2023 Holiday Break - GT in the Diamond Head Classic

[wreckrod]

I like Sacko. I like him a lot and obviously so do the coaches. He is going to be a contributor off the bench with a lot more minutes as the season progresses. But this was crunch time in the final minutes of a game that was close enough to win. Down 1 point at 4 minutes. 2 points at 2:55. CSD wanted his best players on the floor to win or lose with in the last few minutes and that did not include Sacko. It wasn’t just about stopping Blackshear, it was also about trying to outscore Nevada. They were drawing fouls and missing the free throws. And at 1 for 7 and 14% for the season Sacko was not a player you wanted at the line.

I am sure this isn't just a GT fan thing, it happens across message boards all over the country for every team. But I don't understand it. If we're all just supposed to blindly trust the coaching decisions and have unfailing confidence that they definitely did the best thing possible and any decision other than the one they made would've been MORE wrong, what the heck is the message board even for?

CDS has probably forgotten more about basketball than I know. But I also know, he didn't coach them to a win that game. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that a different combination of lever pulling could have resulted in a different outcome. So, we speculate. I'd get the blind coaching trust if we were undefeated. Or maybe if we had somebody like Puke's Coach K. But, this team has been all over the map. Sometimes they look tournament bound, anything less than the sweet 16 seems silly. And other times. Whew. Any of us could coach THAT kind of performance.

There were very few times anybody "stopped" Blackshear. And Idk that anyone really did, he just had a few times where he didn't hit the same move flawlessly. I DO think, trying something, literally anything, different, wouldn't have been a bad idea. Somebody, anybody. I mean shoot send out a walk-on to flagrantly foul him cause he is killing us. (I say that sorta tongue in cheek).

 

[lv20gt]

I have never understood the "coaches know more so no point in having discussions about what they could have done different" arguments. Every coach makes mistakes pretty much every game. That includes the absolute best. And as a message board what is there to talk about after a loss if not what could have been done different? And CDS as a head coach is 79-81 and never made the NCAAT. Even if you're a believer in him you can't pretend he is overly proven for an ACC HC. So yeah, when a 6-6 dude drops 30 points on 14 shots and doesn't make a 3 the coach should get second guessed about whether he could have done something different.

Of course, the bigger issue that should be focused on is the 64 points shooting 38.6% from the floor and the 10th game out of 12 where we have shot under 30% from 3 despite having a roster that prior to the season seemed poised to live by the three.

 

[YlJacket]

I obviously think there were some things we could have tried. Think it is a reasonable discussion of the options. To me that is what this board is for - not just blind coach knows best.

Questioning that decision doesn't mean I think he can't coach or that I am unhappy with his tenure. Far from it.

FWIW there are multiple questions like this every game. For Nevada you could even add why didn't we run more ball screens with Ndongo to get him the ball on the roll rather than trying to feed him on the block which we didn't do very well. Or go to Ivy's undelying question of why is our shooting from deep under 30%? Are the shots our European/NBA scheme generating not what our guys are used to shooting or can make? I don't think so but still a legit question.

To me that is what this place is for.

 

[Root4GT]

I have never understood the "coaches know more so no point in having discussions about what they could have done different" arguments. Every coach makes mistakes pretty much every game. That includes the absolute best. And as a message board what is there to talk about after a loss if not what could have been done different? And CDS as a head coach is 79-81 and never made the NCAAT. Even if you're a believer in him you can't pretend he is overly proven for an ACC HC. So yeah, when a 6-6 dude drops 30 points on 14 shots and doesn't make a 3 the coach should get second guessed about whether he could have done something different.

Of course, the bigger issue that should be focused on is the 64 points shooting 38.6% from the floor and the 10th game out of 12 where we have shot under 30% from 3 despite having a roster that prior to the season seemed poised to live by the three.

The giant hole in your argument is on 3 point shooting is it is only Kelly who is worse shooting from 3 out of our returning players. Sturdivant and Debo are actually shooting at a higher % this year than last year. Obviously Terry isn’t playing.

If Kelly gets back to around his 38% 3 point shooting we will be a very good team. If he doesn’t we will be a .500 team at best.

