Some 23-24 Basketball stats

[lv20gt]

That’s just crap on teams. In current college Basketball teams rarely resemble the same team from year to year.

First, that doesn't address the idea that games towards the end of the year are more indicative of the next year's play than the ones earlier in the year.

Second, even if it's true as a general trend, it wouldn't make sense to just blanket not look at late season play for any team. For example, Purdue returned their top 4 players and 7 of their top 9 players. But we can't look at how they played last year to set expectations for how the team will be this year because in general teams don't resemble the same team from year to year? That's absurd. It would still be a thing that you would look at on a team by team basis. And the portal hasn't changed that. There have been teams in the past where they had 5 seniors out of the 7 or 8 men rotations so the previous performances wouldn't be as indicative in that case as well.

Third, even with that you could just skip to the "Even after the roster overhaul the roster " portion and go from there. But the reality is you don't want to have set any kind of expectation because it allows you to avoid having to deal with the possibility of expectations not being met.

The real sad thing is that if posters weren't so dead set on defending CDS to the point of placing no responsibility on him for the current team, there would be an easy argument to make to be optimistic.

Here, I'll make the argument for you and others.

The players who have responded the best to CDS are the freshmen George and Ndongo. With the exception of Reeves, almost no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him (Gapare being a project means that is too early to really tell for him). So CDS looks to be a coach who has a weakness in getting the most out of players who have already established habits/skills/tendencies/etc but has a strength in developing and utilizing players who are more blank slates. So his weaknesses as a coach are more of a focus this year than would be normal and so that would explain a poor job in year one, but his strengths combined with a good first recruiting class, and hope that is a continued thing, means that by year 3 or 4 we'll have a roster that is more comprised of players he recruited and so his strength as a coach would be more of a focus and lead to success.

It's full possible to both be critical of the job that CDS is doing this year and be optimistic that he can find success in the future. Hell you don't even have to look far for an example of just that. Hubert Davis at UNC should absolutely be criticized for the job he did last year at UNC. He did a bad job and severely underperformed. And this year he's running roughshod through the ACC and it wouldn't be a surprise at this point if they made it back to the NCAA title game or won it. Does that mean he must have done a great job last year and it wasn't his fault at all? No. It means he did a bad job one year, and a better job the next.

 

[Root4GT]

First, that doesn't address the idea that games towards the end of the year are more indicative of the next year's play than the ones earlier in the year.

Second, even if it's true as a general trend, it wouldn't make sense to just blanket not look at late season play for any team. For example, Purdue returned their top 4 players and 7 of their top 9 players. But we can't look at how they played last year to set expectations for how the team will be this year because in general teams don't resemble the same team from year to year? That's absurd. It would still be a thing that you would look at on a team by team basis. And the portal hasn't changed that. There have been teams in the past where they had 5 seniors out of the 7 or 8 men rotations so the previous performances wouldn't be as indicative in that case as well.

Third, even with that you could just skip to the "Even after the roster overhaul the roster " portion and go from there. But the reality is you don't want to have set any kind of expectation because it allows you to avoid having to deal with the possibility of expectations not being met.

The real sad thing is that if posters weren't so dead set on defending CDS to the point of placing no responsibility on him for the current team, there would be an easy argument to make to be optimistic.

Here, I'll make the argument for you and others.

The players who have responded the best to CDS are the freshmen George and Ndongo. With the exception of Reeves, almost no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him (Gapare being a project means that is too early to really tell for him). So CDS looks to be a coach who has a weakness in getting the most out of players who have already established habits/skills/tendencies/etc but has a strength in developing and utilizing players who are more blank slates. So his weaknesses as a coach are more of a focus this year than would be normal and so that would explain a poor job in year one, but his strengths combined with a good first recruiting class, and hope that is a continued thing, means that by year 3 or 4 we'll have a roster that is more comprised of players he recruited and so his strength as a coach would be more of a focus and lead to success.

