When does Pastner feel heat

[MidtownJacket]

He has also we will move away from base zone D to try to take advantage of speed and turnovers and getting out to run.

I love our zone so hope he keeps it heavily in the rotation (he has said it’ll still be used situationally).

 

[SecretAgentBuzz]

AJC had a writeup of his answer to the question "how do you use the portal?" I quote some of his answer - I deleted some of his response that was not relevant to the question. It does highlight some of the problems Tech has with the portal.

“You know, when we’re looking in the portal, we’re constantly trying to find the right fit. Georgia Tech is one of the elite academic schools in the world. I think it’s the only FBS school to play football in Division I that does not have a bachelor of arts; everything is a bachelor of science. To be a student, to be a student-athlete, it’s incredible. It’s amazing.

“It’s a science, math and technology school, and to be able to do what these young men do and the rest of the students, it’s remarkable. There’s very few online classes, if any, at Georgia Tech, and so by the time we get them for practice, they’ve had a full day.
“But look, a lot of the people that graduate from Georgia Tech are – they build the airplanes and build the bridges, so you want them to learn in the classroom, not online building those things.

“That’s what’s so great about the school. Fourteen people went to outer space that are Georgia Tech grads. They found water on Mars from Georgia Tech. That’s what’s amazing about this school. It’s incredible. It’s a real honor to be able to be coaching there.

“I say all of that to say Georgia Tech is awesome. What an incredible school. I know I’m on a little tangent, but for these guys to go to school at Georgia Tech, play athletics, the school is amazing. It is an amazing academic institution, and when you get – when you’re looking in the portal, I know I’ve gone a little off line, but when you’re looking in the portal, you’ve got to have the right fit.
“And the right fit is it’s a special, special place academically and it’s a real honor to be around these young men and to see what they – when Kyle (Sturdivant) shows me his homework and it’s like the math class these guys are in, it looks like alien spacecraft. It’s unbelievable. But these guys, that’s just the power of these young men here. They’re really, really special.”

Even if he is not the best bball coach on the planet, THIS is exactly why I appreciate Coach Pastner. He gets GT and he really wants to be here. I know that’s not enough reason to keep him—he has to win games too—but it is the reason that I might give him a little more leash than others. Plus, he cracks me up when he goes on his tangents. You never know what he is going to say. I love that we have our own real life Ted Lasso.

 

[Connell62]

He has also we will move away from base zone D to try to take advantage of speed and turnovers and getting out to run.

I love our zone so hope he keeps it heavily in the rotation (he has said it’ll still be used situationally).

I like the way he put it... He is going to use the zone as a change up, versus it being our fastball. He also talked about how other teams killed us on the boards last year due to the zone.

Personally, I'm confident that we will be able to score the ball, but what will be able to do on defense? Franklin will help on the boards, but will we still miss a shot blocker?

 

[kg01]

Even if he is not the best bball coach on the planet, THIS is exactly why I appreciate Coach Pastner. He gets GT and he really wants to be here. I know that’s not enough reason to keep him—he has to win games too—but it is the reason that I might give him a little more leash than others. Plus, he cracks me up when he goes on his tangents. You never know what he is going to say. I love that we have our own real life Ted Lasso.

I'll let you in on a little secret. And this may shock and surprise most of you who haven't read any of my posts in past years. Ready?

Partner was not my first choice, or 2nd or 3rd but I digress.

That stunning admission aside, I actually agree with what you're saying. The fact that he's totally bought in to what GT is actually is a plus for me.

Again, as you said, gotta win. But wanting to be here is a positive thing especially in a landscape where it could be easier for him to go some other places and not have to worry about the 'stuff' that comes with being hc at GT in this era.

And, before anyone says it, yes we pay him well for the privilege. I'm just speaking to this one aspect of his job.

 

[2ndgenjacket]

It was an offense that his assistant, Tavares Hardy, installed. He did not run it at Memphis.

Yes I would imagine that Princeton offense wouldn’t have gone over well at Memphis.
1. So do you think this offense hurts his recruiting similar to the football option offense? Just seems he came with reputation as recruiter but hasnt seemed to break thru but has more coaching chops than predicted.
2. So based on what I just read where he says the zone won’t be the primary D, why doesn’t he consider a different offense. I love watching the P offense when the ball moves like a hot potatoe but it requires a facilitator, a team that buys into moving the ball to the open man, and hard cuts. Last year we had none of those working.

