Allowing any team to shoot 18-35 from the 3 is inexcusable, as is allowing a team to go an entire game with only 3 turnovers.   Give South Carolina credit of course for knocking them down, but far too many were on wide opened looks.   Where was the defensive preasure?  Very disappointing game, not so much because we lost (as was expected), but we failed to compete.

Last edited by Long Suffering Fan (12/01/2023 8:55 pm)

jersey guy wrote:

Free Quebec wrote:

Not a single turnover in the second half for USC and only 3 for the game (to go with 18 threes). We ran into them on the wrong day. A team can’t play better than that.

FQ That is a pretty encapsulation of this game.  Bad day facing a, frankly better at the moment team.  Its early and we have a pretty good shot at an 11-2 record going into A10 play.   A lot of new faces takes time to gel.  They have shown grit all year.

Thanks.  A lot habitually negative old men on this board are returning to their old habits, but this is a learning experience and this very young team will continue to get better. And sometimes the other team plays great and sometimes the other team helps you look good.

And as anyone who’s watched college basketball for a long time knows, one game doesn’t define anything. St Joe’s lost to Texas A&M Commerce City and then took Kentucky to OT at Rupp and beat Villanova.  I like our team and expect us to do well in the A10, though teams that can put shooters at the 4 and 5 may continue to give us problems (Duq comes to mind).

Merrick wrote:

I’m with FQ. We look a lot worse on defense when the other team is knocking 18 treys at over 50% instead of going 4-28. It’s also tougher for us to guard 5 decent guys with size and strength instead of three. This seemed like a classic pick your poison game—if we stretched out perimeter defense, we would have been exploited inside.

What most disappointed me this game was that we had too many bad possessions on offense with poor shot selection and not seeming to seem to want to work very hard to get better shots. And when we got the ball under the basket, we struggled mightily to convert.

Agree 100%.  Also have to give credit to SC's defense as well.  Better players don't fall for Max and DBJ's spin moves along the baseline.  There is A LOT of good tape to go over the next couple of days in anticipation of Navy.

Well, they set a record shooting 3s on a night we left them wide open way too often.

Don’t know why Benny was in street clothes or why Garret was on the bench almost the entire night.

Stretch is limited on offense as we read about when he was recruited.

CC has found some talented freshmen who are well rounded.  Future is very bright.

Tonight we played against SEC competition and the size and athleticism on the court showed.

DMV, I was debating in my mind that last paragraph.  It probably would be better to get a good challenge before conference play.  Admittedly, I am not well versed in the rankings, but I assume Navy is the best team left OOC.  The balance is not crushing the spirit of freshman and new players, but we need to get better continuously.  Given our resent history Fordham is the next measuring stick game, and at VCU will tell us a lot.

dmvpiranha wrote:

Second LSF in his thoughts. GW played with little energy from the beginning, like they were going through the motions. I mostly credit SC for their defensive intensity, because they didn't exactly have to work for anything on offense. The Gamecocks were very impressive defensively, from their rotations to recovering back out to the perimeter. They double-teamed JB midway through his drives and he was forced to kick it back out many times which threw off any offensive rhythm. There were definitely periods of forced jumpers, but I didn't think the offense was that bad. There were issues finishing inside with their length, but I thought the team shot decently overall.

Delaware could have easily done what SC did to us if they had anyone who could make shots consistently. CC is going to have to go back to the drawing board when it comes to competing and playing with energy on that end. Consistently going under screens, losing the opposition on drives, losing players along the perimeter, not putting a hand up to contest shots, possessions with no one in the vicinity to guard the shooter.  There was sadly not much fight tonight.

Thankfully we have a young team and not an old one otherwise tonight would have been less palatable. Guys will learn from this and get better.

Was impressed with Jacoi, Trey, and Darren tonight. Jacoi was very poised, taking shots in rhythm, and not forcing anything. Trey seemed pumped up for this one, and was showcasing his offensive versatility. Darren is a straight up high-major player that we've stolen. What a get. With time he could develop into a player like BJ Mack. He's clearly hesitant to take threes, but has a nice stroke and will get the green light to take those shots next year and beyond.

Tough game for Garrett. Forced a couple deep threes and I think he found for the first time this season that he wasn't able to beat his man off the bounce. Not worried - he's the kind of player where I would have liked to have come off a screen for a pick and pop three or something to get him going.

I can't tell whether it's a good thing that JB is passive or not. When he is and others step up, it makes me less worried for last year. However, there are times where I definitely feel he should probably look for his shot a lot earlier.

Max was probably due for a somewhat off game, but like Garrett there are times where I would like to actually set up shots for him to get going instead of having him always create them. He probably has the lowest percent of his shots assisted on the team - at least it feels that way.

As others mentioned, Stretch is good when he's allowed to be near the hoop defensively but any team that has bigs that can shoot is cause for concern as he's forced to leave the paint. I'm not sure he should have played a lot of the second half if I'm being honest. SC could have run pick and pop with Mack every play of the game and won. It was hard to watch. His offensive ability is what it is. Hoping his court time will pay off during conference play.

