Since the rehashing of old arguments about our now former coaches and AD officials has turned a bit ugly, I'd like to try to move things in a different direction. What are your expectations for next season? I'll start.

I expect us to lose 4 or 5 games in our upgraded OOC schedule, then go 10-6 or 11-5 in A-10 play. I think we'll make it to AC but lose in the semifinals. There will be some talk of an NCAA bid, but we'll end up having to settle for an NIT berth. We'll win a game or two once we get there.

I expect Tony Taylor to have a huge season and for Lasan Kromah to come back nicely from his injury. I'd look for a big jump from Dwayne Smith, a slight regression by Mikic, and at least a few games where Aaron Ware saves us with his defense, energy, and versatility. Tony will be rewarded by making the All-Conference First Team and Kromah will make the third team. If Ware gets enough minutes, I definitely think he'll have a shot at one of the All-Conference Defensive Teams.

Thoughts? What do you guys expect this year?

It's a cop out, but I have no idea what to expect.  i certainly expect the offense to be more efficient, but I don't know if Kromah is healhy or if the kids accept Lonergan's style, or what.

I do agree about your guess on smith and ware.  I could really see Smith taking a big leap, but I don't really know if he fits Lonergan's system perfect or terrible.

I guess I expect growing pains against the tough schedule, with a couple of reaosns for optimism, and then I expect us to do very well against an A-10 likely to be medicore for the 2nd straight year.   I expect us to battle for the bye, but I guess I won't be surprised if it doesn't click this year and we're stuck in the 150 range in RPI once again, but I also won't be surprised if we make a huge leap forward and go to the show.

Comparing VMU vs GW over the last 5 years on Ken Pomeroy shows Vermont as consistently more efficient offensively (4 of 5 years) and defensively held the opposing offenses to a lower effective shooting % (5 of 5 years).  Hobbs had GW try to force the action defensively and had an overall better TO% on D (3 of 5 years). 

Surpisingly Vermont played at a faster pace than GW in 3 of the 5 years (tied once).  This seems to be from GW's horribly inefficient half court offense that would stagnate until the last seconds of the shot clock when they couldn't attempt a transition basket.  It was argued that at least Hobbs gave the fans a "fun and exciting" brand of basketball to watch, even if it wasn't always successful.  I thing GW games will be higher scoring next year, even with Lonergan's more conservative defensive style. 

The question for GW recently has always been, "who's going to make shots?"  But who on VMU could make shots? Joey Accaoui? My hometown hero (Severna Park MD), Bernard Bald?  This wasn't an offensively skilled team but they were able to make shots and they were more efficient in earlier years.  If the book on Lonergan is true and team is based on defense and rebounding, I'd expect Dwayne Smith and Jabbari Edwards to see solid minutes in the front court.  Pellom might strugle as Lonergan's rep is that he demands toughness and has a quick hook for defensive errors.

Kromah will hopefully see more open looks than ever and Mikic will either learn to rebound and defend more consistently or sit on the bench. If he can stay on the court, I'd expect a more complete offensive game next year as he can really do more than just shoot 3s.  I really think Taylor's about maxed out already on his production, but he won't need to do as much so hopefully everything a little more effeciently. 

NIT year for GW and a couple of wins in the A10 tournament.  They'll be playing their best ball by the end of the season and we'll all be wildly optimistic for the following season.

 The future is bright!!!!

It is now.

Then again, BM, if Lonergan likes quick cuts and flashes for the mid-range jump shot, we could actually see an increase in production for both Taylor and Mikic.  Taylor really excels at the mid-range game, so if the offense is designed for that kind of shot (or, I should say, for better shots than him pulling up and shooting over his defender), then it could increase his opportunities and %.  Likewise, mikic and Kromaha can both hit that shot, and I suspect Bynes can, too, in a catch and shoot situation, so it might actually increase the productivity of all our guards -- at least as compared to the shoot or three or take your man one on one offense.

 Maybe this is wishful thinking but I expect the added reps for Tony Taylor last year to prove hugely beneficial to his play this year. With Kromah back on the floor causing defenses to stick close to him anywhere he goes (assuming his explosiveness isn't badly affected by the injury), I think TT will get more open looks than last year where (at times) teams doubled or at least were quick to slide and help against his penetration or even jumpers. His vision will look drastically improved with Kromah spreading the offense, and I expect TT to have a lot of easy assists to cutters or open jumpers after a defensive slide. 