 

[spdrama]

I have never understood the "coaches know more so no point in having discussions about what they could have done different" arguments. Every coach makes mistakes pretty much every game. That includes the absolute best. And as a message board what is there to talk about after a loss if not what could have been done different? And CDS as a head coach is 79-81 and never made the NCAAT. Even if you're a believer in him you can't pretend he is overly proven for an ACC HC. So yeah, when a 6-6 dude drops 30 points on 14 shots and doesn't make a 3 the coach should get second guessed about whether he could have done something different.

Of course, the bigger issue that should be focused on is the 64 points shooting 38.6% from the floor and the 10th game out of 12 where we have shot under 30% from 3 despite having a roster that prior to the season seemed poised to live by the three.

I don’t see much post game coaching decision “talk about” or speculation. I see a lot of second-guessing, complaining, hindsight whining with a complaining, disrespectful and “I know better” than the coaches attitude. As for not making the tourney as a HC, CDS was only a HC once before. He was on the Memphis coaching staff when they made the tourney in 2011-12. He was on the Arizona coaching staff when they made the Elite 8 2014-15. He took over a 12-13 (6-10) Pacific U team under post season ban & scholarship reduction sanctions for academic fraud and in 3 years led them to a 23-10 (11-5) 3rd place Western Conference tie and was named conference Coach of The Year. The Western Conference only received 2 tourney bids that year (Covid cancelled) to Gonzaga & BYU. He also led his HS to two State championships, was a first team college All American, finalist for college player of the year and PAC 10 player of the year. He’s played for the U.S. National Team, was the NBA 7th draft pick & NBA rookie of the year. And long before practices even started at GT he made, what might be the best coaching decision in a long time by bringing in Karl Hobbs as his assistant, resulting in Ndongo’s decommit from Rutgers. The players seem to relate well to him and they and their families really like him (according to at least one player’s parent) with the benching of Abram suggesting one possible exception. By contrast, I’ve yet to see any post here by someone who knows this game better than CDS or who can support an end of game strategy in a tight game against a highly ranked & accomplished team of substituting a raw Freshman on “speculation” instead of a go for the win or take the loss with our best players on the court. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Including me. And I don’t understand how any of this negative player or coach bashing helps players, coaches, or re-builds a lost fan base or will positively contribute to once again filling the seats in the Thrillerdome. There are plenty of posts on this site and on others across the country during vacations and after losses that discuss games, players, coaches & decision making that do not rise to the level of bashing I so often read here.

 

[57jacket]

I don’t see much post game coaching decision “talk about” or speculation. I see a lot of second-guessing, complaining, hindsight whining with a complaining, disrespectful and “I know better” than the coaches attitude. As for not making the tourney as a HC, CDS was only a HC once before. He was on the Memphis coaching staff when they made the tourney in 2011-12. He was on the Arizona coaching staff when they made the Elite 8 2014-15. He took over a 12-13 (6-10) Pacific U team under post season ban & scholarship reduction sanctions for academic fraud and in 3 years led them to a 23-10 (11-5) 3rd place Western Conference tie and was named conference Coach of The Year. The Western Conference only received 2 tourney bids that year (Covid cancelled) to Gonzaga & BYU. He also led his HS to two State championships, was a first team college All American, finalist for college player of the year and PAC 10 player of the year. He’s played for the U.S. National Team, was the NBA 7th draft pick & NBA rookie of the year. And long before practices even started at GT he made, what might be the best coaching decision in a long time by bringing in Karl Hobbs as his assistant, resulting in Ndongo’s decommit from Rutgers. The players seem to relate well to him and they and their families really like him (according to at least one player’s parent) with the benching of Abram suggesting one possible exception. By contrast, I’ve yet to see any post here by someone who knows this game better than CDS or who can support an end of game strategy in a tight game against a highly ranked & accomplished team of substituting a raw Freshman on “speculation” instead of a go for the win or take the loss with our best players on the court. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Including me. And I don’t understand how any of this negative player or coach bashing helps players, coaches, or re-build a lost fan base or will positively contribute to once again filling the seats in the Thrillerdome. There are plenty of posts on this site and on others across the country during vacations and after losses that discuss games, players, coaches & decision making that do not rise to the level of bashing I so often read here.

Outstanding post spdrama. Excellent . Must read for all the whiners and those who know more than CDS. Thanks

 

[kg01]

At the risk of agreeing with @lv20gt , I mean who wants that, I do think we should be able to discuss stuff although it may sound like second-guessing.