It's full possible to both be critical of the job that CDS is doing this year and be optimistic that he can find success in the future. Hell you don't even have to look far for an example of just that. Hubert Davis at UNC should absolutely be criticized for the job he did last year at UNC. He did a bad job and severely underperformed. And this year he's running roughshod through the ACC and it wouldn't be a surprise at this point if they made it back to the NCAA title game or won it. Does that mean he must have done a great job last year and it wasn't his fault at all? No. It means he did a bad job one year, and a better job the next.

You said – “First, that doesn't address the idea that games towards the end of the year are more indicative of the next year's play than the ones earlier in the year.” This is your assumption. It is not factually backed up in general. You used Purdue as an example. Their play at the end of last year was not nearly as good as their overall season, they went 5-7 in their last 12 games including a first round exit in the NCAAT as a #1 seed. They were expected to be good this year as they are returning the 2023 College Basketball Player of the Year plus as you said a total of 7 regulars. Who returns matters far more than how the team played its last 10-12 games.

You said - even with that you could just skip to the "Even after the roster overhaul the roster" portion and go from there. But the reality is you don't want to have set any kind of expectation because it allows you to avoid having to deal with the possibility of expectations not being met. This is a total BS response. It is who returns that is the correlation to the prior year. GT returned 4 players of which only 3 have played. So how last year’s last 10 games played out are of little to no value in predicting how this year’s team would perform. For all practical purposes it is a new team, 9 of the 12 players are new this year! If you can’t see that, no one can help you!

You said – “The real sad thing is that if posters weren't so dead set on defending CDS to the point of placing no responsibility on him for the current team, there would be an easy argument to make to be optimistic.” Coaches are responsible for their team’s performance and won/loss record. CDS is responsible for this season 9-10 (2-6) record at this point in the season. I have not seen anyone saying he is not responsible for that record.

You said – “The players who have responded the best to CDS are the freshmen George and Ndongo. With the exception of Reeves, almost no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him…” I agree on Ndongo and George, they have been very well for freshmen. Reeves is a far better player at GT than he was at Florida. In his 2 years at FLA he shot 38/26/71 for 8.5ppg while this year at GT he is shooting 45/40/82 for 12ppg. That is a major improvement.

Comparison for Coleman and Sturdivant respectively - shot/scored/min per game:
2022-23 // Coleman: 38/32/69 for 9.5ppg in 31 min/game
2023-24 // Coleman: 42/37/60 for 7.2ppg in 22 min/game

2022-23 // Sturdivant: 39/32/73 for 8.6ppg in 24 min/game
2023-24 // Sturdivant: 43/36/87 for 8.2ppg in 19 min/game

Both are better shooters this season. Combined they are scoring 2.7 ppg fewer than last year in 14 fewer min/game combined. They are playing better this year with fewer minutes that predominantly are going to George and Reeves. I have no issue with that as I believe George and Reeves are better overall players than Sturdivant and Coleman. My opinion, you may disagree. Both are opinions.

Your comment “no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him” is 100% false as the numbers above demonstrated that 2 of the 3 returning players are playing better this year.

Kelly is clearly shooting much worse this year! That is not disputable in any manner. If you recall CDS said before the season that Kelley had to play at an All ACC / All American level for GT to have a successful season. Kelly clearly has not done that! None of us know what his shooting issue is but it is real and has been the #1 reason this year’s team isn’t winning as often as we would like.

VT will be a tough game in Blacksburg. GT hasn't won many times there. They can shoot 3s very well. Coach Young is in his th season and his guys know his system. Go Jackets

 

[Root4GT]

You said – “First, that doesn't address the idea that games towards the end of the year are more indicative of the next year's play than the ones earlier in the year.” This is your assumption. It is not factually backed up in general. You used Purdue as an example. Their play at the end of last year was not nearly as good as their overall season, they went 5-7 in their last 12 games including a first round exit in the NCAAT as a #1 seed. They were expected to be good this year as they are returning the 2023 College Basketball Player of the Year plus as you said a total of 7 regulars. Who returns matters far more than how the team played its last 10-12 games.

