and try to get Jeff, Summers, Ewing, Macklin some chances in the open court when Roy is out. If Ewing and Macklin are going to get 10-15 minutes, they need to be turned loose.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Jan 15, 2007 0:16:43 GMT -5
RDF, three questions about your post - 1 - Why does our slow offensive pace help our FG% allowed? 2 - What does everything else you listed under point 4 mean? I see no connection between FG% allowed and TOP, or what our pace has to do with the other team getting more shots off. 3 - Why can't you win a team win a game if it is limiting posessions and the other team is knocking down shots? Couldn't we knock down more? I think you are missing that the number of posessions we and our opponents have are directly linked. I know you aren't the type to be swayed with facts, so I'll just allow you to continue thinking Roy hurts us on defense based on the 4 games that your glorious and all powerful eyes have seen. Edit - 1 more thing, since I saw you mention this a few times. I just checked the play by play, and Roy left the game in the 2nd half when we were down 13, came back in when we were down 9, and left again before the final three. We lost 3 points when he was out in the first half. This magic "15 point lead being cut to 6 without Roy" moment never happened. This makes me doubt your eyes with regards to Roy's defense even more. If you slow the pace down--your overall FG percentage defense is going to appear better because there will be less possessions for both teams in the game. If you consider that in a 30 game season that you are only going to play about 10-12 games against quality teams on average and rest of schedule is going to be against decent to mediocre teams, you will come out looking good statistically--especially if you limit possessions in a game. The longer the game, the odds are more talented team finds a way to win. I understand the slow it down strategy when outmanned, but against teams you have more firepower, and when you are behind--you have to look for more opportunities to run. Secondly--the point of FG % allowed and TOP is basically saying it's a worthless stat if other team is benefitting. If I'm on a team shooting 48% from field and you are shooting 60% but I've gotten 18 more shots off and gone to the foul line more, I'm more then likely going to win the game--and especially when you factor in the 3pt shot unless GU is hitting all 3's. TOP is as overstated. If you turn the ball over and I'm scoring TD's, I could give a flying F if you have ball longer--as long as I'm scoring TD's. Stats only matter in one category--W's and L's. Games take on their own life and some games you have to slow it down, and others you better turn it up and run. I just look at Hoyas personnel and dont' understand why they'd not get more shots up and try to utilize their size on glass more and possibly wear a team down. Almost every Hoya game--the opposing team attempts more shots then GU and the games I've seen it's usally by at least 10 shot attempts--if not more. That means you are not getting shots off, you are not dominating the glass despite having a big frontline, and against good teams--that isn't going to help you win games. It's not like Hoyas get to FT line a lot--they are forced to make shots--other teams can afford some misses because they have players who create offense and can draw fouls. Hoyas get majority of their FT attempts when having a lead and teams have to foul--otherwise it's rare that GU out shoots the opposing team from Line--they usually make more then Hoyas attempt as a team. If you watched that game and felt Roy Hibbert influenced the game defensively at all--then may God bless you. I have no idea what you watch or if you need LASIK surgery, but I suggest something. I don't even think that could be debated about last night's game--but whatever you want to go with buddy. Enjoy.
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Jan 15, 2007 1:07:28 GMT -5
RDF, you are extremely, extremely confused. Fewer possessions does not necessarily lead to a better FG% against; I have no idea where you are getting that from. The pace a team plays also has no relevance when talking about strength of schedule, as the ratio of possessions against good teams and against bad would be the same.
The amount of shots taken compared to our opponents also has nothing to do with our pace - the difference would come from turnovers and rebounding. You again seem to not realize that us playing a slow pace does not mean the opponent gets more shots; they are equally limited in attempts, all else being equal.