If Mikic continues his upward trend I can see Lonergan running a three man back court (TT, Kromah Mikic) for extended which will be very hard to defend with 3 legitimate shooters spreading the floor and leaving the paint -- and hopefully a baby jumper -- open for Pellom and having Edwards there with only one guy to box out and clean up on the glass. With Ware's defense we can get out on the break quickly and I think Dwayne will continue to improve and get to the basket if he and/or Ware can become consitent driving threats and learn to look for the kick out to one of the shooters we can be a really tough team to guard again thanks to our ability to spread the floor.

If the team can start the season out strong against some weaker out of conference teams/a good showing at one of the early season "tournaments" they'll energize the fans (which we see time and time again translates to this team playing harder and overall better) I wouldn't be shocked to see us upset one of the big names on the OOC schedule considering how hard we are going to be to scout (with very little benefit from scouting last year's team -- this one could and should look entirely different). If we can start out strong and don't blow it with a stupid loss to a clearly weaker opponent I can see us vying for a bye in the A-10 tourney and getting to the semis or even the finals -- with a favorable bracket -- of the A-10 and once the lights are shining bright you can never say never. I'd realistically expect some chatter about us going to the dance and either sneak in with an at-large bid (especially if we beat a big name or two) or have a nice ranking in the NIT. A first round loss in the tournament is probably about as much as we can hope for but I can see us doing some work in the NIT if that's where we end up. 

Of course this all depends, as FQ wrote, on the players' ability to buy into Lonergan's system and for the coach to find a workable rotation and get these guys playing up to their potential. Since we haven't heard anything (positive or negative) about Kromah I take that as maybe a bad sign and he, in my mind, is pretty essential to this team doing anything meaningful this season. I know the fans will be out in force again to start off the season, I hope the team can keep butts in seats with some good wins because if GW students are anything they're all about the fair weather.  

There are some reckless things you can do in life: skydive without a parachute, drive drunk and/or without a seatbelt on, give your banking details to Nigerian princes, etc... I would add trying to handicapp this upcoming GW hoops season before the exhibition game (and maybe even after that). The fact is we have no idea whatsoever what things will be like next season. We have no clue as to what the new coach will do with the talent he has, or how that talent will respond to his coaching. There is no reason not to be optomistic, but there is no reason to think any game will be an automatic win, either. Will Kromah be back to what he was? Will Mikic have a great Soph. season or channel SirVal? Is Taylor ready to become an all-A10 player? Will there be any frosh on the team at all? Will the new coach pull out a gun in the middle of a game and shoot the Hippo much to the delight of the home crowd? I can't say we know the answers to these and the many more questions that are yet to be asked. But it is nice to talk hoops.

On thing I noticed looking at UVM stats is that despite the requirement that everybody hit the boards they always had one guy with a very high rebound total.  I'm guessing that boxing out, something we haven't seen since Jarvis, will be lesson number one, with everyone blocking out the paint and the designated Windex guy ("YEAH BABY!") gethering the ball.

What do you mean, is Taylor ready to become an all-A10 player?  He already is.  Made 2nd team last year.

For that matter, why are you wondering if there will be any frosh on the team next yea?  We will have 2: Jonathan Davis and John Kopriva.

I think injuries are the biggest issue in predicting next seaon's performance. The team is not overly deep and an injury or two could be deadly. TT played injured/banged-up for chunks of last year and when he was out we all recall how BB did at full-time PG. Edwards is notoriously injured and Warren has had injury issues as well. Smith had the concussion issues. And, of course, there's Kromah....

If Lady Luck "doesn't blow on some other guys dice" and the injuries stay away, optimism should flow freely.

GW finished 7th out of 14 conference teams in defensive rebounding percentage last season and 4th out of 14 the season before that.  Pretty impressive when you consider that KH teams didn't ever box out as BM noted.

FQ-- The "frosh" question was facetious and the TT questions should have read "1st team all-A10". Might add to the list: will Warren turn out to be player he was touted to be when recruited (pre-injury)? will the offense have any set plays to run? will the floor have fewer deadspots now that the coach isn't stomping it in to sawdust?