You said - even with that you could just skip to the "Even after the roster overhaul the roster" portion and go from there. But the reality is you don't want to have set any kind of expectation because it allows you to avoid having to deal with the possibility of expectations not being met. This is a total BS response. It is who returns that is the correlation to the prior year. GT returned 4 players of which only 3 have played. So how last year’s last 10 games played out are of little to no value in predicting how this year’s team would perform. For all practical purposes it is a new team, 9 of the 12 players are new this year! If you can’t see that, no one can help you!

You said – “The real sad thing is that if posters weren't so dead set on defending CDS to the point of placing no responsibility on him for the current team, there would be an easy argument to make to be optimistic.” Coaches are responsible for their team’s performance and won/loss record. CDS is responsible for this season 9-10 (2-6) record at this point in the season. I have not seen anyone saying he is not responsible for that record.

You said – “The players who have responded the best to CDS are the freshmen George and Ndongo. With the exception of Reeves, almost no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him…” I agree on Ndongo and George, they have been very well for freshmen. Reeves is a far better player at GT than he was at Florida. In his 2 years at FLA he shot 38/26/71 for 8.5ppg while this year at GT he is shooting 45/40/82 for 12ppg. That is a major improvement.

Comparison for Coleman and Sturdivant respectively - shot/scored/min per game:
2022-23 // Coleman: 38/32/69 for 9.5ppg in 31 min/game
2023-24 // Coleman: 42/37/60 for 7.2ppg in 22 min/game

2022-23 // Sturdivant: 39/32/73 for 8.6ppg in 24 min/game
2023-24 // Sturdivant: 43/36/87 for 8.2ppg in 19 min/game

Both are better shooters this season. Combined they are scoring 2.7 ppg fewer than last year in 14 fewer min/game combined. They are playing better this year with fewer minutes that predominantly are going to George and Reeves. I have no issue with that as I believe George and Reeves are better overall players than Sturdivant and Coleman. My opinion, you may disagree. Both are opinions.

Your comment “no other players can really be said to have responded that well to him” is 100% false as the numbers above demonstrated that 2 of the 3 returning players are playing better this year.

Kelly is clearly shooting much worse this year! That is not disputable in any manner. If you recall CDS said before the season that Kelley had to play at an All ACC / All American level for GT to have a successful season. Kelly clearly has not done that! None of us know what his shooting issue is but it is real and has been the #1 reason this year’s team isn’t winning as often as we would like.

VT will be a tough game in Blacksburg. GT hasn't won many times there. They can shoot 3s very well. Coach Young is in his th season and his guys know his system. Go Jackets

Edit - Purdue went 7-5 not 5-7 in their last 12 games last year. Typo error.

 

[57jacket]

I give you props for working very hard to express an opinion based on fantasy. Believing last year’s team was better than the 6-14 conference record is simply a selective false narrative. Believing last year’s team was better than 15-18 is also a false narrative.

You are what your record is. We are currently a losing team in the ACC and overall. We likely will have a losing ACC and overall record again this year.

This is a new team as next year will be a new team. Setting expectations on the composition of a team in March is fools gold.

Clearly you are living in what you think GT BB SHOULD BE , not what it is or has been. This year the team is not a good team. They are competitive and entertaining but at this point they are not a good team. The prior two years GT BB teams were bad teams.

How you think the team should play is not important except to you. I hope you enjoy watching GT BB this year.

As expected lv20 gave a lengthy 500 word answer to your yes or no questions. Brevity is not one of his strengths. LOL. But I deciphered his post and here are his 5 answers.
IDK
IDK
IDK
IDK
IDK
Have a nice day. Go Jackets

 

[Peacone36]

Ignore the f***ing guy! Jesus he makes me look like a f***ing gold member.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Ignore the f***ing guy! Jesus he makes me look like a f***ing gold member.

Who are you talking about? I think that font went on ignore several years ago, came out of time-out earlier this season, and was quickly put back in the penalty box.

 

[lv20gt]

This is your assumption. It is not factually backed up in general.

It's also not factually refuted in general. If you are dealing with only absolute facts then you wouldn't be talking about any kind of prognostication in the first place. Teams develop and change over the course of the year. Why wouldn't more recent games be more indicative of the current state of the program than older ones?

