GWRising wrote:

Agreed dmvpiranha. JC's issues have more to do with personnel than x's and o's. The Lee injury changed a lot up front and put more stress of Brown, Dean and Lindo to rebound. I am confident our rebounding numbers would look a whole lot better with Lee in there. 

I don't doubt that Ira would have made a huge difference up front. I've watched him play at Arizona and he 100% would have been a difference maker on the glass (and maybe even would have balanced out the offense).

That doesn't answer why we didn't try to sign another big during the offseason. I understand JC was operating with the assumption that Ira and Ricky were going to be eating up the majority of minutes down low, but it really feels like wishful thinking that neither player was going to miss any time with an injury. Neither Hunter nor Noel was proven coming into the season (you can add Qwanzi as well) but given the construction of the roster it felt inevitable that either one was going to start at some point in the season. At least I'm glad that we brought in Tyler Warner if even as a walk-on but the team definitely needed another big with at least a bit of experience - one that could just rebound if nothing else. JC expected Noel/Hunter to take the next step, but if they didn't there was no Plan B given how the recruiting went in the offseason.

GWRising wrote:

Lindo has had so far a disappointing season offensively. This has hurt us as well. We needed him to score 14-16 per night to help offset the loss of a guy like Battle. He looked capable of that. Hasn't happened yet.

Ricky definitely seemed to drop off in productivity after the first few games of the season. I think part of that is due to how hard he has to work down low defensively given the aforementioned lack of frontcourt, but during a large portion of OOC play he was just not getting the ball consistently in the halfcourt offense.

His field goal attempts don't suggest that, but he really should have been touching the ball on pretty much every possession during OOC play. I'm not saying that JC drew it up that way, but it really seemed like we had no idea how to break a zone. Ricky was always standing in the high post yet our guards kept passing the ball back and forth along the perimeter and never got the ball to him. Ricky's best game of the season was against Wright State, when he had 12 points, 6 rebounds and 6 assists. That was one game that comes to mind where it feels like we played many of our possessions through him. He didn't necessarily light it up on the scoreboard scoring-wise, but he made a huge impact. It doesn't feel like a coincidence that we won by double digits either.

Hopefully moving forward the ball finds him more often so he doesn't feel the need to hoist up a shot worrying that he's never going to get the ball again. The team is definitely playing better team ball now. I just wish it didn't take a couple months before that started happening. It didn't strike me necessarily that there was a chemistry issue because we weren't always missing other guys on passes but the extra pass just wasn't being made to begin with. I know JC keeps track of number of passes and stuff and I'm sure he's happier with where the team is at with that now. Hopefully next season we can play better team ball during OOC play.

GWRising wrote:

A related point is we don't have a consistent shooter. Losing Battle was huge. The thought was the trio of Bishop, Adams and Freeman could make up for that. So far they have not. But they are improving.

This is what concerns me more - JC as a recruiter while he's been at GW rather than JC as a coach. Again, hoping Adams was going to help out as a shooter was a fairly large misstep given he's 25% for his career. Even more so that he's averaging between 4-5 attempts per game. The stat sheet doesn't usually lie when a player has played multiple seasons of college basketball. I'm less worried about Joe because he's still just starting out. Not saying Brendan hasn't/can't be a useful piece (he's been great when he takes it to the hoop), but we need more guards that can shoot from the perimeter.

I assumed that's what Knapp was brought in for, which is why it was crazy to me that it took until January for him to start getting any minutes at all. He's probably been useful for the team in practice, but an experienced, productive college player riding the pine when the team could use shooting makes no sense.

Bishop certainly brings value to the team - despite what he showed last year during OOC play, I think he can be the go-to guy late in close games. It made a lot of sense to move him off the ball this season, but he's only shooting 30% for his career from 3. I know JC keeps track of player measurables (like height) from a recruiting standpoint, but I'm curious what he's looking for in terms of player efficiency shooting the ball. The SG should be shooting several percentage points better than 30% from distance. The A10 has never been the best shooting league in the country or anything, but teams are improving in their shooting from distance. We are dead last by over 2% over the 13th place team, Fordham. Ideally, we would be at least around 33-35% from distance.

I think (or at least hope) that JC figures out recruiting, but it was concerning early on when he was bringing in guys like Lincoln Ball, Tyler Brelsford, and Sloan Seymour who aren't even getting many minutes at low major schools. Brayon was certainly a good get. He has admittedly shown great improvement with his three point shooting in the past couple years (his senior year of HS and this year at GW) which has been huge for the team.

