Speaking of next season, maybe we could have an offense that didn't rely as much on Bishop to shoot.
Or as John Feinstein said, "Bishop only shoots when he has the ball." 

Last season, Bishop took more shots per game than anyone in A-10, averaging 15 a game.
This season, Bishop again took more shots per game than anyone in A-10, also averaging 15 a game.

Last season, Bishop had a .427 FG percentage, ranking 37th in A-10 
This season, Bishop had a .387 FG percentage, ranking 61st in A-10.

Last season Bishop had a  .34  3-pt FG percentage, ranking 31st in A10
This season Bishop had a   .32  3-pt FG percentage, ranking 43rd in A-10. No player has a worse percentage than Bishop who took as many or more  3-pt shots 



 

GW73 wrote:

Speaking of next season, maybe we could have an offense that didn't rely as much on Bishop to shoot.
Or as John Feinstein said, "Bishop only shoots when he has the ball." 

Last season, Bishop took more shots per game than anyone in A-10, averaging 15 a game.
This season, Bishop again took more shots per game than anyone in A-10, also averaging 15 a game.

Last season, Bishop had a .427 FG percentage, ranking 37th in A-10 
This season, Bishop had a .387 FG percentage, ranking 61st in A-10.

Last season Bishop had a  .34  3-pt FG percentage, ranking 31st in A10
This season Bishop had a   .32  3-pt FG percentage, ranking 43rd in A-10. No player has a worse percentage than Bishop who took as many or more  3-pt shots 



 

 Very good and interesting analysis. The odd thing is that James has improved a lot in terms of being a team player.
Of course, he no longer has the ball in his hands all the time. The eye test and maybe stats show he is a better player when he is not always the focus of the offense. And no, all Bam not the answer either. Brayon is the only one who got things going especially first half to pull us to within mere humiliation.
As noted above by our excellent analysts, we need more than 3 players to contribute on offense.
But these statistics tell a disturbing story about how unbalanced our offense is (coupled with an often uncaring defense).
Especially the one about the comparatively low percentage of shots made and Bishop's  highest amount of shots in the league.
 What's really odd is that we are supposedly all about the analytics.
 Yet last night and in recent games, as we were making a small run toward it being an actual game, we reverted back to low-percentage, quick shots with no one under the basket. Aided by lazy passes, these shots by our stars proved to be an effective rally killer. UMass didn't have to do anything. We did it to ourselves.

Hire Joe Dooley for another 5 years of this!

Woulda, shoulda, coulda.

Can you imagine what ML would have done here if Luke Garza came? Nigel Johnson?

We can play that game all day.

Oh look the 3 GW stars all top 10 :

I guess that let's the hot air out of that BS argument!
The rankings are:

1) Brajkovic
2) Loyer
3) Joe Bamisile
4) Grant Golden
5) Josh Oduro
6) James Bishop
7) Toumani Camara
8) Jackie Johnson
9) Darrius Quisenberry
10) Brayon Freeman

moneybox wrote:

What other school besides GW would retain a coach with a 29-48 record after three seasons? None that cares about the success of its only revenue-producing sport.

Joe Dooley was 29-52 at ECU after 3 seasons and was fired after going 15-15 in year 4.  Someone on the board here posted the old adage, fire a coach a year before the end of his contract or extend him a year before the end of his contract.  These scenarios help in recruiting.  

Moneybox is making a nonsensical argument as practically everyone here understands that the school was not going to pay two year's worth of "dead money" to an outgoing coach (or even a generous buyout).  Not to mention that some progress has been made this season.  Just because we may not be precisely where we'd like to be right now does not give one the right to deny that progress has been made.

You were not alone FQ.  My apologies to moneybox.  Guess it wasn't nonsense after all.

Mike K wrote:

Free Quebec wrote:

Free Quebec wrote:

DMV Pirahna, I think you set your sights too low.

For the purpose of this question I’m assuming Tanya Vogel does not have the ambition or the guts (or budget) to move on from her signature hire this year

Just wanted to jump this to apologize to Tanya and out myself for yet another dumb, incorrect take. I was wrong.

Hope she gets the hire right this time.

FQ, many of us thought the same.

 

It's not a dumb take. You can still think that and be correct. It could be that TV actually does lack ambition, guts or budget to have made this move. Her hand could have been forced: Make the move or you're gone, too. Or there could be news we don't know about. We don't know and likely won't unless it devolves and we return to Deadspin territory. 