This is a total BS response. It is who returns that is the correlation to the prior year. GT returned 4 players of which only 3 have played. So how last year’s last 10 games played out are of little to no value in predicting how this year’s team would perform. For all practical purposes it is a new team, 9 of the 12 players are new this year!

Yes, so you could skip the entire looking at previous year's result as a means of direct prediction factor and look at the comparison of the rosters and use it as a relative one. Which is why I said "Even after the roster overhaul the roster seemed to at least be in a similar state if not better.". So if you think the overhauled roster was better then why wouldn't you have higher expectations? So the end of the year play wouldn't be indicative of how the team would play, but could be used as a comparison for setting an expectation in regards to level of play for how an improved roster. Now maybe you think the roster wasn't improved. I thought that was one of the points that was generally held by most here because that seemed to be the case over the summer.

Coaches are responsible for their team’s performance and won/loss record. CDS is responsible for this season 9-10 (2-6) record at this point in the season. I have not seen anyone saying he is not responsible for that record.

This entire line conversation started with someone saying we were MUCH better than our record so to me that certainly sounds like he isn't responsible for the current record. But beyond that particular post, I'm not talking about token responsibility like just saying a coach owns his record. But after pretty much any loss little to no criticism is ever directed towards CDS. Plenty of it is directed at players either directly, like what happens usually with Kelly, indirectly, like those that point to a lack of interior production, or in more vague terms like talking about competing, hustling, focus, etc etc. But almost none talking about any decision or action made by our HC.

I agree on Ndongo and George, they have been very well for freshmen. Reeves is a far better player at GT than he was at Florida. In his 2 years at FLA he shot 38/26/71 for 8.5ppg while this year at GT he is shooting 45/40/82 for 12ppg. That is a major improvement.

That wasn't an argument for a position I actually held. It was playing devil's advocate. The conclusion of that argument was that CDS is likely to have success in year 2 and 3 despite the struggles this year. The argument has lots of issues and it's why I don't actually believe in it or particularly buy the conclusion that it leads to. It was just an example of how you could make an argument that both acknowledges a poor job one year but finding reasons to be optimistic for the near future. .

As expected lv20 gave a lengthy 500 word answer to your yes or no questions. Brevity is not one of his strengths. LOL. But I deciphered his post and here are his 5 answers.
IDK
IDK
IDK
IDK
IDK

The questions weren't a matter of knowledge. It's not possible to know if we'd have a better record if we had a different coach. But if you just want one word answers you could answer yes to all of them except the one about the future which would be just I don't because we can't even know what the future of the program currently is to even have a thing to compare to unlike the other questions. I still don't see how the first three are at all relevant. FWIW if we're talking alternate realities, my pick wouldn't be Pastner. It would be to have gotten Pat Kelsey, not that is any more relevant now.

Also, not all his questions were yes or no. In fact the very first question he asked in that post was not a yes or no question.

 

[Root4GT]

It's also not factually refuted in general. If you are dealing with only absolute facts then you wouldn't be talking about any kind of prognostication in the first place. Teams develop and change over the course of the year. Why wouldn't more recent games be more indicative of the current state of the program than older ones?



Yes, so you could skip the entire looking at previous year's result as a means of direct prediction factor and look at the comparison of the rosters and use it as a relative one. Which is why I said "Even after the roster overhaul the roster seemed to at least be in a similar state if not better.". So if you think the overhauled roster was better then why wouldn't you have higher expectations? So the end of the year play wouldn't be indicative of how the team would play, but could be used as a comparison for setting an expectation in regards to level of play for how an improved roster. Now maybe you think the roster wasn't improved. I thought that was one of the points that was generally held by most here because that seemed to be the case over the summer.



This entire line conversation started with someone saying we were MUCH better than our record so to me that certainly sounds like he isn't responsible for the current record. But beyond that particular post, I'm not talking about token responsibility like just saying a coach owns his record. But after pretty much any loss little to no criticism is ever directed towards CDS. Plenty of it is directed at players either directly, like what happens usually with Kelly, indirectly, like those that point to a lack of interior production, or in more vague terms like talking about competing, hustling, focus, etc etc. But almost none talking about any decision or action made by our HC.



