Game Thread - @ FSU, 12/31/2019

[bke1984]

We are not a good offensive team

When was the last time we were?

 

[awbuzz]

I’m sorry, but the game I watched was sloppy when it was competitive. Watching our guys get called for palming, walking, and outlet passes thrown into the scorers table. Instead of drawing contact when the defender left their feet & drawing a foul, we try to go over them. They came close to setting an all-time block record. 40% of the F$U starting 5, didn’t even play.

It looked like we were straight out of exams.

Don't disagree about the offense... Left a lot to be desired.

Overall the D was okay, particularly in the first half. If we were worth spit offensively... Well I can go back to 1985 and enjoy the season...

 

[yjfan]

When was the last time we were?

Lethal weapon 3

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Have we EVER won in mbb @ fsu?

 

[LargeFO]

Then make the case for our actual team instead of using sterile terms. My guess is you didn't because even you know there is a huge gap between Mike/Jose and Shembari/Asanti and between Wright and Cole. Only with Moore is there a decent case that he should have gotten a lot more minutes, but even then he's been struggling and in particular looked like a bad match up against FSU especially with the way they were calling the game.

The truth is the opposite of what you said is where our team is at. We are hurting because there is a big drop off when we go to the bench. Cole hasn't developed like we hoped nor has Shembari shown the ability to be a positive influence. Price has shown some promise but he isn't ready as a freshman. Didenko is Didenko, Sjolund is redshirtting/transferring, and we have an empty scholarship. That's our bench beyond Bubba/Moore. Now if you want to argue that we shouldn't be a in a situation where ironmanning our starters is the best course then go for it, and I doubt you'll be met with much resistance, but if you're trying to argue that we lost because Cole/Price/Phillips didn't get in the game then I think you have a lot of work to do to make that point.



He didn't play well. Are you going to try and argue that he still isn't a huge overall plus for us over what we had when he was out?

We absolutely shouldn't be iron-manning them. It's recruiting failure after recruiting failure. There are guys that are not ACC level players. That's recruiting failures over several years.

 

[gte447f]

Then make the case for our actual team instead of using sterile terms. My guess is you didn't because even you know there is a huge gap between Mike/Jose and Shembari/Asanti and between Wright and Cole. Only with Moore is there a decent case that he should have gotten a lot more minutes, but even then he's been struggling and in particular looked like a bad match up against FSU especially with the way they were calling the game.

The truth is the opposite of what you said is where our team is at. We are hurting because there is a big drop off when we go to the bench. Cole hasn't developed like we hoped nor has Shembari shown the ability to be a positive influence. Price has shown some promise but he isn't ready as a freshman. Didenko is Didenko, Sjolund is redshirtting/transferring, and we have an empty scholarship. That's our bench beyond Bubba/Moore. Now if you want to argue that we shouldn't be a in a situation where ironmanning our starters is the best course then go for it, and I doubt you'll be met with much resistance, but if you're trying to argue that we lost because Cole/Price/Phillips didn't get in the game then I think you have a lot of work to do to make that point.

I agree with you that our roster is not where it needs to be talent wise and depth wise, but I still do not agree with going with such a short bench as Pastner did today vs FSU. What do you say about actual fatigue? Do you think it is not a factor? Do you think that Jose/Mike/Moses are able to go at their best for 40 minutes per game (Moses 37 minutes)? I saw each of those guys literally walking around the court and looking tired out there today at a time in the second half when the game was getting away from us and we needed to be playing with intensity to get back in it before it was out of hand.

Anyway, I made my original post about Pastner not playing enough bench minutes because I really question whether or not he is capable of managing player minutes during the flow of the game, unless he makes that his only focus. That's why I said he claims it's a strategy, but I think it's just laziness. He has said many times since he got the job that he would prefer to play with just 5 players. Well, isn't that convenient. One less thing to have to worry about while coaching. I wonder why everyone doesn't just do that. To me, a lot of what he says and does indicate that he seems to almost obsess over one or two issues at a time for stretches of time, and frankly I'm not sure he can see the bigger picture or juggle more than his one or two balls in the air most of the time.

 

[lauraee]

When was the last time we were?

Jarret Jack, Bynum et al final 4.

 

[lv20gt]

I agree with you that our roster is not where it needs to be talent wise and depth wise, but I still do not agree with going with such a short bench as Pastner did today vs FSU. What do you say about actual fatigue? Do you think it is not a factor? Do you think that Jose/Mike/Moses are able to go at their best for 40 minutes per game (Moses 37 minutes)? I saw each of those guys literally walking around the court and looking tired out there today at a time in the second half when the game was getting away from us and we needed to be playing with intensity to get back in it before it was out of hand.

Yes they were fatigued. That's arguing past the point though. I wish we had the depth to be able to sit our starters more and get them rest but we don't. I'd take a fatigued Jose over what we saw when he was out. I'll take a fatigued Mike over Price or Phillips. I'll take a fatigued Moses over Cole. Why is it that you're arguing that it was a mistake him playing those guys so much, but you won't actually argue for specific players deserving of more minutes over specific players? To me this just screams trying to find something to complain about even when what was done makes logical sense and you can't support the point.

Anyway, I made my original post about Pastner not playing enough bench minutes because I really question whether or not he is capable of managing player minutes during the flow of the game, unless he makes that his only focus. That's why I said he claims it's a strategy, but I think it's just laziness. He has said many times since he got the job that he would prefer to play with just 5 players. Well, isn't that convenient. One less thing to have to worry about while coaching. I wonder why everyone doesn't just do that. To me, a lot of what he says and does indicate that he seems to almost obsess over one or two issues at a time for stretches of time, and frankly I'm not sure he can see the bigger picture or juggle more than his one or two balls in the air most of the time.

