Game 20: George Washington University, Jan 25th, Noon, NBCSN

[patriot2000]

I don't disagree that Lonegran could have hypothetically squeezed a few more wins out of our team if he were our coach, but I'm also in the Dennis Green camp that we are what our record says it is. And whether Hewitt is retained our not, turning that record upside down has to start with bringing in more talent.

I think you make a very good point, Tom, but I just don't agree. It seems clear to me that these exact same players with the exact same deficiencies would do better in a more team-oriented system. Neither of us has any way to prove our point, so we're both just looking at different hypotheticals. You are assuming you're seeing the best our players are capable of, and I am assuming you are wrong. If you're right then, yeah, a better coach could snag a couple more wins and we still suck. If I'm right, we could be competing for top 6 in the A10 with these players. Sadly, we'll never know. We got what we got.

 

[mason2k1]

Oh come on. Our main problem is not our athletes. It's our coach. We play well every first half because Hewitt and Friends are good at watching tape and coming up with a game plan. Then, every team we play has a better coach than we do, so they make adjustments in the locker room. Hewitt and Friends stand there saying, "Wait... what? This worked in the first half. Why isn't it working now? Well, let's keep it up. It will start to work again." The players know from watching Gray and possibly Edwards that this regime has a fortuitous dog house that is almost impossible to escape. So, even if they had the brains to come up with something better (most of them don't), they're just going to run Hewitt's system even if it means winning no games in our inaugural A10 season. They are tired of playing for a loser coach, so they blow late-game plays based on frustration and exhaustion. Because of a long history of no team-building skills, and players knowing that they're not likely to win anyway, certain individual players have become increasingly selfish. Unfortunately, as mentioned above, they're not athletic enough to do it alone against good defenses. But due to the coaching frustrations, they're gonna try anyway.

I've always been a "blame the athletes first" kind of fan because they're the ones on the court getting it done (or not). But these guys are doing the best they can with the "teaching" and "leadership" they are experiencing.

Yes, GW beats us 7 or 8 times out of 10 even if we swap coaches because their team is better. But what if we swap coaches last April? Could be a little different. Hewitt's problem is not just his failure to adjust when the other coach adjusts to us. His problem compounds day after day, week after week, season after season.

Give Lonergan the team that almost won the CBI and see what he does with it this season. Better yet, give him the team was probably a pre-season Top 25 and had the nation's best win streak. Let Hancock still transfer. See what happens then. My prediciton: First season wouldn't have been quite as good as Hewitt's because Lonergan wouldn't have done the warm and fuzzy "Let's not piss off Coach L's players too much... The first 10 seconds of the shot clock are yours. Then run my system that lets you all feel like a star." But last year would have been better, and especially this year. Yeah, I'll put Jenkins, BA, Sherrod, and company against GW's talent. Especially with one of their top scorers sidelined with an ankle injury.

I'll have to agree simply based on the fact that we've have the lead after 20 min in 6/7 games including UMASS and GW. vcu we were down by 1 at half. All 3 games were very winnable and against respectable teams. A win (or 3) against any of those teams would have done wonders for the players confidence and could have had a chain reaction moving forward. However, due to a lack of halftime coaching adjustments and some last minute mental breakdowns (lack of confidence?) we're now oh fer. It'd be interesting to get ricky's input after this last loss. Where's the morale of the players at?

 

[gmutom]

Patriot2000, although we are both using hypotheticals, I think we agree that Hewitt's not getting the best out of this group. The fact that we have been in almost every game with the exception of Oklahoma shows there is some talent there. Our main issue is having players perform every game as opposed to here or there ( much of which I do put on the coach).

The luxury we had with our 2006 team with five players averaging double figures is Lamar Butler could have a bad game and we could still win. Teams could focus on shutting Will Thomas down and we could rely on the other four to make them pay. Right now our roster is a crapshoot, because there is no given on where our points will come from.

I know people take my comments as a defense of Hewitt, which they are not. He assembled a large part of this roster, and it's incumbent on him to get more out of it. I stand by my comment about our talent being vastly overrated, but I also don't think the players are being used effectively enough due to our errant offensive and defensive schemes. That alone has cost us a few wins in the A10.