The one accurate thing in your post was that a faster pace means the better team will win more often - a larger sample size will do that. However, that is only the case if our offense could remain close to its current efficiency at a faster pace. While I would like to pick it up a little and be more opportunistic, we don't have the talent or depth at guard to run that much right now. That doesn't mean we need to have the slowest pace in D-1, but we shouldn't be fastbreaking like mad either.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 15, 2007 2:42:10 GMT -5
RDF,
We take fewer shots than our opponents because we commit a ridiculous number of turnovers.
|
|
HoyaSpirit
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Gotta love Smitty - 1989 Big East Player of the Year
Posts: 305
|
Post by HoyaSpirit on Jan 15, 2007 5:03:54 GMT -5
anyone else feel like we have taken 10 steps back since the ND win? I felt like we did in the Nova game, though this game I would put only 3 steps back of the ND win. Our offense was as good as the ND game roughly, but our d was behind. to be fair, Pitt has a much stronger offense - very patient, with inside and outside play, a lot of experience etc. I thought we had a good game. The problem is really we should have beat Nova by 10 and be 2-1 in BE. We should be able to amass a decent record against the remaining opponents "if" we play strong and don't stoop to the level of our opponents. b/c pitt did not overplay the ball and did not 1-2-2 press, we don't know as yet if jt3 has learned and/or instructed the team on how to handle those. hopefully yes. challenge might be to get a decent seed in the tourney so we don't have to lay a top 8 team early on.
|
|
|
Post by hoyaeighties on Jan 16, 2007 8:58:06 GMT -5
Very good game...Hoyaboy1 don't waste your time with you know who I'm talking about...useless...on some different stuff...lol...he has a big problem with Big Roy to da tee...he never says anything good Big Roy does...Roy is put is so many odd positions yet and still look what Roy does...leads his team...the Pitt game was a good game by the Hoyas, but could of been a whole lot better if the guards played better defense...lots of times Pitts guards were penetrating and blowing past our guards so Roy was left defending the penetrating guards and therefore could not get back in time enough for the dish off to Gray...Thank you...
|
|
|
Post by theEDGEfactor on Jan 16, 2007 13:51:06 GMT -5
ok guys sorry went to the game...sorry for the no feedback. So as some know I am a senior in high school in the pittsburgh area. My semi-formal dance was the night of the big game. Well, i had this game marked down on the calendar alot longer than my semi, so i went to my semi for an hour and left at 830 for the game. I got to the game with 17 minutes left in the first seeing an 11-9 gtown advantage on the scoreboard. My ticked was about 8 rows back from gtown's bench so was some great ticks to find at the last minute for a game that has been sold out for a month or so. So I get there luckily to find a group of hoya alumn right next to me (around 15 or so). Every year I get heckled about gtown and this year it kept going. A parking lot didn't let me park because I was wearing gtown apparel. The seater at the pete wouldnt show me to my seat, and most of all, i got an earful from all pitt fans. I noticed that the only two players not to play in the first half was sead and izzo, so it seemed like jt3 was looking to tire the pitt team down. Second half came, and really only about 7 played?In all, thought jt3 gave it his all for the win. Really loved the intensity of roy with some of his dunks, but him and jeff must crash alot more (only 2 boards for a 7'2 monster is not acceptable). Also noticed the lack of boxing out, instead we would glare at the ball and wait for it to hit our hands. In all, Pitt is a good team, but by far not a team who is destined for greatness. I would take pitt anyday versus us. But most of all, great game by jr. Ended up gettinginto a nice convo with a pitt fan how he thought our team was great and very underrated and saw us as a contender for the champ this year. He said big men win and you have the best in this nation. He also loved patrick and thought he was well deserving of getting starting minutes. He recognized our youth movement even though we are a very veteran-like team, and said we will be very scary for the coming years. In all, my take of the game was that we showed up for 35mins of the game. But this is a 40 min game and pitt just outplayed us, but deff does not have more talent then us. They are gonna be in a state of shock next year if they dont find a compatible replacement for gray. Ewing is due for some thanks. He kept us going in the game, with his energy, his emphatic block on gray when gray had the O-foul, or with the corner 3's (especially how he got fouled on both 3's while making them). The record doesn't show our talent, but I am pretty happy with the talent, and how the newcomers are already coming in and playing some good minutes and contributing right off the bat, and coming into the hardest atmosphere that they will play in the BE this year, and playing fairly well.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,527
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 16, 2007 15:01:45 GMT -5
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but Dukie V was right (that was hard) when he said that we couldn't stop Pitt's penetration.
Defend the paint better. It will lead to less baskets, more rebounds, more wins...
|
|