That wasn't an argument for a position I actually held. It was playing devil's advocate. The conclusion of that argument was that CDS is likely to have success in year 2 and 3 despite the struggles this year. The argument has lots of issues and it's why I don't actually believe in it or particularly buy the conclusion that it leads to. It was just an example of how you could make an argument that both acknowledges a poor job one year but finding reasons to be optimistic for the near future. .



The questions weren't a matter of knowledge. It's not possible to know if we'd have a better record if we had a different coach. But if you just want one word answers you could answer yes to all of them except the one about the future which would be just I don't because we can't even know what the future of the program currently is to even have a thing to compare to unlike the other questions. I still don't see how the first three are at all relevant. FWIW if we're talking alternate realities, my pick wouldn't be Pastner. It would be to have gotten Pat Kelsey, not that is any more relevant now.

Also, not all his questions were yes or no. In fact the very first question he asked in that post was not a yes or no question.

You story changes constantly – rationalization of the highest order. First it was how the team finished the prior season was the standard. I pointed out how the team YOU mentioned, Purdue, went 5-7 in their last 12 games after you used them as an example for high expectations on a team the following year!

You spend a long paragraph rationalizing that you were wrong on comparing the prior season’s last 10 or so games and switched to well people said this roster is better. Again you admitted your original position was wrong but latter try and come back to it as having been correct. Good Lord take a position and stay with it or own up to being wrong!

What I have read on this board is that this roster has more potential than last year’s roster. You may have a different view of what has been wrote, Abram has been a bust for someone who was thought to be a major contributor and an upgrade. Then you come back to the end of the year roster BS again. You rationalize back and forth as to whether that matters or not. Pick a position and have the courage to stick with the position.

Then you turn to CDS not taking responsibility for the team’s performance. You must not really listen to his comments. He absolutely takes responsibility. He repeatedly states the guys have not fully bought into what he and the staff are teaching. He emphasizes the importance of film study and taking that film study to the floor. He discusses drills, their point, what he wants the players to get from the drills and how that hasn’t sunk in yet. He owns that as his responsibility.

You gripe that other posters have not complained about CDS and they defend him, so what, that is your issue. Everyone has their own opinion. If you feel it is your mission to change people’s minds than have at it. PS you are getting a grade = “F” in your efforts in changing anyone’s mind!

When pointed out your statement that only George and Ndongo were responding to CDS and I used actual player stats to refute that reasoning. You then state, that wasn’t your position. Really, that’s total garbage and if that is what you believe there is no value having any discussion with you as you say one thing then say or I was just being a “Devil’s Advocate” when what you emphatically said was called out as flat out wrong.

So your bottom line after all your back and forth is you don’t think CDS is a good basketball coach for GT. On this board you are nearly a Party of One. Seems you like the attention of being the dissenter.

At this point your conversations do not appear to have any value to keep a dialogue going as you constantly change your position or say you didn’t mean what you wrote. So while it has been interesting it’s not worth my time to continue.

Only time will tell if CDS is a successful coach for GT. I sure hope he is!

Go Jackets!

 

[lv20gt]

You story changes constantly – rationalization of the highest order. First it was how the team finished the prior season was the standard. I pointed out how the team YOU mentioned, Purdue, went 5-7 in their last 12 games after you used them as an example for high expectations on a team the following year!

First off, I believe you just made the same error that you corrected yourself on? Anyways, I didn't chose Purdue because of high expectations. I chose them because they were #1 in returning minutes rank, although on second look it looks like their rank in that is 11th and for some reasons they had that column also including overall rank. It was an example to show that not all teams look nothing like the previous year due to the portal. Same could be said for Columbia, UNI, FAU, Wisconsin, Sainst Joseph's. All of those teams it would make sense to look at the previous season's results. Some of them were bad and probably ended the year bad and so you would think that would indicate low expectations.