 

[kg01]

Outstanding post spdrama. Excellent . Must read for all the whiners and those who know more than CDS. Thanks

My only pushback is I do think we can maturely discuss coaching decisions. Doesn't necessarily mean we're wanting the guy fired. Just healthy discussion, no?

 

[spdrama]

My only pushback is I do think we can maturely discuss coaching decisions. Doesn't necessarily mean we're wanting the guy fired. Just healthy discussion, no?

Absolutely agree. Raising any issue for discussion is a positive. I’m not seeing that approach to a lot of after game posts

 

[kg01]

Absolutely agree. Raising any issue for discussion is a positive. I’m not seeing that approach to a lot of after game posts

Yeah, that's true of every message board tho. Gotta wade through the muck.

 

[Techwood Relict]

My only pushback is I do think we can maturely discuss coaching decisions. Doesn't necessarily mean we're wanting the guy fired. Just healthy discussion, no?

You had me until you said maturely

I can't do that on a message board. Even one that's as refined as this one

 

[Root4GT]

I don’t see much post game coaching decision “talk about” or speculation. I see a lot of second-guessing, complaining, hindsight whining with a complaining, disrespectful and “I know better” than the coaches attitude. As for not making the tourney as a HC, CDS was only a HC once before. He was on the Memphis coaching staff when they made the tourney in 2011-12. He was on the Arizona coaching staff when they made the Elite 8 2014-15. He took over a 12-13 (6-10) Pacific U team under post season ban & scholarship reduction sanctions for academic fraud and in 3 years led them to a 23-10 (11-5) 3rd place Western Conference tie and was named conference Coach of The Year. The Western Conference only received 2 tourney bids that year (Covid cancelled) to Gonzaga & BYU. He also led his HS to two State championships, was a first team college All American, finalist for college player of the year and PAC 10 player of the year. He’s played for the U.S. National Team, was the NBA 7th draft pick & NBA rookie of the year. And long before practices even started at GT he made, what might be the best coaching decision in a long time by bringing in Karl Hobbs as his assistant, resulting in Ndongo’s decommit from Rutgers. The players seem to relate well to him and they and their families really like him (according to at least one player’s parent) with the benching of Abram suggesting one possible exception. By contrast, I’ve yet to see any post here by someone who knows this game better than CDS or who can support an end of game strategy in a tight game against a highly ranked & accomplished team of substituting a raw Freshman on “speculation” instead of a go for the win or take the loss with our best players on the court. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Including me. And I don’t understand how any of this negative player or coach bashing helps players, coaches, or re-builds a lost fan base or will positively contribute to once again filling the seats in the Thrillerdome. There are plenty of posts on this site and on others across the country during vacations and after losses that discuss games, players, coaches & decision making that do not rise to the level of bashing I so often read here.

Good post. Line breaks make for easier reading.

 

[dtm1997]

Yeah, that's true of every message board tho. Gotta wade through the muck.

This assumes the muck deserves the time to wade thru it. I'm finding it really doesn't.

 

[Techwood Relict]

This is how kg approaches it....

dtm prefers the muck a bit less deep

 

[lv20gt]

The giant hole in your argument is on 3 point shooting is it is only Kelly who is worse shooting from 3 out of our returning players. Sturdivant and Debo are actually shooting at a higher % this year than last year. Obviously Terry isn’t playing.

If Kelly gets back to around his 38% 3 point shooting we will be a very good team. If he doesn’t we will be a .500 team at best.

Sturdivant is shooting 33.3 compared to 32.1 last year and 33% the year before. However he is averaging just 1.8 3s per game compared to 3.4 last year. Part of that is playing time related as he's playing 24.7% less minutes, but that doesn't fully account for the 47.1% decrease in attempts. So yeah, his average has remained about the same, but he's getting fewer looks. He's not as willing to take the bad to mediocre looks as Kelly.

