GW Hoops

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



1/29/2023 12:45 am  #61


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

The most important outcome of the game is that all eight players still healthy finished the game without any being ruled out.

The result of this game felt decided before it was played. A game on the road after just two days of rest following an OT game played with no depth. Honestly, it was just a matter of time before we were going to hit a wall in the game, which happened about 80% through. It very much felt like a repeat of the Richmond game.

Credit Fordham for their play today (although yes, Novitskyi certainly got some favorable calls down low during the game). The Rams certainly won the game - it's not that GW lost it. I don't think I've ever seen a turnout like that at their arena before either. Seems like things might be turning around for them finally. Their defensive pressure was impressive (almost VCU lite) and wore us down. We were battling limited depth and multiple guys not playing at 100% having just played a game that went to OT. I was surprised to find out that we still managed to outrebound Fordham for the game 39-33.

JB appeared to be the player most hit by fatigue in the last quarter of the game. You can definitely give Fordham some credit for denying him the ball (and making it tough to run anything offensively in general - it's been a while since we last finished with just 9 assists as a team in a game) but he was being a bit too unselfish down the stretch. If you can believe it, he took ONE total shot in the final 10 minutes of the game. That's not a typo. Also, that one shot was taken with about a minute left in the game when the game was already decided. It's okay to get others involved when the opportunity presents itself, but when the game is starting to slip away we need him to start to take over. Today, it felt like BA was fighting Fordham by himself down the stretch - at less than 100% to boot. Bishop also accounted for 6 of GW's 10 turnovers in the last 10 minutes of the game. He had just 2 through the first 30. The fatigue was evident.

There have been a few times this season where I've questioned CC's use of his timeouts. I get that you always want to have some in hand late in the game in case it's close (to discuss certain possessions and avoid inbounding turnovers) but I think we needed to call more than just one down the stretch. It felt like we basically threw in the towel with 5 minutes left. I'm not saying the result would have changed (again, the fatigue was evident and it definitely impacted performance) but it would have been helpful if not at the very least to give the starters another breather and slow down the pace. It was increasingly clear having timeouts in hand wasn't going to matter as the lead was continuing to balloon. The tempo of the game in the last quarter favored Fordham heavily. As mentioned in the preview they have depth to play faster. While we do like to play relatively fast (and I think that helps with transition opportunities) the team went a bit too fast down the stretch which led to both sloppy turnovers and increased fatigue.

As for the 2 for 1, I second FQ that I am liking that we are going for it this year, especially on a team that is offensively very potent. The thing I didn't like about this one in particular was that it was a Bishop three pointer rather than a Bishop midrange shot. I think there's a large enough sample size to show that a JB three point shot is probably not the best shot for the team to take with some exceptions. I think we could have probably taken an extra couple seconds to get a bit downhill before launching the shot. Also agree that it was clear Ricky was trying to make the right play at the end but slipped a bit.

Despite the missed FTs (Fordham's rims have always seemed off) I thought BA did the best he could this game, especially after hurting his ankle a bit during the game. Unfortunately, this team can't have success if only one of JB/BA are providing positive minutes.

He'll be remembered for his corner threes not going down, but I thought Ricky had a decent game overall and he was actually doing a good job on the boards earlier in the game. Agree with others though that he probably spends more time along the perimeter than he should. Unfortunately, the key matchup between Lindo and Moore went heavily in favor of Moore.

Hunter was also visibly fatigued. His back was hurting and there were a couple instances where I think that affected his ability to bend more to dribble at the top of the key resulting in him losing the ball. I'm not saying Noel is all the way there in his development but I think Brown could have given Hunter about 5 more minutes of rest this game.

Outside of the contested three he took and being blown by on a couple drives on defense I thought Max had another good game. He was doing a good job cutting off the ball, taking the ball to the hoop and finishing in traffic. Perhaps the best on the team today.

Glad to see Amir was able to play and was being aggressive on offense when he had the ball. We're going to have to live with the fact that he just won't be a consistent factor offensively but I will continue to hope the shots fall.