You spend a long paragraph rationalizing that you were wrong on comparing the prior season’s last 10 or so games and switched to well people said this roster is better. Again you admitted your original position was wrong but latter try and come back to it as having been correct. Good Lord take a position and stay with it or own up to being wrong!

No, I said that even if you wanted to not look at the previous years results you could just skip and start at looking at the roster after the overhaul. Because it really shouldn't matter. Whether you start at where the roster to end the year or after the overhaul, we have enough pieces on this team to not be clearly in the cellar.

Then you turn to CDS not taking responsibility for the team’s performance. You must not really listen to his comments. He absolutely takes responsibility. He repeatedly states the guys have not fully bought into what he and the staff are teaching

Read what you just wrote again. You are right that he repeatedly states guys have not bought into what he and his staff are teaching. That is putting the blame squarely on the players.

You then state, that wasn’t your position. Really, that’s total garbage and if that is what you believe there is no value having any discussion with you as you say one thing then say or I was just being a “Devil’s Advocate” when what you emphatically said was called out as flat out wrong.

I literally said that i was going to make the argument on your behalf. The conclusion of the argument was that CDS was likely to have success in year two or three. How do you read that as a position that I hold? Does that conclusion seem to fit at all with the rest of my position?

So your bottom line after all your back and forth is you don’t think CDS is a good basketball coach for GT. On this board you are nearly a Party of One. Seems you like the attention of being the dissenter.

I don't think CDS is a particularly proven HC. But the real bottom line is that I believe he is doing a bad job this year. And you're right that I seem to be a party of one in thinking the product being put on the floor isn't a result of a great coaching job.

 

[Root4GT]

First off, I believe you just made the same error that you corrected yourself on? Anyways, I didn't chose Purdue because of high expectations. I chose them because they were #1 in returning minutes rank, although on second look it looks like their rank in that is 11th and for some reasons they had that column also including overall rank. It was an example to show that not all teams look nothing like the previous year due to the portal. Same could be said for Columbia, UNI, FAU, Wisconsin, Sainst Joseph's. All of those teams it would make sense to look at the previous season's results. Some of them were bad and probably ended the year bad and so you would think that would indicate low expectations.



No, I said that even if you wanted to not look at the previous years results you could just skip and start at looking at the roster after the overhaul. Because it really shouldn't matter. Whether you start at where the roster to end the year or after the overhaul, we have enough pieces on this team to not be clearly in the cellar.




Read what you just wrote again. You are right that he repeatedly states guys have not bought into what he and his staff are teaching. That is putting the blame squarely on the players.



I literally said that i was going to make the argument on your behalf. The conclusion of the argument was that CDS was likely to have success in year two or three. How do you read that as a position that I hold? Does that conclusion seem to fit at all with the rest of my position?




I don't think CDS is a particularly proven HC. But the real bottom line is that I believe he is doing a bad job this year. And you're right that I seem to be a party of one in thinking the product being put on the floor isn't a result of a great coaching job.

You live in your own head! Have a good day!

 

[awbuzz]

Just wow, some of y'all are going crazy about this. Don't have to go giving grief to someone that has a different opinion.

I do appreciate the passion being brought into the conversation. Just need to remind ourselves that we want GT to do well and specifically regarding men's basketball to get back to the "glory days" of being in the top echelon of the ACC in being relevant in the national picture. That includes going to the NCAA tournament on a regular basis and making some second and third weekend runs during the NCAA tournament.

Are we good this year? Record doesn't indicate that we are.

Will we be better next season or two or three years from now? We all know we hope we are, however, there's no guarantees.

Do we have a good recruiting class coming in? All indications are that we do. Would we with a different coach? How would we know, we do not live in an alternate universe. (If we did uGa would suck at all sports.. )

Will George, Ndongo, Reeves, etc., i.e. players not out of eligibility leave before they're eligibility is up? Don't know, likely some will.

Will we get starters next season out of the portal? Yes, no, maybe.

Would we have a better record this year if we had hired a different coach? Don't know, there's no way to know, period.

Go Jackets