 

[MtnWasp]

There's 3-4 fonts on this board that have really taken away from what it used to be.

Just a miserable bunch that never have anything positive to say,

Pastner has coached six complete seasons, 3 good (Years 1, 4 & 5) and 3 not good (Years 2, 3 & 6).

That split has the fan base in two camps, optimists and pessimists. The optimists look at the three good years and tend to justify the bad ones. The pessimists look at the three bad years and tend to dismiss the good seasons.

For the optimists, when we have bad season, we tend to say, "Well, let's see what we look like next season. We'll be better." But with the pessimists, they will be quiet when the team is playing well but as soon as the team loses, they come out an say, "See? I knew it all along!"

Most of the pessimists were Pastner skeptics right from the git-go. Some of them would not forgive the poor seasons regardless of who the coach is. They think it is our due to win all the time and recruit like the blue bloods (Even if we did win a lot, would they be happy?). If Pastner can't do it, then they want the magic booster to come up with the funds to find the magic coach to turn GT into the next blue blood. Even if the odds of that happening are in the ball park of 1000 to 1, they think that is the proper bet (as long as it is not their money on the line). The key view for them is to never settle for mediocrity and the key symbol for not standing for mediocrity is getting rid of the coach. The long process of establishing an infrastructure to support a winning program is too involved and daunting to be given much consideration. Hire the right guy and it all will magically fall right into place. Just get rid of the failure and bring in somebody else. Lather, rinse, repeat.

My prediction for this season is that it will not resolve the schism. There will be enough good and bad to fuel both camps. However, the roster pipeline is stable and there will be enough success that Pastner's butt will not be on any kid of hot seat at season's end. This will piss-off the pessimists. They will complain.

Pessimists can cross the line to be trolls. You can recognize the troll by their application of the double standard. It goes like this:

When the team is doing well, the troll externalizes the success. That success is because of the players or the assistant coaches or it is because of the conference being down, etc. Success is always in spite of the coach. When the coach is assumed to be a poor recruiter, players like Alvarado and Wright are dismissed as flukes, or it is because of the lead assistant. Transfers and late recruits are dismissed altogether.

But when the team loses, the buck ALWAYS stops with the coach. Failure is never justified. Injuries should never determine a season. If a solid recruit doesn't pan-out, it is on the coach. If a modest recruit does develop, it is because of the player or assistant. If a coach gets bit by a snake like Ron Bell, it is his own fault.

The trolls are very easy to spot in a situation like our's where the coach has had a mix of good and disappointing results. The circular nature of their arguments gives them away.

 

[Root4GT]

Pastner has coached six complete seasons, 3 good (Years 1, 4 & 5) and 3 not good (Years 2, 3 & 6).

That split has the fan base in two camps, optimists and pessimists. The optimists look at the three good years and tend to justify the bad ones. The pessimists look at the three bad years and tend to dismiss the good seasons.

For the optimists, when we have bad season, we tend to say, "Well, let's see what we look like next season. We'll be better." But with the pessimists, they will be quiet when the team is playing well but as soon as the team loses, they come out an say, "See? I knew it all along!"

Most of the pessimists were Pastner skeptics right from the git-go. Some of them would not forgive the poor seasons regardless of who the coach is. They think it is our due to win all the time and recruit like the blue bloods (Even if we did win a lot, would they be happy?). If Pastner can't do it, then they want the magic booster to come up with the funds to find the magic coach to turn GT into the next blue blood. Even if the odds of that happening are in the ball park of 1000 to 1, they think that is the proper bet (as long as it is not their money on the line). The key view for them is to never settle for mediocrity and the key symbol for not standing for mediocrity is getting rid of the coach. The long process of establishing an infrastructure to support a winning program is too involved and daunting to be given much consideration. Hire the right guy and it all will magically fall right into place. Just get rid of the failure and bring in somebody else. Lather, rinse, repeat.

My prediction for this season is that it will not resolve the schism. There will be enough good and bad to fuel both camps. However, the roster pipeline is stable and there will be enough success that Pastner's butt will not be on any kid of hot seat at season's end. This will piss-off the pessimists. They will complain.