It would be nice if Qwanzi was able to earn more playing time to help the starters out but missing two threes wide open from the top of the key badly won't do that. He was able to steal back one of those possessions which led to a Noel FT but he isn't yet making enough positive plays to outweigh the negative.

In some ways, a loss at Fordham may no longer make the La Salle contest a trap game. I'd imagine we are more locked in after a loss today. And yes, that extra day of rest (three days instead of two) is certainly a difference maker for this team.
 

 

1/29/2023 8:26 am  #62


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

I don’t disagree going for the 2 for 1 at the end of the half and understand Ricky’s turnover.  My point was that we had a timeout to burn with 49 seconds and it might have been worthwhile to settle down and discuss what we hoped to execute.  Instead we got frenzied mistakes that were costly. Hindsight is 20-20, but that’s an area where a coach can play some role in controlling a game and looked like a lost opportunity to me.

 

1/29/2023 9:01 am  #63


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

I  personally think that CC has been a miracle worker this season. His starters are exhausted. Why? NO BENCH and therefore NO DEPTH. Clark's injury made a bad situation worse and guys that were hopefully going to contribute haven't-- particularly offensively. Literally every team we have played this season has more players that were able to contribute in a meaningful way. That said, Fordham has some ballers and is legit so a loss to them on the road in a tough venue should not be surprising to anyone--disappointing yes but surprising no.

 

1/29/2023 9:33 am  #64


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

You can point to various missed opportunities, poor plays and even bad refing, but in the end, we were beat because we are simply short handed.  We only have 8 scholarship players, one of whom (Samuels) contributes virtually nothing and the other (Harris) virtually nothing on offense.   A third player (Brown) gives us very little in terms of offense and 2 others  having physical issues during the game (Hunter back and Adams ankle).  And another (Edwards) is a very talented freshman, but is still a freshman and will have growing pains.  These are very tough handicaps to overcome when playing a good team on the road.   I sitll stand by my representations that we have one of the best, if not the best, starting 5s in the A-10. as we have now led all 8 of our games at the half, but sadly, our lack of depth is something we cannot fix until next season, and by then, at least 2, if not 3 of our best players will be gone.   Will be a very interesting off season in terms of recruiting.  

Last edited by Long Suffering Fan (1/29/2023 9:36 am)

 

1/29/2023 10:24 am  #65


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

LSF is exactly right about how the lack of depth reduces our chances to win. I am confident Coach C will bring in a number of talented players that will give us plenty of guys that can play.
 

 

1/30/2023 10:02 am  #66


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

This loss was a bit of a perfect storm in a way.  First, we've seen Fordham teams in the past have tremendous OOC records in the past only to wilt badly in A10 play.  However, having a gaudy OOC record against a crap schedule does not necessarily make one a bad team (see, GWU, 2005-06).  In fact, this Fordham team is a pretty good one having won 3 straight on the road before Saturday.  (Yes, the 3 weren't Murderers Row but three in a row on the road is an accomplishment, period.)

More to the point is the manner in which Fordham plays.  They pride themselves in defending you within pretty much every square foot in the frontcourt.  What helps is when one of your bench players (Rose) played more minutes than our entire bench.  In total, 59-25 was the Fordham advantage in bench minutes.  GW was clearly taken out of its offense in the second half as evidenced by 18 turnovers (14 of tghem courtesy of Ram steals) for the game (many in the second half).  Hard to execute when you are exhausted from having to fend off defenders virtually non-stop.

I'll echo the sentiments that I love having a coach who knows what a 2 for 1 is at the end of the first half.  However, any condition of a 2 for 1 has to be a good shot selection.  Taking a quick 23 foot shot does not qualify.  And CC, there is literally no reason not to use a timeout in this situation when the reality is you'll be losing it by halftime anyway.  This did give Fordham momentum though I am more than convinced that we were losing this game in the manner that we did with our without the late first half Fordham run.

The loss does make the next two at least fairly essential if GW has aspirations of either a double bye or even say a double digit conference win season.  La Salle is La Salle but this game is on the road (just can't take any A10 school for granted let alone away from home) and they are now coached by Fran Dunphy.  This is followed by a home game against Duquesne who in case anyone needed any reminding, took three overtimes before GW extinguished the Dukes a season ago.  A loss to either would carry far more significance than a justifiable one to Fordham.