The recruiting really needs to pick up this offseason as JC can't have another year where the roster is so unbalanced between the starters and the rest of the bench. While the top of the roster has certainly improved, the depth of the roster in my opinion is worse than year 1 under JC. To date, JC has rarely recruited anyone who can shoot despite his preferred philosophy of devaluing playing through the post and getting offensive rebounds. Everything starts with recruiting and if he just picks a system and sticks with it, it might be easier to recruit players who are better fits for the system.

GWRising wrote:

Hopefully this is all changing.

Agreed. There have been some promising improvements in the past week and I hope the team can keep it up. Not looking at W-L record by the end of the season, but still hope to see an improvement analytically from the team the rest of the way. This team should not be bottom 50 on offense or bottom 100 in the country overall. Everyone on the team was recruited by JC now so it's on him to turn it around. Prior to last week, we were actually lower than both of JC's previous teams MSM and Siena which is unacceptable if we even want to be respectable.
 

Mailfan, you ever think "Maybe I take an A10 College basketball team, a little too seriously, a little too negatively?" 

Last edited by The Dude (1/29/2022 4:26 pm)

Interestingly, those don't always stand up in court--and could or could not be time limited.
Anything on GW's part toward either the truth, especially in the other instance, or stopping the revisionist history nonsense seems quite unlikely. of course..
And this theory is a real stretch, but GW could do the right thing and agree to waive it.
It's not uncommon to have these clauses, guessing perhaps non-disparagement in this case, but it is a pretty UnAmerican way to resolve things. Especially for an academic institution, which theoretically should
champion freedom of speech.

Mentzinger wrote:

GWRising wrote:

After 65 games, ML 27-38 and had not beaten a top 25 opponent - did not beat a top 25 team until game 68
After 65 games, KH 30-35 and had not beaten a top 25 opponent - did not beat a top 25 team until game 92
Both of those coaches inherited better situations than JC. Both went on to have success.
Not sure what bow you are trying to tie here.at this point.

The bow of accountability. 
Better situations you say?
JC inherited a team three years removed from an NIT Championship and school record for wins. It will be four years with no postseason, as compared to ....
KH inherited the scandal-ridden train wreck of Penders; it took him only 3 years to get to the tournament, the same year he defeated two Top 25 teams in three days. KH coached 4 NCAA games with a record of 1-3, and won a road game against a P6 team in his first year (@ Providence).
ML inherited a team that hadn't been to the NCAA in four years; it took him three years to get to the tournament. In year 5, he set a school record for wins and won GW's only national tournament title, scoring at least 3 wins vs Top 25 teams including #6 Virginia, #11 Wichita State, #18 Creighton, and unranked rival Maryland.
We are in Year 4 of JC, so you're already wrong JC has any shot at exceeding those markers, and he won't even play Top 25 ... making his 35% win number more suspect (his total record vs Top 25 in 3+ years... losses to Virginia by 19
and Michigan by 23).
Hell, even MoJo got us to the CBI.
But you see JC doing that by next year, eh? Two or three Top 25 wins and a trip to the posteason? I'll have what you're smoking.

You can spin this however you want. Here are the facts:

JC inherited a 9-win team (with back to back losing seasons on a strong downward trajectory)
ML inherited a 17-win team with the program on a slight upward trajectory the prior 2 years.(back to back winning seasons)
KH inherited a 14 win team (on a steady trajectory) along with Chris Monroe, GW's all-time leading scorer

We are in year 3 of JC not year 4. And really in terms of number of games coached at the beginning of year 3 rather than in the second half.

You disingenuously fail to mention COVID anywhere in your analysis something that neither KH or ML had to face.

If you think JC inherited a better situation than either KH or ML, or that he is in year 4, or that COVID had no impact, I won't ask you what you are smoking but rather what you are snorting.

It looks like it's still counted as a top 100 win on KenPom since URI was top 100 when the game was played. Not 100% sure about that tho

It should count for when the game was played. Much like a top 25 win is still a ranked win even if that team loses its rank

You think I'm Joel Joseph?  Fucking fascinating.

(Edited by Barry removing parts that attacked other board members, leaving only the parts that are relevant).

Last edited by BGF (1/27/2022 5:35 pm)

Agree on personal attacks. Should also include attacks on Mike Lonergan.

2twooed wrote:

Should also include attacks on Mike Lonergan.

LOL, hope he sees this, bro.