ZERO commits

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,420
Actually, potentially more if some decide to leave. I would not be surprised if no more than 6-7 of our current players and 2-3 of our current coaches are back next year. I think it is time to shake things up.
The assistants aren't getting it done. Reveno (sp?) may be a keeper. Need a dynamic recruiter that can sell the program and school. We have really missed an ACC level big this year. This is not a very quick team either which would take a more power oriented bang type team but need a big strong center to control the paint. Without quick feet on D we tend to reach and therefore a lot of fouls. It's been a tough year.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,564
Our bigs are fine, but have been misused and then just benched for little reason.

There were, and are, going to be growing pains, but we've seen that from literally every position with a new contributor this year. We've seen our young wings over rotate, and over react to ball fakes allowing penetration fairly consistently, rushing shots, have poor off ball movement, and any number of other things that are common with inexperienced players. For the most part our wings and guards have been allowed to play through their mistakes while our bigs (notably Howard and Saba) get benched instead.

People will say that they were ineffective, but there is no reason they should have been the focal point of the offense where we forced the issue to them. It didn't make sense stylistically nor given the experience make up of the team. It was like we didn't want to run Devoe at the point but were afraid of having Smith or Kyle run the show so we went with running our offense through an inexperienced big to try and hide it. That isn't a problem with the big though. IMO that also hindered the development of our two pointguards who need to be able to run the show.

Same thing defensively. Oh, they are too slow footed on the perimeter, when our man defense made almost no attempt to switch. Yesterday there were about three straight possessions where their best player came down, had a brush screen if anything, got a switch onto Howard with whoever the other player was (it was Ush in one case) not even trying to stay with. Yeah, that is going to be ineffective because having the opponents best player be able to get whatever match up he wants is a bad strategy.
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
As far as Rodney is playing; he is really getting better!!! On offense he is reacting by rebounding and putting them in the goal! And not near as much turn overs! On defense he is putting both hands up on the shots! That is helping! The only way for him to get even better is jump with both hands up in the air. Do not lean into the shooter with your hands and arm! That will clear the shooters view of the basket! Sure you might block the shot but you would have to hit the ball just as the shooter is releasing the ball from his hand! Two hands up WILL lesson the shooters sight vision toward the goal!
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,420
Don't expect Howard and Sturd to carry the team next year. They aren't Moses and Jose. They are both good players but don't expect being near the top of the conference without having a lot more help. Who would even have a shot at all ACC based on who is expected back. We need at least one or two guys who are in the all ACC conversation next year to be a winning team. I hate to be this bleak but Pastner needs to pull a couple of rabbits out of the hat. Who replaces Ush and Devoe?
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
Don't expect Howard and Sturd to carry the team next year. They aren't Moses and Jose. They are both good players but don't expect being near the top of the conference without having a lot more help. Who would even have a shot at all ACC based on who is expected back. We need at least one or two guys who are in the all ACC conversation next year to be a winning team. I hate to be this bleak but Pastner needs to pull a couple of rabbits out of the hat. Who replaces Ush and Devoe?
I wasn't saying that, and I agree with you about their real ability not being any thing close to carrying the team any further with this years season!
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,451
Don't expect Howard and Sturd to carry the team next year. They aren't Moses and Jose. They are both good players but don't expect being near the top of the conference without having a lot more help. Who would even have a shot at all ACC based on who is expected back. We need at least one or two guys who are in the all ACC conversation next year to be a winning team. I hate to be this bleak but Pastner needs to pull a couple of rabbits out of the hat. Who replaces Ush and Devoe?
Well we are a last place team this year so it can’t be worse in conference. There is nothing that makes me believe we will be better than a bottom tier team next year. While some guys should get better there is no one lined up to replace Devoe or Usher. GT BB is hurting right now.
 

dtm1997

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
15,541
Well we are a last place team this year so it can’t be worse in conference. There is nothing that makes me believe we will be better than a bottom tier team next year. While some guys should get better there is no one lined up to replace Devoe or Usher. GT BB is hurting right now.
Deebo isn't the long term replacement for Devoe?
 

gt02

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
634
Our bigs are fine, but have been misused and then just benched for little reason.