Coleman is at 36% this year compared to 32.6 last year and 41.3% as a freshman. 36 is better but it isn't exactly a ringing torching the nets either, and comparing it to last year is odd to me when, it's my belief at least, he was misused and playing out of position. He is shooting 1.1 fewer attempts this year than last year but that pretty much tracks with decreased playing time, although that raises the question of whether he should be playing less. However his numbers are also very heavily influenced by two games, GSU and UML, where he went a combined 8/14. Outside of those two games he's 27.8% on 3.6 attempts per game. Now obviously you can't just remove games, but it's worth considering what should be considered the norm considering one was against one of the worst D1 teams in the country (GSU is currently 0-12 and 344 in NET), and a game that is increasingly looking more like an outlier.

Also not sure why you would limit it to just those two.

George is shooting 22.2% on 3 attempts per game. Now maybe he's just a bad shooter but it is worth mentioning considering the volume.

Abram is shooting 23.5 % compared to 36.4% last year at Ole miss on 2.8 attempts per game. Both he and George have missed whole games, but since they have more or less filled the same role with similar numbers it's not really significant imo.

Gapare is shooting 25% compared to 26.7% last year at UMass on 1.8 attempts per game. Now I don't really put this one on CDS from a shooting perspective, but if you're going to include Sturdy with the same attempts per game it's also worth mentioning.

Then there is Reeves, who is the really the only example of a perimeter player thriving shooting the ball under CDS. He is shooting 37.8% from three compared to 26.2% at Florida last year. However, he is playing 61.7% MORE minutes per game than he was at Florida while shooting 9.5% LESS 3 pointers. So cudos to CDS for fixing that issue with Reeves that likely led to him leaving UF, but he's still playing 31.2 mpg and only taking 3.8 attempts. Also, something similar to what I wrote about Coleman could also be said about Reeves in terms of numbers propped up by two games (with Reeves it is Duke and GSU).

Then there is Kelly who is shooting 22.2% from 3 compared to 37.9% last year and actually shooting less 3 pointers this year compared to last (about 4% less so not significantly so). In some ways Kelly has benefitted from CDS. He's drawn a lot more FTAs (5.6 compared to 1.8) and gotten a lot more rebounds (6 this year compared to 3.4 last year), but if you're going to attribute that change to CDS, which you should, it seems naive to not also consider that CDS may have had a negative impact on his shooting%.

But, it isn't a giant hole in my argument that some players have okay to good shooting %s. My argument is that the offense we are running isn't generating good looks from 3 consistently. Both having players with decent to good %s but lower volume and a player with higher volume but low % are consistent with that. One group keeps their % respectable by passing up the mediocre to bad shots, while the other group tanks their % by taking, and missing, those bad looks.

Now that could improve over the course of the year. Maybe Kelly just starts making more of the shots he's getting. Maybe Coleman plays more instead of Kelly and gets those looks to fall. Maybe we start generating better looks because George adapts better. Maybe CDS plays Sturdivant more and we generate better looks with an experienced PG running the show. Maybe guys just adjust to what's going on and have better/quicker off ball movement leading to better shots. Who knows? It could also just be this is who we are and will be going forward. My opinion is it likely won't improve significantly unless we make it a priority to generate looks for specific players off of dedicated motion rather than just relying on giving them the freedom to shoot when it become available.

 

[kg01]

This assumes the muck deserves the time to wade thru it. I'm finding it really doesn't.

Facx. I like GT discussion tho. Can't find it many places.

This is how kg approaches it....

dtm prefers the muck a bit less deep

Yeah, dt has always been a lightweight mucker.

 

[lv20gt]

I don’t see much post game coaching decision “talk about” or speculation. I see a lot of second-guessing, complaining, hindsight whining with a complaining, disrespectful and “I know better” than the coaches attitude.

Where exactly are these disrespectful posts? Like actual post the quotes to them.

 

[Root4GT]

Sturdivant is shooting 33.3 compared to 32.1 last year and 33% the year before. However he is averaging just 1.8 3s per game compared to 3.4 last year. Part of that is playing time related as he's playing 24.7% less minutes, but that doesn't fully account for the 47.1% decrease in attempts. So yeah, his average has remained about the same, but he's getting fewer looks. He's not as willing to take the bad to mediocre looks as Kelly.