Pessimists can cross the line to be trolls. You can recognize the troll by their application of the double standard. It goes like this:

When the team is doing well, the troll externalizes the success. That success is because of the players or the assistant coaches or it is because of the conference being down, etc. Success is always in spite of the coach. When the coach is assumed to be a poor recruiter, players like Alvarado and Wright are dismissed as flukes, or it is because of the lead assistant. Transfers and late recruits are dismissed altogether.

But when the team loses, the buck ALWAYS stops with the coach. Failure is never justified. Injuries should never determine a season. If a solid recruit doesn't pan-out, it is on the coach. If a modest recruit does develop, it is because of the player or assistant. If a coach gets bit by a snake like Ron Bell, it is his own fault.

The trolls are very easy to spot in a situation like our's where the coach has had a mix of good and disappointing results. The circular nature of their arguments gives them away.

While interesting the part you skip is Pastner's lack of success recruting. The Optimist (or good guys in your parlance) cite look at Moses, he was a low rated recruit and became ACC player of the year. All true. However expecting similar results more than once in a Blue Moon is really fools gold. He is a category of one. Jose is also cited. He was considered an ACC level talent by most recruting services. He became an All ACC player. This can and does happen throughout the league. Again it dose not happen often enough to base a program on.

The transfer Portal should be and has been good for GT BB. Banks and Usher turned into very good ACC players. That's it so far. There are a couple others on the roster who might turn out that way. Lets hope so.

The ACC is a good BB conference but not nearly as dominant as it was when it was a smaller conference.

This year is clearly an great unknown. You are the ultimate optimist. Nothing wrong with that. I am not sure what would discourage you on CJP as GT's celling our BB coach.

There are valid reasons not to be optimistic on this year's team. Basically no player is a proven above average player. There is hope and the offseason reports have been encouraging. We will have a good idea fairly early. We really can't afford bad losses in OOC play this year as our schedule is fairly soft.

Under CJP GT has generally been a good defensive team and a poor offensive team. Turnovers have been a consistent issue. We simply have not been good enough of a scoring team to turn the ball over at the rate we have. The ACCT Championship team was a clear exception. Our turnover rate was significantly lower than the CJP team's norm. How we control our turnovers this year will have a lot to say about out won-loss record.

Optimism is good right now. I really hope I feel the same when ACC play starts.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I said it awhile back but this year for Tech to win Pastner will have to do his best coaching job since coming to Tech. Lots of parts to put together with this team and no real established stars. Pastner will have to make rapid in-game decisions to get the right chemistry on the court at the right time.

No evidence that there is an actual team yet. Intriguing to me to see if Pastner pulls this off or not. Can’t wait to find out. Hope we are shocked by the transformation of certain players as well as the team identity.

 

[MtnWasp]

While interesting the part you skip is Pastner's lack of success recruting.

Only if you evaluate recruiting based on rankings without regard to record, which to me is absurd.

No one called Cremins lucky when Mark Price turned into an All-ACC player or that John Sally grew 4 inches after signing with GT. No one pooped on Cremins because Matt Harpring had to beg his way to get Cremins to offer him even though Harpring played on the same high school team as Cremins' son and Cremins saw Harpring play in high school all of the time.

Luck is a big factor in recruiting ALL of the time. If you hold a coach accountable for bad luck, then you have to give them the credit for good luck as well. No double standards. The mantra that only recruiting rankings for the Fall period count and nothing else does is arbitrary and silly.

Pastner said it himself, at GT there is the issue of "fit." Gt is not for the majority of students regardless of whether or not they are athletes. the pool f players that "fit" at GT is becoming progressively smaller in the last 10 years due to societal changes beyond any coach's control.

Recruitniks point to Cremins and Hewitt and their five star recruits. Things have changed dramatically since then.

GT's prioritizing of the traditional student athlete model results in our progressive divergence from the emerging SEC-semi-pro-model, which is dominating the recruiting scene at present. Meanwhile, there is a society wide skepticism of the value of a higher education among young people due to factors far above the capacty of salesmanship to overcome. GT's top selling point is becoming nonsense to kids today. Finally, the NIL has entered the picture where the "good" recruits have a market value that, so far, Gt boosters have not even showed the slightest inclination to dip a toe with regards to putting together cash packages to induce recruits. See Nwoko to Miami.