There were, and are, going to be growing pains, but we've seen that from literally every position with a new contributor this year. We've seen our young wings over rotate, and over react to ball fakes allowing penetration fairly consistently, rushing shots, have poor off ball movement, and any number of other things that are common with inexperienced players. For the most part our wings and guards have been allowed to play through their mistakes while our bigs (notably Howard and Saba) get benched instead.

People will say that they were ineffective, but there is no reason they should have been the focal point of the offense where we forced the issue to them. It didn't make sense stylistically nor given the experience make up of the team. It was like we didn't want to run Devoe at the point but were afraid of having Smith or Kyle run the show so we went with running our offense through an inexperienced big to try and hide it. That isn't a problem with the big though. IMO that also hindered the development of our two pointguards who need to be able to run the show.

Same thing defensively. Oh, they are too slow footed on the perimeter, when our man defense made almost no attempt to switch. Yesterday there were about three straight possessions where their best player came down, had a brush screen if anything, got a switch onto Howard with whoever the other player was (it was Ush in one case) not even trying to stay with. Yeah, that is going to be ineffective because having the opponents best player be able to get whatever match up he wants is a bad strategy.
To your point about the bigs being misused (which I agree with) has anyone asked Pastner about that during a press conference? It’s pretty obvious to all on the offensive end. So why keep doing it? Same thing happened when we had Banks here. But there, he scrapped the offense mid season.
 

Connell62

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
2,970
To your point about the bigs being misused (which I agree with) has anyone asked Pastner about that during a press conference? It’s pretty obvious to all on the offensive end. So why keep doing it? Same thing happened when we had Banks here. But there, he scrapped the offense mid season.
The BIG difference between scrapping it then and now are the players on the team. Those guys were a bit more seasoned, and there was a guy name Jose Alvarado running the point.

It was risky then, but those guys had been together for a while and it was a worthy risk. This year, we have leaned on a lot of first year guys still finding their ways.

Additionally, I think that the Princeton Offense (minus playing through the high-post) is probably better suited for this team.

Our big men are not back to the basket scorers, and they're athletic enough to play pick-n-roll or pick-n-pop.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
14,436
Location
Atlanta
The BIG difference between scrapping it then and now are the players on the team. Those guys were a bit more seasoned, and there was a guy name Jose Alvarado running the point.

It was risky then, but those guys had been together for a while and it was a worthy risk. This year, we have leaned on a lot of first year guys still finding their ways.

Additionally, I think that the Princeton Offense (minus playing through the high-post) is probably better suited for this team.

Our big men are not back to the basket scorers, and they're athletic enough to play pick-n-roll or pick-n-pop.

You did mean to say they're 'not' athletic enough, right? I can see Meka developing as a roll man though.

On another note, I must say what a difference a year makes. I think folks could see that Jose was good but I don't think many of us truly realized how impactful he was on multiple levels. There's a reason I said he was the better pro prospect than Wright.

That said, where do we go from here? My fear with us was that we're now on that 90's-00's mid-major track where you're great one year (when all your guys are seniors) then you disappear for the next 3-4 years.

I hate to rely on the portal, but it looks like that's where we are.

Somebody make me feel good! (that came out weird)
 

Connell62

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
2,970
You did mean to say they're 'not' athletic enough, right? I can see Meka developing as a roll man though.

On another note, I must say what a difference a year makes. I think folks could see that Jose was good but I don't think many of us truly realized how impactful he was on multiple levels. There's a reason I said he was the better pro prospect than Wright.

That said, where do we go from here? My fear with us was that we're now on that 90's-00's mid-major track where you're great one year (when all your guys are seniors) then you disappear for the next 3-4 years.

I hate to rely on the portal, but it looks like that's where we are.

Somebody make me feel good! (that came out weird)

Bottom line...Guys gotta grow up quickly... Bunch of young guys, lots of talent, but they don't know how to win...yet

Deivon is going to keep getting better..He's already improved so much this year..Deebo and Miles will continue to progress, Jalon will develop for us.

There's a lot to build on and we are going to have to find a couple of pieces in the portal. Hopefully we find an older, experienced guard that can create his shot and has some leadership traits.