Coleman is at 36% this year compared to 32.6 last year and 41.3% as a freshman. 36 is better but it isn't exactly a ringing torching the nets either, and comparing it to last year is odd to me when, it's my belief at least, he was misused and playing out of position. He is shooting 1.1 fewer attempts this year than last year but that pretty much tracks with decreased playing time, although that raises the question of whether he should be playing less. However his numbers are also very heavily influenced by two games, GSU and UML, where he went a combined 8/14. Outside of those two games he's 27.8% on 3.6 attempts per game. Now obviously you can't just remove games, but it's worth considering what should be considered the norm considering one was against one of the worst D1 teams in the country (GSU is currently 0-12 and 344 in NET), and a game that is increasingly looking more like an outlier.

Also not sure why you would limit it to just those two.

George is shooting 22.2% on 3 attempts per game. Now maybe he's just a bad shooter but it is worth mentioning considering the volume.

Abram is shooting 23.5 % compared to 36.4% last year at Ole miss on 2.8 attempts per game. Both he and George have missed whole games, but since they have more or less filled the same role with similar numbers it's not really significant imo.

Gapare is shooting 25% compared to 26.7% last year at UMass on 1.8 attempts per game. Now I don't really put this one on CDS from a shooting perspective, but if you're going to include Sturdy with the same attempts per game it's also worth mentioning.

Then there is Reeves, who is the really the only example of a perimeter player thriving shooting the ball under CDS. He is shooting 37.8% from three compared to 26.2% at Florida last year. However, he is playing 61.7% MORE minutes per game than he was at Florida while shooting 9.5% LESS 3 pointers. So cudos to CDS for fixing that issue with Reeves that likely led to him leaving UF, but he's still playing 31.2 mpg and only taking 3.8 attempts. Also, something similar to what I wrote about Coleman could also be said about Reeves in terms of numbers propped up by two games (with Reeves it is Duke and GSU).

Then there is Kelly who is shooting 22.2% from 3 compared to 37.9% last year and actually shooting less 3 pointers this year compared to last (about 4% less so not significantly so). In some ways Kelly has benefitted from CDS. He's drawn a lot more FTAs (5.6 compared to 1.8) and gotten a lot more rebounds (6 this year compared to 3.4 last year), but if you're going to attribute that change to CDS, which you should, it seems naive to not also consider that CDS may have had a negative impact on his shooting%.

But, it isn't a giant hole in my argument that some players have okay to good shooting %s. My argument is that the offense we are running isn't generating good looks from 3 consistently. Both having players with decent to good %s but lower volume and a player with higher volume but low % are consistent with that. One group keeps their % respectable by passing up the mediocre to bad shots, while the other group tanks their % by taking, and missing, those bad looks.

Now that could improve over the course of the year. Maybe Kelly just starts making more of the shots he's getting. Maybe Coleman plays more instead of Kelly and gets those looks to fall. Maybe we start generating better looks because George adapts better. Maybe CDS plays Sturdivant more and we generate better looks with an experienced PG running the show. Maybe guys just adjust to what's going on and have better/quicker off ball movement leading to better shots. Who knows? It could also just be this is who we are and will be going forward. My opinion is it likely won't improve significantly unless we make it a priority to generate looks for specific players off of dedicated motion rather than just relying on giving them the freedom to shoot when it become available.

This is a direct lift from your post: "despite having a roster that prior to the season seemed poised to live by the three." That is your assumption. The returning players were Kelly, Terry, Debo and Sturdivant. Terry and Kelly were good 3 point shooters. Kelly is bad this year and Terry is not playing. Abrams was a solid shooter for Ole Miss. He doesn't get any playing time now for whatever reason. So it's basically Kelly. He is the problem, who knows why? Will he get back to near what he shot in prior years? No way to know. I sure hope so. We will struggle if he keeps throwing up bricks.

We disagree on getting good looks from 3 point range. I think we get way more good looks from 3 this year than the last few years. The last year I thought we got a lot of open 3s was the ACC Championship year.

Time will tell if we start shooting better. The offense looks better overall now than the first few games. NDongo makes a big difference as his presence causes defense to have to move around which opens guys for good looks from beyond the arc.

That's how it looks to me. Obviously you don't care for the offense we run. That's ok as CDS doesn't give a rat's *** what either of us think.

 

[MtnWasp]

George is shooting 22.2% on 3 attempts per game. Now maybe he's just a bad shooter but it is worth mentioning considering the volume.