In my opinion if we don't finish higher than 4th in the conference than the season is a failure. This will be a more talented, more experienced team then this past year's group playing in a much weaker A-10. We will have arguably the best backcourt in the conference and a ton of depth at the 3 spot. Up front is worrisome but with the exception of Frease and Nicholson it's not like there is a wealth of big men in the A10 anyways. All of you people hyping up Lonergans coaching(Bobo) should agree that if we don't finish in the top 3 then he has not done a good job.

GW had a fortunate in conference schedule last year of who they played, where they played them and when in the season.  I think they can go 10-6 again next year and actually have a better season than last.  GW's RPI was 145.  If they don't beat that number, I would say the season would be a real disapointment.  And a winless A10 Tournament would also be a letdown.

Hopefully DEA and the other Hobbs bunker brigade can bring themselves to support the new coaching staff.

Way to shoot for the stars Bobo.  Temple should be worse than LY.  Richmond and Duquesne should be much worse than last year.  Xavier is the only team who finished above us LY who is expected to be better.  But we can finish with the same conference record and have a better year?  Must be the new math.

We pick up Kromah and 2 freshmen and lose Katuka, Johnson and Fitzgerald.  Yet if we finish with an RPI of say 140, that would be a satisfactory outcome?  It's only June and yet I can hear the bullshitmobile a mile away.

Actually considering our schedule if we don't finish with an RPI under 100 than this season would be a failure. Just so you know I thought if Hobbs was coaching and we didn't make the tourney next year it would be a failure. We have a ton of talent returning and the league will be as down as it will ever be next year with the exception of two top 25 teams in X and Temple. If Lonergan is as good a coach as you say then this shouldn't be a problem considering our RPI will be near 150 if we go 500 in the conference do to our OOC. If Lonergan is as superior to Hobbs as you say than surely he can win more in a worse conference with the teams best player back.

I was a big a Hobbs supporter as anyone here. But I do have to say in fairness, that Lonergan cannot be judged on one year or even be termed a disappointment based on what happens in 2011-12. He has a big challenge on his hands. He needs to win over the old players and incorporate the new ones into a new system. Will the players adapt to his system? And how quickly. These are answers none of us can pretend to know, yet they will determine how the season goes even assuming no significant injuries.

The minute Hobbs was let go, all bets were off for this season. And hopefully, GW knew this and factored this in to its decision. If it didn't, shame on those making the decision.

As they say its a whole new ballgame and there is no good way to really predict how the season will go. Had Hobbs returned I would have had a prediction. But you can't hold Lonergan responsible for what would have happened under Hobbs even assuming you could reasonably predict that. New players, new coach, different emphasis and systems, different schedule. It is not an apples to apples comparison, especially in the first year.

So I can't give you a prediction or a level that would represent disappointment or approval in terms of W-L right now because it is all relative to Lonergan not Hobbs. That decision was already made and we will all live the consequences good or bad. I would be looking more to the following: do we set a foundation for future success and do we have a good recruiting year. If those two things are achieved I will be satisfied with the job Lonergan is doing. Again, that has nothing to do with my feelings on the Hobbs' situation.

However, here to me would be the keys (not in any particular order) to a winning season and a chance to challenge for post-season tournaments:

1. Is Kromah healthy and can he return to form?

2. Can Pellom, Edwards and Warren Hold down the post?

3. Can Mikic become a better defender allowing him to stay on the floor more?

4. Will Tony Taylor continue to develop?

5. Will GW be a better halfcourt and defensive rebounding team then a year ago?

6. Can Ware, Guest, Warren, Kopriva, Davis and Bynes give us solid minutes off of the bench?

7. Will Smith provide us with another consistent reliable offensive threat?

8. How quickly can the players adjust to Lonergan's style of play, coaching etc.?

If we answer all or most of these the right way, we have a chance to be pretty good.

Not sure why you seem to be laying down a hostile gauntlet, DEA. Those unhappy with the coaching change,  those happy with the coaching change but unhappy with the new coach, those happy with both the coaching change and the new coach, and those who are indifferent to all of these machinations are presumably posting and reading here because we are all GW fans wanting the best for the team. Brey isn't here, Penders isn't here, Hobbs isn't here, Dooley isn't here, Jarvis isn't here, but Lonergan is. Is it really that important to be first to draw and presume the lines of failure before the players even show up for the summer session?

DEA- you can't be serious.  What if GW finished 5th in the conference, then makes an A-10 tourney run, and goes to the NCAA tourney- is that a failure?