Nice to see Antoine get on the board at GW. Not the best defensively, but it was his first game with extended time. Seems to have some skill offensively.

It was in garbage time, but Keegan brought more energy than the majority of the team tonight.

It's weird saying this, but somehow this loss feels worse given the rest of the OOC schedule. At least we'll get to see more of the bench (hopefully!) but this team needs to be challenged at least one more time before conference play starts. I'm not sure how much we'll learn anything for the next four weeks now. That infuriates me a bit, but I'm looking forward to conference play and what happens next. What is in the team's control is to hopefully cover and win by a sizable margin in the next handful of games to improve the metrics.
 

 
Agree with you both. A lot of habitually delusional (apparently “young” ha ha ) men non this board are reverting to their old habits of seeing a game like this as a one off when in fact the same pattern has happened for five games in a row. If you don’t see the pattern, you’re not looking.

Last edited by Alum1 (12/01/2023 10:23 pm)

gwstudent2024 wrote:

Lost to a better team in their home arena tonight. 100% could have been closer if South Carolina wasn't so hot from three or we found better shots. Apparently Max, Garrett and Benny are nursing injuries and were limited in practice this week

A little more insight on the injuries here: https://gwradio.com/mens-basketball-routed-by-south-carolina-in-first-road-test-of-season/ 
Max should be 100% ready to go by Tuesday but it's unclear about Benny and GJ

Last edited by gwstudent2024 (12/01/2023 11:52 pm)

Of course the South Carolina game was disappointing...anytime your team loses by 22 points it is going to be.   Still, for some strange reason, I did not feel terribly bad about the loss, and this was even before I knew about the injuries.   We hung with them and made it a game for at least 25 minutes or so.   Our turnovers were down (only 10 for the game, even though the one by Bishop when we were down only 6 was a back breaker, irrespective of whether a foul should have been called.   In addition, the three first year players (hopefully our long term futhre) that I previously discussed (Buchanan, Autry and Hutchinson) showed real progress and were generally composed against a good team in a hostile environment.  It was also nice to see Smith get in the game and drill that first 3.when it was still a game.   I can't help but thinking that he and Harvey should bet more playing time.   If anything, the disappointing outcome was more a result of the substandard play of the veterans Bishop and Edwards rather than the play of the freshman.  In the end, I was left feeling that we need to play South Carolina calibre teams more often, not that losing by 22 points is fun, but I am of the opinion that a 22 point loss to South Carolina prepares the team better for conference play than a 22 point win against a Navy or a Coppin State does.   You only improve by playing better competitoin.  And notwithstanding our lopsided loss, our KenPom rating dropped by less than 10 points.

Last edited by Long Suffering Fan (12/02/2023 10:08 am)

Tough loss and not close but if Garrett had knee issues (making him 1 dimensional (less drives) and not as quick to guard along with Max having an off night - tough to overcome. 
Alum1 - I see the flaws in the team, but I also see progress from year 1 to year 2.  I see an increase in talent and depth.  We are not ready for “prime time” - we will take some big losses away from home as the freshmen experience unfriendly arenas and such.  I chose not to dwell on the negative and focus on the positives and the growth of a program.  That is not sticking my head in the sand

I'll preface this by saying that I truly don't believe there is anything we could have done last night which would have resulted in a different outcome.  USC was too balanced, too confident, and too determined to avenge what was an incredibly embarrassing loss to GW last year.  Even if the 3's were better defended, they took great care of the ball, rebounded well, and did a great job of containing many of our drives along the baseline and in the paint to wind up losing this game.  With that said, a few points:

1) I do believe GW employs a conscious strategy to play team defense to the detriment of leaving three point shooters wide open.  This suggests that we have a better chance of allowing fewer points when we help out in the paint rather than stay with the man each player is guarding.  So, when we get beat off the dribble, the tendency is to help out by stopping the guy with the ball.

2) Why do we do this?  The reasoning suggests that three point shooting will decrease over the course of a game.  More minutes played, tired legs, etc.  Often, this strategy is sound, particularly against the teams we've been playing.  I have not looked it up but my guess would be that our opponents three point shooting has gone noticeably down in the second halves of games prior to last night.  Of course, we know that USC kept the barrage of 3's going all night, a huge difference in the game.

3) Much like throwing out a zone on a few possessions, I would have liked to see us play some possessions of honest man-to-man, without the double teams, just to see how USC would have responded.  We may have given up far more easy 2's (particularly after getting beat off the dribble) but the wide open three point shot attempts would have been significantly reduced.  Again, like the zone, why not try this to see whether the defense improves under these circumstances?

4) I'll echo the sentiments regarding Jun, Trey and Jacoi.  All look very much like they belong.  And, nice to see the Antoine Smith 3 go down.  I saw #34 and immediately wondered what John Kopriva was doing in the game.