 

1/30/2023 2:00 pm  #67


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

I agree with everything that transpired at the end of the second half, except of course the results. Bishop did have an opened look and was right to take the shot.  Even if he was to miss, which he did, we would get the ball back before the end of the half.  Further, as there was under 40 seconds left in the half, I can understand why he would wish to bank the timeout (assuming it was not a use it or lose it) for the second half, as an  opportunity to rest his beleaguered team down the stretch.   Hindsight is always 20-20.   If Bishop makes the shot, we get the ball back at the end of the half and score again, then the move is brilliant.

 

1/30/2023 3:09 pm  #68


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

Long Suffering Fan wrote:

I agree with everything that transpired at the end of the second half, except of course the results. Bishop did have an opened look and was right to take the shot.  Even if he was to miss, which he did, we would get the ball back before the end of the half.  Further, as there was under 40 seconds left in the half, I can understand why he would wish to bank the timeout (assuming it was not a use it or lose it) for the second half, as an  opportunity to rest his beleaguered team down the stretch.   Hindsight is always 20-20.   If Bishop makes the shot, we get the ball back at the end of the half and score again, then the move is brilliant.

LSF, nothing about my analysis was said in hindsight.  It would have been the same analysis regardless of the outcome.

First, the unbanked timeout was use it or lose it.  So there was absolutely no reason not to gather the team and set up a play.  Second, as I said, I am in favor of utilizing a 2 for 1 when it makes sense.  If you feel James took a good shot, then we'll have to agree to disagree on how we define a good shot.  What I called a 23 foot shot may have actually been closer to 25 feet.  Of course it was a clean look because what defense wouldn't want a 29% high volume three point shooter taking that shot?  Plays right into Fordham's hands.  Next JB's miss was rebounded with 37 seconds left so if Fordham opts to hold it for one (they didn't but certainly did have that option), GW's 2 for 1 means getting the ball back with maybe 2 seconds left.  And on top of everything else, GW is up 9 when JB misses that shot.  Absolutely no reason not to look for a good shot on that possession, even if it means squandering the 2 for 1 opportunity. 

 

 

1/31/2023 3:53 am  #69


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

We are thin, fatigued, and a bit nicked up, but what we really had no answer for was the Rams intensity and sense of urgency.   Maybe after decades of losing, the Rams and their new coach have bought into the "we will no longer be doormats" mentality.   The Fordham fans seem to have picked up on it as well.  I do believe our own JBIV needs to play with increasing intensity.   I'd like for CC to let him know that he will be called upon to take over the game on occasion - no matter how tired he may be (I've never quite fully bought into how a well-conditioned 21 year old athlete could get overly fatigued playing only two games a week).   As the best player on the floor, it is, and will be on him to carry that load - not BA, Ricky, Max, or Dean.    I believe he may respond well to being called out to take that kind of augmented, unambiguous leadership role when required.   He may be getting a little too satisfied with tossing off assists and being a "team player"    That's all well and good on most nights, but let's let him know we sometimes will need him to be the star of the show...........

 

1/31/2023 10:05 am  #70


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

Ralphie wrote:

We are thin, fatigued, and a bit nicked up, but what we really had no answer for was the Rams intensity and sense of urgency.   Maybe after decades of losing, the Rams and their new coach have bought into the "we will no longer be doormats" mentality.   The Fordham fans seem to have picked up on it as well.  I do believe our own JBIV needs to play with increasing intensity.   I'd like for CC to let him know that he will be called upon to take over the game on occasion - no matter how tired he may be (I've never quite fully bought into how a well-conditioned 21 year old athlete could get overly fatigued playing only two games a week).   As the best player on the floor, it is, and will be on him to carry that load - not BA, Ricky, Max, or Dean.    I believe he may respond well to being called out to take that kind of augmented, unambiguous leadership role when required.   He may be getting a little too satisfied with tossing off assists and being a "team player"    That's all well and good on most nights, but let's let him know we sometimes will need him to be the star of the show...........