Like this. You're just making stuff up. He has said he prefers a 7 or 8 man rotation, not a 5 man one but that doesn't really lend itself to your other made up point so I guess that's why you went with 5. And there is plenty of history of that strategy working and you don't even have to go to a different school if you know your GT basketball history.

Beyond that UVA had 3 players last year averaging over 32, and only 7 averaging over 10 mpg. Ignore that they basically only played 6 guys in the national championship game, which went into OT.

How about where Nova went basically went 8 deep at most both the years they won the championship? Let's ignore that they basically only used 7 in their national championship game in 18 and only 8 in 16 against a UNC team that went 7 deep.

What about Duke in 2015? Oh they basically went 7 deep including only playing 8 in the national championship game against Wisconsin who only played 7?

How about current #1 gonzaga. When they went against UNC, they played 7. Against Zona they basically went 7 deep. Ditto when they played washington. Same against Oregon.

Hell today, butler basically went 7 deep against St Johns and Gonzaga went 7 deep against 2-12 detroit mercy.

The fact is when games are close and important many teams have short rotations often only going deeper down the bench when they have a lead they can use to buy time.

 

[Peacone36]

Where is everybody? I thought all our problems were solved?

 

[LibertyTurns]

We absolutely shouldn't be iron-manning them. It's recruiting failure after recruiting failure. There are guys that are not ACC level players. That's recruiting failures over several years.

We have an empty scholarship? What other Top 75 or Top 100 team couldn’t fill all their scholarship spots? Any?

 

[slugboy]

Have we EVER won in mbb @ fsu?

If FSU had a raucous environment with a large home court advantage, I’d be more accepting of that as an argument.
Now, most every team in the ACC has a winning home court record, and the good teams win almost every home game. FSU is on a long home winning streak. But there’s no good reason FSU should be invincible at home.
FSU is 20th in KenPom and has a good overall record. We’re 96th as of now. NCST is 36th, and we got a win against them. UNC is currently 47th. The top half of the league has a shot at the tourney right now. We’re in the bottom half.
RPI has us in better shape than Clemson, ND, and some others: http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_acc_Men.html
I think the FSU game was winnable, but we need a better plan and better play to get there

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[YlJacket]

Almost every team operates with an empty scholarship or two. Especially top teams who know the talent in their roster and have defined roles for recruits when they come in. We have filled ours with projects fighting for some playing time - mostly unsuccessfully.

 

[Buzzbomb]

Almost every team operates with an empty scholarship or two. Especially top teams who know the talent in their roster and have defined roles for recruits when they come in. We have filled ours with projects fighting for some playing time - mostly unsuccessfully.

We are now. It’s called probation.

 

[MiracleWhips]

I just don’t see how yesterday’s loss is any indication of how our season will end up. FSU is a team I could see being a top 4 team in conference play and even being a sweet sixteen team. This unc game on Saturday will tell a lot more about us.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

If FSU had a raucous environment with a large home court advantage, I’d be more accepting of that as an argument.
Now, most every team in the ACC has a winning home court record, and the good teams win almost every home game. FSU is on a long home winning streak. But there’s no good reason FSU should be invincible at home.
FSU is 20th in KenPom and has a good overall record. We’re 96th as of now. NCST is 36th, and we got a win against them. UNC is currently 47th. The top half of the league has a shot at the tourney right now. We’re in the bottom half.
RPI has us in better shape than Clemson, ND, and some others: http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_acc_Men.html
I think the FSU game was winnable, but we need a better plan and better play to get there

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not an “argument” for this one game. Rather a plea for an Administration that gets serious about making GT the best it can be in every area it undertakes.

 

[YlJacket]

Well - it does tell us that even at full strength we are not a top third of the ACC type of team. And that we don't have confidence in our roster to play at that level. I do agree with you that UNC will tell us whether we can be in the very mushy middle of the ACC. They were not a great team before injuries and now are really not a good team. On the bubble. If we want to be there we have to show it.

 

[Buzzbomb]

I just don’t see how yesterday’s loss is any indication of how our season will end up. FSU is a team I could see being a top 4 team in conference play and even being a sweet sixteen team. This unc game on Saturday will tell a lot more about us.

They were without 40% of their lineup, but no excuse for #18 playing so sloppy. Maybe they do play to the level of their competition?
In our case, the last 23 years of ACC indicate this will be a difficult challenge. It can be done, with superior coaching, chemistry and a few breaks. Back to reality....when you are 5-5 out of conference with a debatably moderate schedule, history does not bode well at all.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Almost every team operates with an empty scholarship or two. Especially top teams who know the talent in their roster and have defined roles for recruits when they come in. We have filled ours with projects fighting for some playing time - mostly unsuccessfully.

I had no idea. I just figured everyone filled all their scholarship slots.

 

[Buzzbomb]

I had no idea. I just figured everyone filled all their scholarship slots.

We were just forced to surrender one for the next 4 years to the NCAA.
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but we didn’t appeal that part.

 

[LibertyTurns]

We were just forced to surrender one for the next 4 years to the NCAA.
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but we didn’t appeal that part.

I’m confused. So all of our scholarship positions are filled? You can’t fill a position you don’t have.