Bottom line: The recruits that would be needed to make GT fans think we are recruiting well are even less interested in working hard in the classroom than they used to be and they are looking to cash in on their market value. The recruiting pool for GT is shrinking rapidly, especially among highly rated recruits. Gt sits in the heart of SEC country and the SEC is dominating not only GT but the ACC as well. Top players want privilege and some cash, they are not interested in a strong degree that that they see as setting them up for 30 years prarie-dogging under fluorescent lights in a corporate cubicle jungle, praying that their 401-K and job survives the next financial upheaval. The "nose-to-the-grinstone" / "American Dream" message is anathema to kids today. It is the new slavery.

These issues are far above Josh Pastner's (or any coach's) head. These are not issues that can be recruited around by a slick approach. The recruiting pool is shrinking and the staff is compensating for them as best they can.

I have a different view of recruiting: look at the roster. Do we have good distribution of classes and positions. Do we have good distribution of size, athleticism and skills? The staff has established a track record of developing these modestly rated recruits. It isn't luck. It is totally reasonable to expect improvement from last season.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Pastner has coached six complete seasons, 3 good (Years 1, 4 & 5) and 3 not good (Years 2, 3 & 6).

That split has the fan base in two camps, optimists and pessimists. The optimists look at the three good years and tend to justify the bad ones. The pessimists look at the three bad years and tend to dismiss the good seasons.

For the optimists, when we have bad season, we tend to say, "Well, let's see what we look like next season. We'll be better." But with the pessimists, they will be quiet when the team is playing well but as soon as the team loses, they come out an say, "See? I knew it all along!"

Most of the pessimists were Pastner skeptics right from the git-go. Some of them would not forgive the poor seasons regardless of who the coach is. They think it is our due to win all the time and recruit like the blue bloods (Even if we did win a lot, would they be happy?). If Pastner can't do it, then they want the magic booster to come up with the funds to find the magic coach to turn GT into the next blue blood. Even if the odds of that happening are in the ball park of 1000 to 1, they think that is the proper bet (as long as it is not their money on the line). The key view for them is to never settle for mediocrity and the key symbol for not standing for mediocrity is getting rid of the coach. The long process of establishing an infrastructure to support a winning program is too involved and daunting to be given much consideration. Hire the right guy and it all will magically fall right into place. Just get rid of the failure and bring in somebody else. Lather, rinse, repeat.

My prediction for this season is that it will not resolve the schism. There will be enough good and bad to fuel both camps. However, the roster pipeline is stable and there will be enough success that Pastner's butt will not be on any kid of hot seat at season's end. This will piss-off the pessimists. They will complain.

Pessimists can cross the line to be trolls. You can recognize the troll by their application of the double standard. It goes like this:

When the team is doing well, the troll externalizes the success. That success is because of the players or the assistant coaches or it is because of the conference being down, etc. Success is always in spite of the coach. When the coach is assumed to be a poor recruiter, players like Alvarado and Wright are dismissed as flukes, or it is because of the lead assistant. Transfers and late recruits are dismissed altogether.

But when the team loses, the buck ALWAYS stops with the coach. Failure is never justified. Injuries should never determine a season. If a solid recruit doesn't pan-out, it is on the coach. If a modest recruit does develop, it is because of the player or assistant. If a coach gets bit by a snake like Ron Bell, it is his own fault.

The trolls are very easy to spot in a situation like our's where the coach has had a mix of good and disappointing results. The circular nature of their arguments gives them away.

I'm in a third camp. The endurist.

I just endure the season till baseball.

I've found it's a lot more fun (for me) just waiting to see what happens. As I've stated numerous times I really like Pastner and hope he succeeds and is here 10 years form now having built a consistently solid top 30 program.

 

[Connell62]

Only if you evaluate recruiting based on rankings without regard to record, which to me is absurd.

No one called Cremins lucky when Mark Price turned into an All-ACC player or that John Sally grew 4 inches after signing with GT. No one pooped on Cremins because Matt Harpring had to beg his way to get Cremins to offer him even though Harpring played on the same high school team as Cremins' son and Cremins saw Harpring play in high school all of the time.