Free Quebec wrote:

dmvpiranha wrote:

Benchmarks for next year:
9) Finish as a top 125-150 KenPom team. That would require a 75-100 spot jump from this year which does feel a bit out of reach as of now but adding key pieces to the frontcourt may change that.
 

DMV Pirahna, I think you set your sights too low.

For the purpose of this question I’m assuming Tanya Vogel does not have the ambition or the guts (or budget) to move on from her signature hire this year, which means at the end of next year she will have to decide whether to get a new coach or extend JC (or worse, whether to leave him for a 5th year but unable to recruit because recruits won’t know if he’ll be there).

If we finish next year around 135 - roughly where Rhode Island was this year (as well as teams like South Alabama or Sam Houston St) - would you really think that would show that JC can get us to the tourney?

I know it’s almost impossible to ask a team to jump over 100 spots, but if we aren’t at least close to the top 100 would you really think he can get us back to the tourney?

Perhaps you are right FQ that I am setting my sights a bit too low. GW had good success in my 4 years as a student, and I would love for us to get back to winning 20+ games more consistently. I guess I am factoring in a bit just how low the program fell a few years back and COVID really throwing things off. The recent run of losing has lowered my expectations a bit (and I hate that's the case, but it is what it is). It would be great to qualify for a postseason tournament and knock off a few teams that we shouldn't (outside of conference or otherwise) and I hope that is the minimum requirement consistently once we get back to where we need to be. Whether or not JC could get us back to the tourney or not wasn't necessarily part of the thinking process. In some ways, a lot has to go right for us to get back to the NCAA tournament, but I can still find the season a success if we win 60% of our games (or slightly worse depending on how much we lose). Unfortunately while we saw some progress late this year I will say that this year's team failed to meet even my modest expectations for this season. I'm not sure whether KenPom was the right way to go as a benchmark, given St. Joe's is roughly around that 150 range because they blew out Temple and Richmond. The Hawks performed pretty poorly otherwise.

FredD wrote:

dmvpiranha wrote:

1) Learn to communicate as a team on defense. Don't let the guards beat us off the bounce. Draw more charges on that end. Rotate better when other teams move the ball. Force the opposition to take more midrange shots instead of easy layups. We likely need to spend most of the open scholarships on forwards as we have like no wings at this point.

2) Take better shots. We moved the ball better the second half of the year (and finally got to the line a bit more at the end of the season) but that needs to continue to improve. There need to be more possessions with 5+ passes passing around the horn for an open shot. Avoid stupid turnovers like throwing the ball away.

3) Be more balanced on offense. Have the post guy take more shots and put less pressure on the guards.

4) Add more depth. That's the case every year (and we likely overrate the second half of the roster every offseason) but this year's bench was not much better than the previous two years (it may have been worse).

5) Be better rebounding the ball on both ends. Not much more needs to be said there as we were far and away the worst overall in rebounding in the A10.

6) Win the free throw/foul battle. We can blame the refs but we need to be more aggressive on offense and be in better positioning defensively. It felt like we always had 2-3x the number of fouls as the other team, especially before halftime.

Benchmarks for next year:
7) Go over .500 OOC.
8) Win 10 games in A10.
9) Finish as a top 125-150 KenPom team. That would require a 75-100 spot jump from this year which does feel a bit out of reach as of now but adding key pieces to the frontcourt may change that.
 

I'll never top you DMV, but how about:

1. Stop the ball on defense
2. Let the ball do some of the work on offense
3. Offensive rebounding! - Enough of the NBA spread with Offensive Rebounding Optional.
 

I 100% agree with all of these points FredD. Our defense lacked communication as a team all year and the only reason we finished somewhere around "okay" territory is because we had a couple of good individual defenders like Ricky or Joe who would try only sometimes. There was never a feeling that the opposition ever felt uncomfortable operating in the halfcourt despite the "mayhem" identity we were promised.

I'm not sure we had more than 10 plays in the JC era where we made 5+ passes in an offensive possession.

I love the offensive rebounding point as well. I mentioned this I believe in the last recap of the year, but I think the NBA way of thinking isn't fully beneficial in the college game especially since the shot making is nowhere close either. I'm not sure our transition defense was so elite that ignoring the offensive boards was worth it either.