The good news, there should be a lot of options. The portal guys may not be splash names from a P5 team, but I'm confident that we will be able to find the pieces we need.
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,199
That said, where do we go from here? My fear with us was that we're now on that 90's-00's mid-major track where you're great one year (when all your guys are seniors) then you disappear for the next 3-4 years.

That is my concern as well. We did the "get old" part but fell flat on the "stay old" part. We now have some really nice parts that may well develop into major ACC level playmakers/scorers but they came in a year late to be part of the "stay old" process. Same with the bigs - they have potential but are about a year late getting into the system. Recognizing bigs almost always take longer in development for good not great bigs.

We now have holes that are going to have to be filled through the portal (most likely) or really high end HS recruits (very low likelihood) in order to match timewise with the other pieces above. If we don't match up then we have holes for several years with no tourney appearance before all the pieces grow up together.
 

dtm1997

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
15,541
That said, where do we go from here? My fear with us was that we're now on that 90's-00's mid-major track where you're great one year (when all your guys are seniors) then you disappear for the next 3-4 years.
I feel like we've always been on this track, more or less, but either nobody was listening or nobody believed what Pastner was saying.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
14,436
Location
Atlanta
I feel like we've always been on this track, more or less, but either nobody was listening or nobody believed what Pastner was saying.

Agreed (sadly). I don't think people fully grasped the possible down year(s) we could face.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,451
I feel like we've always been on this track, more or less, but either nobody was listening or nobody believed what Pastner was saying.
That’s a highly depressing thought. One out of every 4 years we have a shot at making the NCAAT. That is very close to being irrelevant in college basketball. Basketball is a sport we actually have a chance to be a top 1/3 ACC team most years.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
14,436
Location
Atlanta
That’s a highly depressing thought. One out of every 4 years we have a shot at making the NCAAT. That is very close to being irrelevant in college basketball. Basketball is a sport we actually have a chance to be a top 1/3 ACC team most years.

I think their 'ideal' is what UVA is. At this point, even in their down years they're competitive. We just need some things to break our way.

My beef is that I think they chose this tact to avoid having to win recruiting battles for 5-star guys since that's really hit or miss. But, to me, the GOSO strategy is just as risky as shooting for the moon for 5-star guys.

Especially now that it's even more en vogue to transfer. You can't count on having the same group of guys for 3+ years which kinda negates the point of getting old, staying old.

I'm not off the wagon. I just have questions.
 

gtbync

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
295
Location
Fairmont, North Carolina
The get old stay old is something JP, came up with to make you focus on other things besides bringing in top recruits. Most of the fans that have been following GT basketball for years, should know that we can get the high profile recruits, the one and done. It's been shown by coach cremins and hewitt. I remember when GT use to have several rookies of the year, but now a coach come in and say it's hard to recruit at a place like GT, no it's hard for him to recruit at a place like GT.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,564
The get old stay old is something JP, came up with to make you focus on other things besides bringing in top recruits. Most of the fans that have been following GT basketball for years, should know that we can get the high profile recruits, the one and done. It's been shown by coach cremins and hewitt. I remember when GT use to have several rookies of the year, but now a coach come in and say it's hard to recruit at a place like GT, no it's hard for him to recruit at a place like GT.

You think get old stay old is something Pastner made up?

okay bud.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
14,436
Location
Atlanta
The get old stay old is something JP, came up with to make you focus on other things besides bringing in top recruits. Most of the fans that have been following GT basketball for years, should know that we can get the high profile recruits, the one and done. It's been shown by coach cremins and hewitt. I remember when GT use to have several rookies of the year, but now a coach come in and say it's hard to recruit at a place like GT, no it's hard for him to recruit at a place like GT.

Well first, we're not idiots so nobody's falling for any bananas in any tail pipes.

Second, what you're suggesting .. suggests the recruiting landscape hasn't changed since Cremins and even Hewitt were doing it. Think about it.

Is it possible though? Yes. I think it is. You just have to play some games and skirt some lines that may not be comfortable. But, no, going the GOSO route isn't some waiving of the white flag on recruiting, necessarily.
 
Top