Luck is a big factor in recruiting ALL of the time. If you hold a coach accountable for bad luck, then you have to give them the credit for good luck as well. No double standards. The mantra that only recruiting rankings for the Fall period count and nothing else does is arbitrary and silly.

Pastner said it himself, at GT there is the issue of "fit." Gt is not for the majority of students regardless of whether or not they are athletes. the pool f players that "fit" at GT is becoming progressively smaller in the last 10 years due to societal changes beyond any coach's control.

Recruitniks point to Cremins and Hewitt and their five star recruits. Things have changed dramatically since then.

GT's prioritizing of the traditional student athlete model results in our progressive divergence from the emerging SEC-semi-pro-model, which is dominating the recruiting scene at present. Meanwhile, there is a society wide skepticism of the value of a higher education among young people due to factors far above the capacty of salesmanship to overcome. GT's top selling point is becoming nonsense to kids today. Finally, the NIL has entered the picture where the "good" recruits have a market value that, so far, Gt boosters have not even showed the slightest inclination to dip a toe with regards to putting together cash packages to induce recruits. See Nwoko to Miami.

Bottom line: The recruits that would be needed to make GT fans think we are recruiting well are even less interested in working hard in the classroom than they used to be and they are looking to cash in on their market value. The recruiting pool for GT is shrinking rapidly, especially among highly rated recruits. Gt sits in the heart of SEC country and the SEC is dominating not only GT but the ACC as well. Top players want privilege and some cash, they are not interested in a strong degree that that they see as setting them up for 30 years prarie-dogging under fluorescent lights in a corporate cubicle jungle, praying that their 401-K and job survives the next financial upheaval. The "nose-to-the-grinstone" / "American Dream" message is anathema to kids today. It is the new slavery.

These issues are far above Josh Pastner's (or any coach's) head. These are not issues that can be recruited around by a slick approach. The recruiting pool is shrinking and the staff is compensating for them as best they can.

I have a different view of recruiting: look at the roster. Do we have good distribution of classes and positions. Do we have good distribution of size, athleticism and skills? The staff has established a track record of developing these modestly rated recruits. It isn't luck. It is totally reasonable to expect improvement from last season.

Preach! You really hit the nail on the head here. Anyone that points to recruiting ranks as a sign that Josh can’t recruit either hasn’t been paying attention to what’s happening in college athletics or they have an agenda.

 

[Connell62]

I said it awhile back but this year for Tech to win Pastner will have to do his best coaching job since coming to Tech. Lots of parts to put together with this team and no real established stars. Pastner will have to make rapid in-game decisions to get the right chemistry on the court at the right time.

No evidence that there is an actual team yet. Intriguing to me to see if Pastner pulls this off or not. Can’t wait to find out. Hope we are shocked by the transformation of certain players as well as the team identity.

Disagree. His first year at GT will be hard for him to top. The talent comparison between then and now is night and day.

That year, he had Tadric Jackson, Ben Lammers - who avg less than 10 mpg the year prior, and an incoming Josh Okogie. I’m pretty sure the starting PG was Josh Heath. Needless to say, Josh maximized all their talent.

While unproven, this years squad has good talent at virtually every position.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Disagree. His first year at GT will be hard for him to top. The talent comparison between then and now is night and day.

That year, he had Tadric Jackson, Ben Lammers - who avg less than 10 mpg the year prior, and an incoming Josh Okogie. I’m pretty sure the starting PG was Josh Heath. Needless to say, Josh maximized all their talent.

While unproven, this years squad has good talent at virtually every position.

I may not be understanding you.

Are you saying this year doesn’t require great coaching by Pastner or are you saying that this team has lots of stars? I’m confused about what you are disagreeing with.

I’m ready to disagree back but I’m not sure what you’re disagreeing with.

 

[lv20gt]

I said it awhile back but this year for Tech to win Pastner will have to do his best coaching job since coming to Tech. Lots of parts to put together with this team and no real established stars. Pastner will have to make rapid in-game decisions to get the right chemistry on the court at the right time.

Comparing this year's roster and his first years. Noting prior production and/or recruiting rankings.

Year 1 -
Okogie - freshman 3* by the recruiting services.
Lammers - former 3* recruit. Junior. Had played 15 mpg previous year and got 3.6/4 with 1.3 blocks.
Jackson - 4* top 100 type of recruit. Junior who had gotten about 15 mpg the prior two years averaging 5.4 and 4.7 ppg on sub 30/sub 40% shooting.
Stephens - 3* senior who had gotten about 20 mpg the previous two years averaging 6/5 ppg respectively and 3/4 rpg respectively. Sub 40% from the field each year and a respectable 32% from the 3 as a junior.
Heath - Former 2* transfer Senior had played about 18 mpg each of the previous two years. Good A/T ratio but low total numbers (2.7 and 2.8) and not great scoring, (4.3 and 2.7). Sub 30% 3 point shooter.
Justin Moore - Freshman 3* rated lower than Okogie but higher than Matthews by 247.
Heyward - redshirt senior. Think either former walk on or a lower rated recruit. Doesn't show up when looking at 247 historical classes. Either way, had played sparingly 12-16 minutes his first two years here, but didn't contribute much in the way of stats. Good hustle player.
Gueye - 3* redshirt soph who had played in just 8 games his freshman year before redshirtting his soph.
Matthews- 3* freshman. Lowest rated of the true freshmen.
Ogbonda - 3* redshirt freshman. Lowest rated of all freshmen.



This year (not doing covid eligibility just for ease of comparing experience with the prior list)
Sturdivant - Senior, 4* by rivals 3* by 247. 25 mpg last year. 7.6 ppg on 41%/33% and ~2.0 A/T ratio on 2.3 apg.
Smith - Junior 4* transfer from Mississippi state. ~20 mpg each year and about 5.5 ppg on average on 40%/28%. 2.5 rpg and a slightly plus A/T ratio although not what you would want from a PG.
Kelly - Soph 4* by rivals 3* by 247. ~15 mpg last year, 4.5 ppg, on 40.7%/34.5%. Really heated up the second half of the season after starting 4/30 I believe from behind the arc. IIRC he shot something like 47% on nearly 3 attempts per game the back half of the year.
Terry - Former unrated? Senior transfer from Gardner Webb. Averaged doublefigures each of the last two years at GW, shooting 48/45 from the field and 44/35 from three. Again, at Gardner Webb.
Maxwell - 3* junior with injury problems. Has scored 35 points in his two years here. 22 came in one game. Had a reputation as a skilled scorer. Needs to stay healthy.
Coleman - 4* top 75 type sophomore. Mr Basketball for state of Florida. 23.5 mpg last year, 6.2 ppg on 39/41% shooting.
Jalon Moore - 3* soph. Played sparingly last year, 8.5 mpg in just 13 games.
Meka - 3* RS soph, injured his freshman year. Similar to Moore in terms of playing time last year.
Franklin - 3* senior double transfer first from auburn and then South Alabama. Played 28 mpg last year scoring 12.2 on 65.5% from the floor and 7.8 rpg. Again. At South Alabama.
Bagatskis - Unrated freshman. I don't expect him to contribute much this year during games. I would expect a redshirt. I believe he finished out the year in Europe so didn't join the team until after the summer session had ended.
Howard - 3* Senior transfer. Played 25mpg last year averaging 6.5 and 5 on 56% shooting. Came on in the latter half averaging right at 10 ppg after coming back from a (I believe foot) injury.
Martynov - Unrated? freshman. Originally 2023 recruit who reclassified, although I believe I read agewise he fits in the 2022 class and that he got reclassed when he switched schools or something. Late bloomer

Comparing the two, it should be noted that we have 12 names this year vs 10 in year 1 and I left of Hill who I think could compare with Heyward at least. I don't expect much from Martynov or Bagatskis but If I included Ogbonda for year 1 I felt I should include them for next year.

Going by position group

pg - Heath and Moore vs Sturdivant and Smith? I'll take the latter straight up but even if you like Heath's passing compared to Sturdivant I'd say it is a wash as Sturdivant is a better scorer. Smith is much better than Moore though.