 

[patriot2000]

I don't take your comments as defense of Hewitt, not anymore. Anyone who actually reads your posts knows where you stand. I don't disagree with anything you said above, but I continue to have a little more faith in the individual talent of some of our players and would kill to see that translate into a better team. oh, well...

 

[Patriotfan49]

I don't disagree at all. Like I said, my comment wasn't meant as a slight to Lonegran. He's 10x the coach Hewitt is, and that's probably being generous to Hewitt. I just think most of our fans overestimate our talent level in terms of competing consistently in the A10.

Before anybody responds, I'm not talking about players who can have a good game occasionally. Most of our guys are more than capable of scoring 12 points on a given night. Our biggest problem is — with the exception of Jenkins — we have no clue where our production will come from game to game.

We know Sherrod and Allen can score, but it makes it tough for a team to compete when the two seniors we rely on the most are shooting shooting 41% and 43% from the floor, respectively.

J2 and Copes are about as inconsistent as it gets, as evidenced by Copes scoring 12 points against Fordham and 0 points yesterday, while J2 had no points vs. Fordham and 18 yesterday. Holloway is my favorite player outside of Jenkins, but even he is up and down from game to game.

I don't disagree that Lonegran could have hypothetically squeezed a few more wins out of our team if he were our coach, but I'm also in the Dennis Green camp that we are what our record says it is. And whether Hewitt is retained our not, turning that record upside down has to start with bringing in more talent.

The point is, Lonergan would be in year 3 with us having inherited the same talent Hewitt did. There is no doubt in my mind, that Lonergan would have us maybe in the same position as GW. Even our guys right now, they can play.....and they can play in this league..we see that every game. Its simply the system that bogs them down.

Wright, Allen, Holloway, Jenkins, Williams all can easily score double figures each game. The problem lies with utilizing a system that emphasizes their strengths and puts them in position to do so. Hewitt fails to do that every game. Its no secret that you have a player in a system that poorly suits him, he will look overrated, clueless or just not good. That is what we have here. To me, the main reason Jenkins is doing what he is doing, is due to his aggressiveness once he gets the ball. If he were relying on the system to get him looks instead of his own actions, hed look just like Copes or Williams.

Much like a situation where a Mike Singletary led 49ers team went 8-8 at best, and then you insert a coach who knows what he is doing and you have a perennial contender with much of the same roster at the time. Im not saying well get an A10 contender, but we sure as hell wouldnt be 0-6 and we would be toward the upper half.

 

[GMU84fanman]

Oh come on. Our main problem is not our athletes. It's our coach.

I am not saying that the coach does not deserve some, perhaps even a majority, of the blame. However, in many of our A10 games we simply do not match up with the other team's players athletically. That problem is heightened when the bench is used. How many of our players can actually play above the rim? When a guard penetrates our middle (which is often) are they intimidated that they are going to have their shot blocked or that folks will rotate over and cut them off? Aside from Jenkins, when we launch a shot from the outside, how much confidence do you have that we will hit the boards and gain another possession. How confident are you that when the shot clock is ticking down that one of our players will make an athletic move to break down their opponent and gain an open, high percentage shot?

Yes, clearly coaching plays a big part in this but we simply do not have the athletes to compete at the top level of our league. I have seen the Final Four team cited. Yes, they were well coached and yes they executed well and all five starters could score. But that team could match up with our opponents athletically and we did not back down. Jai Lewis had such quick feet and soft hands that he was given a tryout by the NY Giants. Will Thomas was strong and moved well for his size. He was a bit unorthodox but he did not get beat off the dribble and was a shot blocking threat inside. Lamar Butler was a great shooter but he could also run the court, play tough man defense, penetrate and when fouled, he made his foul shots. Folarin could penetrate, shoot and run the office from the 3 spot. He was strong and agile and had a good handle. Finally, Tony was as quick a player as we have had for a long-time at the point. He penetrated at will and could nail the 3 pointers. Our bench included the likes of Gabe Norwood who could play at the point and was often the recipient of alley-oops. We blew teams out that could not compete with us. How many teams have we blown out this year? Assuming what we have heard from some camps on this board, on talent alone, we should have blown out some teams (similar to what Oklahoma did to us). I guess it can only be coaching that is keeping us down.

Tom has correctly cited that we have no consistency and we rarely have a situation where one of our guys can take over a game. I believe he understated the talent/athleticism deficit between us and GWU (when he correctly stated that none of our players would be able to crack their starting line-up) who was missing one of their best and most athletic players in Kethan Savage (13.4 pts per game) yesterday.

The fact is that when you have an athletic/talent deficit it will tend to show up most in the second half when a team has identified and begins exploiting our weaknesses and when a thin bench, which is used to spell tired starters or players in foul trouble, is exposed (e.g. vcu, GWU, St. Joe's, etc.).

It is interesting to read the progression of posts during a game when we clearly blame the players for making this or that egregious error or for getting beat time and time again, then turn around after the game to blame the coach. Fair enough. As has been pointed out, he recruited several of these players (albeit some for the CAA). I just wanted to offer another opinion that from a personnel standpoint we were not and are not in a position to compete at the top of our league given the athletes/talent we currently have. I think that the recruits we are bringing (JJ and MM this year and those signed to date) give me some optimism that we will eliminate some of that athletic gap in the future. Perhaps a new coach will help us eliminate that gap even further in the future.

 

[Patriotfan49]

84, Some things you listed are problems indeed, but I think you are wrong on the causes.

Like the rim protector...or the shifting on defense. From what I can see, that is an issue with the defense that Hewitt runs. We dont play with a rim protector just sitting in the middle (even though it would help)...and quite frankly, half the time we have a guard who swapped and is on the opposing teams center. Also left out, are Hewitts substitution patterns that are completely random and make no sense. I think we would benefit much more playing a zone...seems our guys would be more of a fit for that.

The consistency problem lies within the players to some degree, but it also is the system. Its such a cluster and disaster that nobody is ever in a clear scoring situation. Some of that is due to bad passes, bad hands, players not passing correctly and some of that is the system bogging them down. It seems a player only breaks out and scores alot when they just do it themselves.

You say we arent in a position to compete with the top half of the league, but each game the players show that we do compete. We just dont close, and we falter down the stretch through mismanaged clock, situations and turnovers.

We just have a perfect storm of ineptitude from the coach in all aspects, met with players that are having their weaknesses emphasized by a terrible system. Players for sure have their own issues, but at this level who doesnt?

 

[JimP]

If the team was getting blown out in a ton of games I'd buy the "talent isn't there" theory. Could we use more talent and athleticism? Sure. But a team with a huge deficiency gap in athleticism does not lead 5 out of 6 A-10 games at the half while only trailing the 6th by one. The lack of mental toughness and smart basketball stems from the coach.

 

[GSII]

Not athletic enough on offense? Stop running an athletic type NBA offense. Not athletic enough on Defense? Play zone like Syracuse does. Making adjustments is what good coaches do.

 

[gmutom]

Not athletic enough on offense? Stop running an athletic type NBA offense. Not athletic enough on Defense? Play zone like Syracuse does. Making adjustments is what good coaches do.

This I agree with completely. Well said, GS.

 

[Patriotfan49]

This I agree with completely. Well said, GS.

So a coaching issue......yeah?

 

[CHRISTOPHER JAMES JOLLAY]

Its not so much Hewitt being outcoached from a tactical standpoint, but on full display from the opening tip was the way a dynamite coach like Lonergan can help a team.

Won the jump, beautiful quick hitter executed in five seconds or so, we're down 2-0. Beautiful, wish I had taped the game so I could steal it.

Feeling a lot better after a 20 hour drinking binge.

 

[GMU84fanman]

Nice responses 49, JimP and GSII. My wife can attest to that fact that I generally agree with 49's statement, "we just have a perfect storm of ineptitude from the coach in all aspects, met with players that are having their weaknesses emphasized by a terrible system." I would just go a step further and say we have a team built for the CAA playing in the A-10.

GSII--Yes--we have tried some zone this year and it has had some mixed results. Once again I would argue that we lack the length or foot speed to make it effective like Syracuse but I am not opposed to using it more (particularly against some of the top A10 opponents). Our offense is a bit confused and I am not sure what we are trying to do with it but we lack the foot speed and handles to effectively penetrate on a consistent basis and do not have enough outside or inside weapons in my estimation to score 70 points a game. The high-post screen and roll isn't doing it for me either (once again lack of personnel and lack of understanding of the limitations of that personnel). I agree we should at least mix it up. Come out in the second half making some adjustments of our own and see if we can't dictate more to our opponent. Try more screens to free up shooters and hope they start going down. I still think we have a personnel deficit too but would agree (and stated as much) that a good coach can minimize some of these deficits.

JimP your comment is more tricky. I think there is a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on. We have clearly increased the level of competition by going to the A-10. However, we have not changed much in personnel (with the exception of JJ and MM and the loss of JA, PB and VV) and little in coaching (ex-Wizard coach leaving). Although we had seniors coming back, with Arledge gone I did not expect a big showing in the A-10 (remember they had 5 bids last year). Have we over-performed in the first half of games or under-performed in the second? I know what the prevailing sentiment is. If that sentiment is correct, is it a matter of coaching that is causing us to underperform in the second half or a lack of talent/bench and the ability to adjust by the other team which has led to our losses? Clearly I agree that the coach is to blame but to some extent it is also on the players (and I would attest a lack of athleticism/skill) as well. Once again, I almost feel like we are competing at the CAA level against A-10 teams and that simply isn't going to get it done.

Really my initial post was to offer hope that we have personnel that can compete at a higher level going forward. Frankly that and JJ and MM's progress are what keep me going back to these games. I agree that we need improvement in coaching, facilities, personnel and attendance to truly become a top tier team in this league. I however do not put this all on Hewitt. I think there are multiple reasons for our lack of success and believe that we simply are not as athletic/talented as the top tier teams in this league.

 

[Patriotfan49]

Jenkins is fine, hes a great young player for us and I just hope he isnt around in Hewitts system long enough to regress and we can get somebody in that can build around him.

Moore really stuck out to me in the GW game. He was incredibly hesitant and refused to shoot period. I know his shot looks ugly, but combine that with no confidence in it, is a dangerous thing. He was being left open and still refused to shoot. Also, when he would penetrate he would be in mid air layup range and kick the ball back out. He also was a few ticks to slow on a few of his passes....

 

[GMU84fanman]

Agree with the hesitation comment but a box score of 8 points, 7 assists, 2 steals, 2 rebounds and just 2 turnovers isn't bad for our starting point guard.

 

[gmubrian]

I am sorry, but I have to call a foul on the play when people say we don't have A10 level talent, or that we can't score 70 points. We had U-Mass beat until we were coached out of it with our wonderful Offense/Defense strategy. We scored 87 on U-Mass, one of the better teams not just in the A10, but in the entire NCAA.They just wiped the floor with Fordham and they did with their top 5 sitting for most of the second half. We lost to Fordham in a close one, too.

It is clear we have the athletes if they were being used properly. The fact that we play to the exact level of our competition almost every time, whether they are a top level team or a bottom feeder is just another confirmation it is on the coach.

And, if for a second I accept your premise (which I don't but for the sake of argument will), it is Hewitt's job to get the talent in. Other coaches have done so in this same amount of time. Recruiting was supposed to be his strongest point, but so far, he has only hit a home run on one recruit, Jenkins. So, even with accepting your premise, it is still on Hewitt as the coach

 

[GMUgemini]

Our personnel deficiencies don't equal 0-6, especially when two of those losses are against bottom tier teams.

We also got carved up by an Ivy League team in Princeton, couldn't break 60 against St. Francis, were vastly over matched against Iona and let another Ivy in Penn pour in 77 points. Oh and we lost to ODU despite holding to to a total of six baskets in the second half of that game.

You would be absolutely correct in thinking this wasn't a top 25 team, but we should be holding our own in the a-10 and we aren't.

 

[gmujim92]

Whether it's football or basketball, a team with comparable talent often can hang with its opponent for the first half.

But good coaches make the most of their time in the locker room, and those coaches who make the best strategic adjustments usually wind up winning the game.

You can just see the guys on our opponents' bench biding their time until halftime, when they can break down our "offense" and make a defensive adjustment to neutralize it.

Whether it was Shaka having his bigs hedge harder on our ball screens to stop our straight-line drives or Lonergan going to the 1-3-1, opposing coaches consistently make at least one strategic change that stops our offense cold.

Our coach either doesn't have a Plan B or is unwilling to use it. Either way, Hewitt has been outcoached in the second half of every A-10 game, and no amount of blaming the players will change that.

Given his nonsensical player rotations and ridiculous defensive schemes, I think it's a tribute to our players that we've had any leads to squander.

 

[MASONscott]

Fellas. I really enjoyed reading the last few pages of this string. Great analysis rather than just a cloud of negativity. This team is perplexing.

I think we have hit a bit of a perfect storm with a tougher schedule and conference, a talent deficit, and a coach that might be a better general manager than head coach. As always when you only lose your team may not be as bad as it appears, but with incomplete games it becomes a mute point.

Playing in the A-10 and our out of conference schedule is a step up. To my surprise we haven't played many seasons where our average opponent had an above .500 winning %. The years we have Mason's winning % has dipped. This year obviously it has tanked. But the trend looks consistent over the span put together in statsheet.
(Winning % Mason vs Opponent chart at the bottom of the page - http://statsheet.com/mcb/teams/george-mason/team_stats?type=all)


Talent deficit - I'm a little more favorable on our roster than most. Beyond Jenkins -Allen, Wright, Holloway, and Moore could contribute on most A10 rosters. Our back court is the heart of our problem. I agree with 84 on his comments about when Jenkins is in or out of the game. And, as everyone but one poster concurs Arledge's clairvoyant abandoning of the ship hurts a talent depleted team.

Coaching - Hewitt has enough knowledge to be a top coach. But, he seems to be missing something. I half joked about Fordham's committee of coaches, but it is time to at a minimum bring in some fresh eyes. I do think he is doing some things right and this situation could still be salvageable for the long-term (not this season unless we surprise everyone in Brooklyn).

We seem to be able to run with any team for at least half a game, but then we all know the final outcome, so there is at least a nucleus to build on. However small that nucleus looks today.

There are however decisions Hewitt makes that make no sense to me.

First, if I was facing a superior talented teams my team would pass the ball and have more assists than the other team. e.g. Tony Shaver always amazed me with how he ran his offenses.

Second is in game adjustments. At the start of the second half GW switched to a 1-3-1. That is when they took over and won the game in my mind. He had BA at the short corner and our guys did a nice job passing the ball and looking for a shot. Not Hewitt's fault that BA didn't have his A game in that situation. But, the offense could have been a lot more robust utilizing both short corners with BA and any other player on the court. We had one guy that can hit the outside shot in Holloway on the wing. Lonergan let whatever wing defender leave their zone to play match-up against Holloway keeping him in check. We had to have another shooter in the game at the same time Holloway was out there. I realize Edwards is not too respected, but if Sherrod is on the bench - put in Edwards or Gray (I guess) or anyone else that would also stretch their D. We needed another ball handler that can hit the outside shot. Stretch the D with a high post, two guys in the short corner, and two longer range shooters in their. Instead we had one shooter and one short corner. Not to difficult for a zone to only have to worry about just two to three guys knowing the others are just there to pass.

Defense is mental. If our kids can't play man than go to zone. If the 2-3 isn't working go to a 1-2-2 or a 1-3-1 or something. I think GW was running a dribble drive offense by putting two guys high waiting to drive and two guys wide with the option to shoot or drive.

Hewitt's timeouts as mentioned by many drive me crazy as do the substitutions. Although his recent rotations seem a lot tighter which given how we rotated last year and the beginning of this year is an improvement.

Lastly, I do think another coach could get more out of these kids. Composure and confidence comes from the top. Anytime a team so much as barks at us we collapse. Coach L used a lot of psychology on his kids - even spoke often about Bob Rotella (sp?). It amazes me what I can get out of a team when they are up against a more talented group when they have confidence and work as a team.

If Hewitt can't get these guys to trust in themselves and their teammates,
I think it is time to call in a doctor.

 

[Patriotfan49]

Agree with the hesitation comment but a box score of 8 points, 7 assists, 2 steals, 2 rebounds and just 2 turnovers isn't bad for our starting point guard.

Agreed. But some times stats are misleading. If J2 wasnt making those jumpers, or Jenkins didnt just boss his way to the bucket......those assists go way down.

Call me nitpicky but they were not creation assists, they were more he simply touched the ball last before a guy made a 15-20 foot jumper. That wont happen every night, and I would like my PG to create like the GW guards were doing with their drive and kick outs to a wide open cutter.