Abram is shooting 23.5 % compared to 36.4% last year at Ole miss on 2.8 attempts per game. Both he and George have missed whole games, but since they have more or less filled the same role with similar numbers it's not really significant imo.

Abram is attempting 0.20 three point attempts per minuted played (84 minutes)
George is attempting 0.11 three point attempts per minute played (245 minutes)

The percentage may be similar, but Abram is attempting twice the three point shots per minute played than George. Big difference.

Also, George is shooting .391 from the floor in general compared to .265 from Abram. George is 37 assists to 18 turnovers (2:1) compared to Abrams 9 assists to 8 turnovers (1:1).

 

[lv20gt]

This is a direct lift from your post: "despite having a roster that prior to the season seemed poised to live by the three." That is your assumption. The returning players were Kelly, Terry, Debo and Sturdivant. Terry and Kelly were good 3 point shooters. Kelly is bad this year and Terry is not playing. Abrams was a solid shooter for Ole Miss. He doesn't get any playing time now for whatever reason. So it's basically Kelly. He is the problem, who knows why? Will he get back to near what he shot in prior years? No way to know. I sure hope so. We will struggle if he keeps throwing up bricks.

Not sure the point of your inclusion of the quote is. Yeah, the roster was poised to live by the three. The roster includes everyone, not just the returning players. And that shouldn't be a particular disputed statement. You can just look at what the players had done prior to this year to see that was the case.

In any case, no, Kelly isn't the only problem. No matter how convenient it would be if the only issue was him being on a cold shooting streak. He has a bad shooting %. He is joined by Gapare, Abram, and George in that aspect though which is a group that makes up over 21% of our total attempts. Kelly himself is at 28.8% of our 3 point attempts so that group can't be just ignored.

But the problem you want to pretend doesn't exist is the one of a lack of looks for the players who don't have bad %s (Sturdivant, Colman, and Reeves). Sturdy has always been about a 33% shooter from 3 basically being good enough to make it worth it to shoot a good look but not good enough to warrant trying to generate looks for and remains so this year, but his volume has decreased beyond what you would expect even with decreased playing time. That should be a fairly straightforward barometer of the point. But, our two best shooters have only combined for 33% of our teams total three point attempts. Even including Sturdivant that number goes up to just 41.3%. To compare, last year our two best three point shooters accounted for 46% of our three point attempts. In total 83% of our 3 point attempts last year were taken by players who shot 32% or better (comparable to the inclusion of Sturdy). So the question is why do are better shooters not get more looks if it's just Kelly cold shooting? To me it's pretty clear explanation is that Kelly is willing to take worse shots, which explains both his lower % and Reeves/Coleman/Sturdivant's lower volume.

Now, it's also worth reiterating that Coleman, outside of the GSU and ULM games is shooting just 27.8% (down 8.2%) and Reeves outside of the GSU and Duke games is shooting just 28.6% (down 9.4%). To compare, if you took away 5 of Kelly's best shooting games last year (Cuse, UL, FSU,UVA, and NE) he's be at 33.8% (down 4.1%). Obviously taking out the best performances of any player will hurt their overall numbers, but it is also fairly clear that those two games for each of them are having a significantly higher impact than a similar number, ratio obviously, of games did for Kelly last year. Those numbers also put them pretty square in line with what the overall story of our 3 point shooting has been.

Also, if the issue was just Kelly, and that we were getting good looks overall, you'd expect the games where he has fewer attempts would have a similar number of shots with the shots that Kelly normally gets going elsewhere. However, that hasn't really played out. Against Hawaii he shot just 3. The team shot just 17. Against Cinci he shot just 3, and again the team shot just 17 total. He shot 5 against Howard, the team shot 18. Against UMass he shot 6 and the team shot 17. Generally speaking when he doesn't shoot as much, those shots just aren't being taken. So he's taking shots that others are either incapable or unwilling to take. The one exception to that is against UML where he shot 6 and the team shot 30 (Deebo shot 9 and Abram shot 5 in 14 minutes). In the games I haven't yet mentioned we shot 29,27, 23, 27, 28, 22, and 26.

Lastly, if all else was the same, but Kelly was shooting 38% that would put us at 33.09% as a team good for 187th in the country. So yeah. It isn't just Kelly that is the problem.