Wings - Okogie, Jackson, Heyward, Matthews vs Kelly, Coleman, Terry, Maxwell, Moore. Obviously the former group has the benefit of retrospect telling us what Okogie and Jackson would do but if we're going by prior to the season, Coleman compares favorably against Jackson, Kelly against Okogie, and Terry/Maxwell/Moore against Heyward and Matthews is no real contest. In many ways it's a similar dynamic with Coleman, Kelly, Maxwell, and Terry stepping into the vacuum created by Devoe and Ush leaving the way Okogie and Jackson did when Hunt and Smith. Whether it turns out as well as it did with Okogie and Jackson remains to be seen but I think going into the year we have a better line up to fill the spot than we did in year 1.

PF Stephens and Gueye vs Franklin and Meka. Seems about a wash. Both groups living on some hopes and will handle the issues differently. Franklin and Meka will be more defense/rebound/low post oriented vs Stephens being more a stretch 4. The main dynamic difference though is that this year we have the option of going smaller with 3 wings because of better depth that we really didn't in year 1.

C - Lammers/Ogbonda vs Howard/Martynov. If we're honest the latter two didn't factor in much/probably won't factor in much. I give the slight edge to Lammers due to playing only limited minutes as a soph vs Howard getting as much as he wanted. More room for Lammers to grow into the role, which he did beyond what anyone could have expected.

Overall, Pastner won ACC CotY in his first year for good reason despite going 8-10 in conference. I think if Pastner wins ACC CotY this year we likely are looking at a top 4 finish in conference.

It is hard, even in retrospect to see how that first year's team won games. Looking at it from the perspective of trying to predict how they would do that year is still mindboggling. This year's team, it's not hard to create a somewhat realistic scenario where we can finish in the top 4. Sturdy and Howard continue to develop nicely into solid ACC caliber starters at the 1 and 5 spots. Meanwhile Coleman and Kelly use the new opportunity to flourish by scoring a lot from 3 while Terry, Smith, Moore and Maxwell help create a spark off the bench when needed. Franklin and Meka hold down the 4 spot when we need to go bigger and we are able to go smaller effectively more. Not saying it will happen, or is even likely as it involves a lot of moving parts coming together, but at least I can picture it. Looking at the roster for year 1 I still can't picture how that team won as much as they did even having watched them do it.

 

[Root4GT]

Only if you evaluate recruiting based on rankings without regard to record, which to me is absurd.

No one called Cremins lucky when Mark Price turned into an All-ACC player or that John Sally grew 4 inches after signing with GT. No one pooped on Cremins because Matt Harpring had to beg his way to get Cremins to offer him even though Harpring played on the same high school team as Cremins' son and Cremins saw Harpring play in high school all of the time.

Luck is a big factor in recruiting ALL of the time. If you hold a coach accountable for bad luck, then you have to give them the credit for good luck as well. No double standards. The mantra that only recruiting rankings for the Fall period count and nothing else does is arbitrary and silly.

Pastner said it himself, at GT there is the issue of "fit." Gt is not for the majority of students regardless of whether or not they are athletes. the pool f players that "fit" at GT is becoming progressively smaller in the last 10 years due to societal changes beyond any coach's control.

Recruitniks point to Cremins and Hewitt and their five star recruits. Things have changed dramatically since then.

GT's prioritizing of the traditional student athlete model results in our progressive divergence from the emerging SEC-semi-pro-model, which is dominating the recruiting scene at present. Meanwhile, there is a society wide skepticism of the value of a higher education among young people due to factors far above the capacty of salesmanship to overcome. GT's top selling point is becoming nonsense to kids today. Finally, the NIL has entered the picture where the "good" recruits have a market value that, so far, Gt boosters have not even showed the slightest inclination to dip a toe with regards to putting together cash packages to induce recruits. See Nwoko to Miami.

Bottom line: The recruits that would be needed to make GT fans think we are recruiting well are even less interested in working hard in the classroom than they used to be and they are looking to cash in on their market value. The recruiting pool for GT is shrinking rapidly, especially among highly rated recruits. Gt sits in the heart of SEC country and the SEC is dominating not only GT but the ACC as well. Top players want privilege and some cash, they are not interested in a strong degree that that they see as setting them up for 30 years prarie-dogging under fluorescent lights in a corporate cubicle jungle, praying that their 401-K and job survives the next financial upheaval. The "nose-to-the-grinstone" / "American Dream" message is anathema to kids today. It is the new slavery.

These issues are far above Josh Pastner's (or any coach's) head. These are not issues that can be recruited around by a slick approach. The recruiting pool is shrinking and the staff is compensating for them as best they can.