Sorry Ralphie but it's very hard to buy into this take.  These aren't "Strat-O-Matic" cards where you can try to arrange to have your leading scorer shoot as many times per game as possible.  These are real human beings, who are being opposed by other real human beings.  Then there is this fatigue thing which is very real.  Not from the standpoint of whether someone is too tired to play or not but rather on the cumulative effects on performance.  Legs get heavier, shots often fall too short, or if overcompensated, are too strong.  Play in a closely contested contest and psychological stress gets added to this mix.   Then, there are the environmental factors which help explain why a team is far more likely to wilt playing on the road as opposed to the comforts of home.

JBIV may be the best player on the court but that does not automatically make him the hero nor does it give his team the victory.  This team has been dealt a very unfortunate hand.  Had EJ Clarke remained healthy and been able to give this team 20 minutes per game, and if Bradley, Nixon, or even Jabari West stayed healthy and had been able to offer 10-15 minutes in total among them, this would have made a second half like the one we played at Fordham the exception rather than the rule.  Instead, our team is vulnerable to teams that know how to pressure the ball and otherwise make GW work harder than it has to.  

Let's also remember this about JBIV...he does not have a body that could easily absorb a great deal of physicality.  He is willing to drive to the hoop and has been quite successful doing this.  Yet this often includes the risk of being fouled hard, crashing to the ground, etc.  His play this season has been remarkable; please read the Feinstein column if you haven't already.  In my mind, there was no way that one could conclude that if James had just shot a bit more, GW would have left Rose Hill with a win.  This really did not have anything  to do with intensity.  It had everything to do with being vulnerable towards another team's strengths.

 

1/31/2023 10:12 am  #71


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

Also we saw what happened in 2020 when JBIV played Westbrook/Harden ball and it wasn’t pretty.

Last edited by GW0509 (1/31/2023 10:25 am)

 

1/31/2023 10:50 am  #72


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

And please don't underestimate Brandon Adams as an end of game option.  Although JBIV may have an overall edge over Brandon (and I do mean edge), Brandon is 2 inches taller, 20 pounds heavier,, shoots for a higher overall percentage and is a significantly better3 point shooter and is a better free throw shooter.  In fact, JBIV's scoring average is only 4 ppg better but he has taken nearly 90 shots more than Brandon over 21 games.  JBIV may be quicker,  more creative and a better ball distributor and in all fairness draws more attention by the defense. but Brandon certainly deserves to have the ball at the end of the game.

Last edited by Long Suffering Fan (1/31/2023 10:53 am)

 

1/31/2023 12:39 pm  #73


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

What we don't need is more hero ball. Which was the point of the Feinstein article on James.
Didn't work out well for JC as coach.
   Even with new and improved team play, there were several inopportune 3s that made little sense
and cost a big Fordham swing or several.
Both James and Brendan need to appreciate their excellent ability inside the arc, from the midrange
shot, which both own when they're on, to driving to the hoop. Brendan has been doing that more with
excellent results.
   And they're both generally pretty good at the line when they draw fouls, which is a JB specialty.

 

2/01/2023 2:48 am  #74


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

Very apt and thoughtful comments all.    The crux of my point was simply that CC should be prepared SELECTIVELY and ON OCCASION to ask JBIV to "take over" when needed at a crucial point in maybe a handful (max) of games a year.   I agree completely with the Feinstein article.   Nothing was uglier than JBIV trying to be a one man team 2 years ago, but when we need that offensive spark today for a scoring spurt, I believe JBIV should be the clear choice to strap up and carry the load.   Again, I believe he would welcome the responsibility that comes with such recognition of his leadership and talent.   Naturally, if he's totally gassed, double/triple teamed, or getting hacked mercilessly, give the ball up to one of our other capable guys - but he must always be option 1.        

 

2/01/2023 6:54 am  #75


Re: GW vs Fordham Game Thread

It's a sign of something, just don't know what.

Fordham alone in 4th having won 5 conference games in a row just beat pre-season favorite St. Louis. Happy for their fans

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum