Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
On the subject of Cat vs. Tyler, I think a lot of fans overrate Tyler’s performance in comparison to Cat’s.
Cat was better than Lewis this season in the following categories:
FG%
3FG%
eFG%
TS%
OREB%
DREB%
STL%
BLK%
TO% (that’s right, Tyler turned the ball over more often)Tyler was better at FT%, AST%, and A/T. But not by as much as I suspect most think. Tyler’s AST% was 32.8%, compared to 27.5% for Cat… And that is far better than Tyler as a freshman (17.5%). Tyler’s A/T ratio was much better than Cat’s this year, but Cat’s was 2.0, not far behind Tyler’s 2.2 as a freshman… And Tyler was passing to a much more experienced and offensively talented team as a freshman than Cat was this year.
More important than those metrics, Cat had a better +/- and Roland Rating than Tyler this year, showing that the team performed better overall (including both offense and defense) with him on the floor.
IMO Cat’s future is bright.
I think it’s helpful to segregate the reasons for Gott’s transfers/early departures. Some of these reasons overlap, but I’d generally segregate the major reasons as follows:
1. Result of coaching transition (didn’t want to play for new coach): Harrow
2. Result of coaching transition (not talented enough for new coach): Raymond
3. Result of playing time (not getting as many minutes as desired and not willing/capable of earning them): Painter, Harris, Lewis
4. Result of bad attitude (by player and/or parents): De Thaey, Purvis
5. Result of going pro early (with some reasonable basis to do so): Brown, Leslie, Warren?There could be some overlap here. I debated putting Harris in category #4, for example. Also, perhaps this categorization is unfair for Painter, since he had a family issue; I have always thought that at least part of his departure was tied to his expected view of his playing time, especially considering that many expected Amile Jefferson to end up at State.
I put zero responsibility on Gott for categories #1 and #2 above. And I also put zero responsibility on him for category #5; IMO it is clear that Gott helped Brown, Leslie, and Warren to achieve sufficient pro potential to make the leap (assuming here that Warren goes pro this year, obviously). In retrospect, it’s possible that Brown and/or Leslie would have been better off staying, but that’s not on Gott, and that also might have disrupted some of our recruiting (e.g., had Leslie stayed, we might not have gotten all 3 freshman bigs this past season).
And if you buy Painter’s reasons as being solely about family, I don’t think you can blame Gott for that either.
I would also segregate these players as follows in terms of impact on the team:
6. Departures that hurt the team: Painter, Lewis (maybe)
7. Departures that didn’t hurt the team: Harrow, Raymond, Harris, De Thaey, Purvis (can’t overlook the attitude)I suspect some will argue that Purvis leaving hurt the team, since he was a highly regarded recruit who theoretically could/should have played a lot better than he showed in his freshman season if he stayed. Even ignoring his attitude problem and moving him into that category, that’s still only three transfers that hurt the team.
But now consider that Gott brought in transfers Johnson, Turner, Lacey, and Lee so far. IMO that group is at least as good as the group of Painter, Lewis, and Purvis, and it could prove to be better. Sure, Lewis and Purvis had strong credentials, but at this point it is no given either of them will live up to them.
Meanwhile, as others have pointed out, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic at this point that we will have a roster next season that goes 10 deep with legit ACC talent. This despite Gott losing 10 non-seniors to various departures in three seasons, plus losing at least 5 senior rotation players that I can think of off the top of my head.
I can’t remember the last State team that ran 10 deep with legitimate ACC talent. Can anyone else? Do we have to go back to Valvano’s years for that?
So… what’s the problem, exactly? I’m not seeing it.
And the CJ comparison, thats not even worth discussing.
I’m the one who mentioned Leslie. Some of you need to work on reading comprehension.
Had Leslie gone pro a year earlier, he likely would have been drafted higher. Instead, he came back and his pro stock dropped. I mentioned him in response to another poster saying potential never changes. It can and does.
Food for thought – his potential never changes.
His potential can definitely change in the eyes of those making NBA draft picks. Ask C.J. Leslie.
I would love TJ to return, but IMO he should go, and it is an easy decision.
If he returns, it would be hard for him to improve his stock, but plenty could happen to lower his stock — injury; shooting slump; sharing more with better teammates and this less of the spotlight… This season, he was ACC POY and leading scorer and 1st team All ACC. No guarantee be matches or exceeds that next season, and, in fact, that is probably unlikely.
Meanwhile, next year he would be a year older, and the NBA often drafts on potential, so that could hurt his draft stock.
And it’s not like if he returns State is likely to be a national and/or ACC title contender.
Going pro now also enables him to get better faster — no limit on practice time, no need to go to class, etc.
Plus he gets paid sooner.
Put it all together and this is a nobrainer.
Anyone ever stop to think what last season would be like if Purvis stuck around? He’s far superior to his replacement, Dez Lee. Better defender, scorer, shooter. I mean, we would have still sucked…but just saying…losing transfers hurts.
Better defender? LOL.
You also completely ignore the cancer factor, which dwarfs the rest.
I wonder when Paige comes out. He’s lottery type IMO .
Respectfully disagree. There aren’t many 165 pound combo guards taken in the lottery. Can anyone name the last one? IMO it is a stretch to believe Paige will ever be an impact player in the NBA.
And are you suggesting there is not enough time to practice against presses and free throw shooting?
Rick, let me get this straight. Do you think our coaching staff doesn’t have the players shoot free throws in practice? Really? So it is the coaches’ fault that our players weren’t good free throw shooters this season? It is the coaches’ fault that our players missed 11 of 20 free throws in the last 5 minutes of regulation against St. Louis? This entire line of criticism of Gott seems off base IMO.
As for practicing against presses, do you know for a fact that our team never did that in practice? Do you know for a fact that it was poor coaching rather than poor execution, fatigue, and pressure of the moment by a group of players with relatively limited experience? Do we not give any credit to St. Louis for their defense and execution?
The press criticism may have some validity. I don’t know how often they practiced it this season, and I don’t know how much more they should have practiced it, given other demands on limited practice time. But, again, it seems a lot more like other factors IMO.
Tau, my gripe had much less to do with in game coaching as much as preparation. The staff should have seen from the UNX game that we were atrocious at handling pressure. It’s what lost that game and it’s what cost us in the NCAAT. We turned the ball over and looked foolish… It looked as if we had never practiced breaking pressure. And that is on Gott and staff. If he didn’t recognize we needed to fix that after the UNX game then someone who works for him sure should have!
Maybe someone can educate me on something. I assume this post is about the UNC game on February 26. Given the following:
1. Limitations on the time players can spend on organized basketball activities per week
2. The portion of that time that must be spent in season on film study and preparation for upcoming opponents
3. The portion of that time that must be spent on physical activity (lifting, stretching, getting taped, in the tub, etc.)
4. The portion of that time that must be spent continuing to practice the offense and defense that has been installed all season…exactly how feasible is it for the coaching staff to teach something in season in reaction to one game that exposes a particular flaw, and to do so in less than a month? Maybe there is plenty of time for that, and had the coaching staff spent focused time on the press it would have made the difference in this game.
Or maybe our kids just didn’t handle the pressure of the moment well, especially given:
1. That they had played 5+ games in 8 days, in 3 cities other than their home city
2. The difference in experience between our players and the opposing players, pretty much opposite ends of the spectrumI feel like people are essentially complaining that our team isn’t great at everything. Well, how many teams are? And how many of those teams are comparable to State this season in terms of experience? Hint: none.
Regarding the Kenpom analysis, is that for the beginning of the season? If so, does it remain the same at the end of the season?
Of course it remains the same. While State’s players gained a season of experience by the end of the season, so too did all players on all other teams. I suppose one might argue that the gain made by a freshman from the start to the end of the season is larger than the gain made by an older player, but I think the difference is likely not significant.
Thursday night was not one of Gott’s finer coaching moments. Most are able to see that.
Can someone summarize in one post the coaching mistakes he made on Thursday night? I watched the game up until 3 minutes remained in regulation; I had to record the game, and unfortunately it cut off there.
I’m not saying Gott did a great coaching job, but I put this loss much more on the players than the coach.
Of course, the coach is accountable for results and is responsible for installing and coaching offense and defense, fundamentals, etc. So the coach can always be said to be responsible for on court results. I’m more interesting in specific decisions he made or didn’t make that is leading everyone to complain that he did a poor job during the game on Thursday night.
Can someone summarize?
Over the last few minutes State was out-rebounded 5 to 14. Little things add up over the course of a game and a season.
I assume you are talking about regulation. Looking at the play by play, over the last 5:03 of regulation, State was outrebounded 13-6. But that doesn’t have much to do with rebounding fundamentals. State missed 7 live ball free throws during that stretch, which accounts for the entire difference.
Maybe it’s too much to expect the killer instinct to be instilled in a young team… I don’t believe that St. Louis was better but, they never lost their focus or gave up on themselves even with what would seem an insurmountable lead.
State’s team was something like #330 in KenPom’s experience rating. St. Louis was a team full of seniors with postseason experience. That accounts for the difference.
With all due respect, some of the opinions being posted in this thread are ridiculous.
“Last night was all about coaching.”
BS. In the last 5 minutes of regulation, we had 16 possessions. On those possessions, we were 1/4 from the floor, 9/20 from the free throw line (with one miss on the front end of a 1-and-1, so more like 9/21), and had 2 turnovers. Gott had the right lineup in for the press, they just didn’t handle it well and couldn’t make free throws. That is not the fault of the coaching staff.
“St. Louis never gave up, which is something State does regularly.”
Again, this is complete and total BS. Not only that, it is one of the worst insults that can be said about a team. State didn’t give up in this game and does not do so “regularly.”
“I have been a State fan for nearly 40 years. I have never been as disappointed as I was last night…”
You have a short memory if this was your biggest disappointment in the past 40 years of State athletics. Just last season, our first game NCAA tournament loss was much more disappointing, given the talent and expectations on that team.
These quotes are all examples from a recent post, but many others have been equally off base. This team wasn’t even in the top 300 in terms of experience this year, yet exceeded expectations in the regular season and the postseason. Gott isn’t Valvano, but he did a good job with this team. Anyone who disagrees with that has an unrealistic perspective on what should have been expected of this team.
That is the problem with Tyler. He just got abused badly on defense for an and-1. It’s rare to see kids at this level get turned around like that.
…except for our free throws. It’s pretty surprising that we are tied at halftime after shooting 3/10 from the free throw line, plus missing the front end of a 1-and-1… so more like 3/11.
Warren and Turner going 1/6 is inexcusable.
This article explains why Wilson is the greatest young QB of all time.
“Luck plays a large role in every story of success; it is almost always easy to identify a small change in the story that would have turned a remarkable achievement into a mediocre outcome.”
“Success = luck + talent; Great success = a little more talent + a lot of luck”
– Daniel Kahneman
Congrats RW, you lucky SOB.
I couldn’t disagree more with this post.
As the famous quote goes, luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. Wilson is known for making sure he takes care of the preparation part, which means he puts himself in position to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves.
That’s another way of saying what MrPlywood said, that Wilson made his own luck.
As good as Seattle’s GM is, and despite having read and understanding the tenets of Moneyball, he will succumb to the NFL custom and award RW with a $100,000,000 contract. He will join an elite club of overpaid QBs: Flacco, Ben R. and Eli Manning
As for this, it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of “the tenets of Moneyball”, a lack of appreciation for Wilson’s talent and worth, and a lack of understanding of how NFL teams need to manage the QB position.
Assuming Wilson doesn’t regress next season, he will get a contract extension from the Seahawks at market value for a top 5-10 NFL QB. And that is absolutely the right move for Seattle. There are not enough quality QBs in existence for each NFL team to have a good one. Letting Wilson go to avoid paying market value would be the dumbest move Seattle could make. Given the implied rationale that it would be to save money, that suggests the team would go with another first or second year, inexperienced player, not a veteran free agent. Do you know what the success rate of young QBs is? It’s not good.
Also, Wilson has been a really good QB to date in his career. His pass attempts have been very low relative to other starting QBs, due to Seattle’s excellent running game and defense. But all of his rate metrics and advanced statistics (a la Moneyball) have been really good and show him to be a legit top 5-10 NFL QB, despite the fact that he has only just finished his second season. He has been far better than Flacco and Eli, and also better than Roethlisberger, though to a lesser degree. Your comparison here illustrates that you don’t have a solid grasp of the performance and accomplishments of the guys you are posting about.
If Seattle let Wilson walk, every team in the NFL not already locked in to a high dollar QB contract would be beating down his door to sign him.
So, from what I can tell, the based on the way that the NFL salary cap and player salaries “conspire” to work against dynasties, the Seahawks can plan on one more year before they will have to disassemble their team (ala last years Raven’s) in order to sign Russell Wilson to a new contract.
Assuming that Seattle has another very good to great year, you can assume that Russell Wilson will command the $20 million/season kind of money that franchise quarterback (including flacco) get these days.
Also, both Richard Sherman and Jermaine Kerse’s contract end next year also. You can assume between those three guys that it will tie up ~$40 million in cap room (nearly 1/3 of the estimated 2014 cap).
The NFL salary and cap structure are going to cause more teams to go the route that Seattle went this year…keep the QB and most of the skill positions on both offense and defense young, pay for a couple of veteran guys (like Percy Harvin and Marshawn Lynch.
I agree that Wilson will get big money as soon as they can give it to him. Same for Sherman.
Kearse is easily replaceable. On their roster right now, Harvin, Rice, Tate, and Baldwin are as good or better WRs. Rice might be a cap casualty, and Tate is a UFA, so Kearse might be due for a bigger role next season… but he has a ways to go to earn big money.
As for keeping the QB young, that only works for as long as the rookie contract, and even then requires the team to draft a great one, which is easier said than done. Seattle’s formula going forward will be to keep Wilson for the duration of his career, barring unexpected developments. I’m sure many teams would like to emulate that success, but it doesn’t equate to paying the QB low salary long term.
The reason for Seattle’s success has to do with how good Carroll and GM Schneider have been at finding talent. A large number of key players on this year’s Seahawks team were drafted in the 4th round or later or not drafted at all. They have a good eye for talent that fits their system and a good plan for coaching them up.
I do think other teams will try to emulate the Seahawks’ approach to defensive backs. Their philosophy is to first identify all DBs in the draft or free agency with good speed, then narrow that group down by size, preferring bigger DBs like Sherman and Chancellor. Then they coach them up with a great philosophy with three key principles: (1) Do not give up explosive plays; (2) Punish the receivers at every opportunity; (3) get the ball. They place more emphasis on these principles than any team in the NFL, and it shows.
The problem with the MVP award is that the entire team played well, particularly the defense, Wilson, and Harvin.
Agree the DL was great, but so were the LBs, including Smith, and the defensive backs.
Even though his name wasn’t called much in the game, Sherman had a huge impact. Manning threw 49 passes but only threw into Sherman’s coverage 5 times, completing 2 for just 10 yards. Sherman essentially removed whatever receiver lined up to the outside on the right of the Broncos offense. Given that meant generally covering Demaryius Thomas, Decker, or Julius Thomas, that is a huge impact.
And Chancellor was also awesome. He set the tone for the game on the Bronco’s second offensive series — the series right after the safety and ensuing Seahawks FG — when he lowered the (Legion of) Boom on Demaryius Thomas on a crossing route, stopping him for a 2 yard gain. Then after the ensuing punt and subsequent Seahawks FG, on Denver’s next series he first stopped Welker on 1st down for a 5 yard gain, and then intercepted Manning on third down. Denver was soon down 15-0 after having run just 7 plays from scrimmage, and the game was essentially over. Chancellor was the biggest impact player on defense to that point.
Wilson’s numbers also don’t do justice to his play early when the game was still in doubt. On Seattle’s first drive, he converted their first third down with a pass and appeared to scramble for another first down on their second third down, but the refs didn’t give it to him, so they kicked the FG. On Seattle’s second drive, he converted 3 straight third downs on passes, and the last third down was the end zone play Nate broke up, which could have easily been a TD pass. On Seattle’s third drive, which was a short field after Chancellor’s interception, Wilson completed 2 passes to combine with 3 runs to lead to a third down at the Denver 5, and his pass into the end zone drew a DPI penalty to set up Lynch’s TD. Wilson had 104 yards of offense on those drives that led them to the 15-0 lead. The fact that he added 2 TD passes later was just gravy.
Buckets, BSW, KW, and KH should all be excellent free throw shooters. But they’re all awful.
Warren is shooting 71.8% on the season. He should be better, but I wouldn’t call that awful. Agree on Turner and Washington, given that they appear to be good jump shooters.
Vandy had 1 rebound in 25 minutes. Anya had 4 boards in 11 minutes of play. I think you got the question backwards. Why did Gott stay with Vandy so long?
Vandenberg: 4 points, 1 rebound, 3 assists, 1 steal, 2 blocks, 0 turnovers
Anya: 3 points, 4 rebounds, 0 assists, 1 steal, 0 blocks, 2 turnoversFurthermore, my impression is that Miller scored more on Anya than on Vandenberg. I know Miller got a left baseline layup by getting past Anya, and he got at least two dunks when Anya was guarding him, one when Anya fronted him and they lobbed over the top and another on a follow dunk.
So altogether, I thought Vandenberg had a slightly better game. But he is a 5th year senior and Anya is a freshman. That is to be expected. And the margin was not much between them.
The first three pointer Tyler hit today could end up as one of the biggest plays of our season. It turned today’s game and could shake him out of his funk going forward.
Weirdly, in the FIRST half they shoot more threes and more free throws. In the second glad the same was for us. That seems very counterintuitive to me.
I didn’t really keep track of it, but one thing that would contribute to that is if they were getting offensive rebounds and getting fouled in the process of getting them or going back up to shoot, or even passing out and catching us out of defensive position, leading to reaches, etc. They killed us on the offensive boards (18-9), not sure if that was a factor in the first half fouls.