I have a different view of recruiting: look at the roster. Do we have good distribution of classes and positions. Do we have good distribution of size, athleticism and skills? The staff has established a track record of developing these modestly rated recruits. It isn't luck. It is totally reasonable to expect improvement from last season.

We disagree. No reason CJP can’t get 1 or 2 top 150 players every year out of HS. He has gotten 3. Devoe who was a very good college player. He got Coleman and Kelley who most base our hopes on. He has to get guys like that every year. Three in 6 years won’t cut it in any league anymore.

The days of getting a top 5 player like Bobby did 3 times are clearly over. Getting top 150 guys should be an expectation if we are serious about being competitive in the ACC.

This isn’t complex or hard. Talent is required to be a winning program. Transfers help. Their prior team performance is generally a solid indicator of how well they will preform in the ACC. In 6 years only Banks and Usher exceeded their prior performance at a significant level.

This year will be very interesting. We really have no clue how the team will preform. I am most concerned with interior defense and turnovers. If we are solid in those areas we could be a solid team.

 

[Connell62]

I may not be understanding you.

Are you saying this year doesn’t require great coaching by Pastner or are you saying that this team has lots of stars? I’m confused about what you are disagreeing with.

I’m ready to disagree back but I’m not sure what you’re disagreeing with.

That it will require his best coaching effort since coming to Tech for this team to win.

As mentioned, it will be tough for him to ever outperform the job he did in year one. That team was flat out horrific from an on-paper, talent perspective.

BTW, let's also define what winning means for this team. If it means upper half of the conference or a tourney bid, then we're likely setting ourselves up for a lot of agony.

I'll be rooting for that harder than anyone, but it would take a lot of things to fall our way. The conference is going to be extremely tough this year.

If it means 18-19-20 wins and landing somewhere between 8th - 12th and being a bubble at the end of the year, that is more realistic.

 

[Root4GT]

That it will require his best coaching effort since coming to Tech for this team to win.

As mentioned, it will be tough for him to ever outperform the job he did in year one. That team was flat out horrific from an on-paper, talent perspective.

BTW, let's also define what winning means for this team. If it means upper half of the conference or a tourney bid, then we're likely setting ourselves up for a lot of agony.

I'll be rooting for that harder than anyone, but it would take a lot of things to fall our way. The conference is going to be extremely tough this year.

If it means 18-19-20 wins and landing somewhere between 8th - 12th and being a bubble at the end of the year, that is more realistic.

Getting to 18 wins this season would be success for sure. I believe we have 10=11 OOC games. Getting 8 wins there would be a big step forward for CJP. With 20 ACC games getting 10 wins would also be a good season. If we get 20 wins we should all celebrate a terrific year regardless of making/not making the NCAAT.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That it will require his best coaching effort since coming to Tech for this team to win.

As mentioned, it will be tough for him to ever outperform the job he did in year one. That team was flat out horrific from an on-paper, talent perspective.

BTW, let's also define what winning means for this team. If it means upper half of the conference or a tourney bid, then we're likely setting ourselves up for a lot of agony.

I'll be rooting for that harder than anyone, but it would take a lot of things to fall our way. The conference is going to be extremely tough this year.

If it means 18-19-20 wins and landing somewhere between 8th - 12th and being a bubble at the end of the year, that is more realistic.

I hear you and you may very well be right.

I guess I feel like Pastner in year one getting more out of his players than the previous coach was not that surprising but that’s just me. This year we know what was lost offensively and defensively off of last year’s team and we are counting on several players to show more than they’ve shown and step up to a whole next level of play. We also are expecting them to come together as a team with a whole new level of chemistry. As I’ve said before, a lot of moving parts have to come together or this season will be pretty dismal.

Not arguing. Just explaining myself in the face of your impeccable logic.

Of course, once again, Pastner “really likes this team.” Fingers crossed.

 

[gt02]

Pastner's teams look well coached -- especially defensively. The issue that frustrates me is our offense just does not match our skillset. Hopefully he switches it up this year.

 

[1979jacket]

there are a lot of optomist on this page which is encouraging. Nevertheless the pundits have us projected as last from a coach in his 7th yr. that is not good - please explain why not that bad?