Further, you talk about all of this great talent and experience....but ignore the fact that this is a new coach, coaching players that are new to him.  Do they revolt because ML is not KH?  Do they buy in?  Do they, as the Hobbs crowd so often pointed out, develop as the season goes on and not finish in the top 4 but show much improvement along the way?

I'd love for GW to finish in the top 4.  I expect that they will.  But let's be real here- this is a coach in his first year, with just one of his own recruits. 

I don't think that anyone is looking to judge ML after one season but you have your head in the sand if you think this upcoming season ought not to be judged.  Given how we were set up to perform had the school decided to retain Hobbs, I'd say the judging has more to do with Ramsey/Levine/Chernak and their decision to release KH than it does ML's coaching abilities.  Could we be better off 5 years from now this way?  Maybe.  But you can only take them one year at a time so here's to evaluating this decision over the next year for starters.

The other point I'd add is that no matter what any possible criticisms are this year, they at least are not going to be followed by the words" he should be fired" which is pretty much what KH believers have had to endure for the past 3 years.  So to Seneca and Poog and anyone else who may be taking exception to the fact that us judgmental types will be watching how things go pretty closely, all I can say is that payback can be a bitch.

Believe me when I say that nothing would bring more GW basketball pleasure to all of us, myself included, than to watch the 2011-12 Colonials return to the NCAA tournament. 

We know what we are getting with TT, Ware and Edwards.  However, there is much room for growth (read that improvement) in Bynes, Pellom, Smith, Mikec, Guest  and Warren.  Depending on how these player grow, plus the status of Kromah's return from injury and contributions from the 2 frosh will shape the season.  With a healthy Kromah and an improved game coach, I would expect a better season than last year, even if the growth in the others is only marginal.   My measure would be a double digit RPI.   Still,unfair to judge a new coach until he has had the opportunity to coach mostly his own (recruited) players.

Make a one year judgment all you want MV but the school's decision, right or wrong, was made with an eye toward the long term, not simply the 2011-12 season. But if you feel compelled to set up an I told you so if the team doesn't do as well next year as we all hope, have at it. I'm sure you'll get at least one 100% backing on that.

MV, payback to whom? I hardly think Poog or I would be in the "payback" category. I don't think either of us advocated for Hobbs' removal or thought the University handled it well. In fact, quite to the contrary, I thought it stunk.

But we are where we are now. So direct your expectations and/or fire at Ramsey and Levine because as I understand it that's where all the criticism should be directed if this doesn't work out. But you can't blame Lonergan for inheriting the situation and you can't place expectations that rightfully belonged to Hobbs' team on Lonergan's team. That's not to say this season won't be judged but I think it should be judged with respect to Lonergan no differently than any other first year coach who inherits a program that hasn't been to the NCAAs in a few years. The goals and expectations changed the minute Hobbs (and Copes) went out the door. And the judgment on whether ultimately the University made the right move won't be decided in one year because as LSF says you need to wait until Lonergan has recruited and caoched mostly his own players.

DEA, first you posted 'the future is bright!!!!' then you put benchmarks on Lonergan top 3 in A10, RPI under 100 next season. you seem to be implying that the future is 2011-12 season only. nothing after that matters. Lonergan and Nero are long-term hires.

Seneca, my fire is at Ramsey and Levine but it is also at anyone (not you or poog) who disrespected KH here over the past few years.  And to be clear, disagreeing with his game strategy or how he substituted players are not examples of disrespecting him.  Repeatedly stating that he should be fired or naming his possible replacements while he was still the coach are such examples.

Now, where you and Poog run the potential to be under enemy fire is with this attitude that suggests that nobody should have the right to criticize anything in this first year.  This is where we disagree a bit.  Granted that none of this was Lonergan's doing but this team should meet expectations.  I agree that the expectations have changed but that's all the more reason why the decision to shake things up continues to be a boneheaded one IMO.  Face it, we purposefully made moves that puts us worse off in the immediate term.  I get the counterargument that this was best for the long-term but in reality, we don't know this for a fact.  Yet we do know that we are hurt in the short-term.  So with this as background, I feel very entitled to pass judgment on the upcoming season.

Finally, despite what Poog may infer, I derive far more pleasure from supporting a successful GW team than I do getting to say I told you so.  Really.

Here's what I'm saying simply. We will have one of the most talented teams in the conference next year on paper. There will be no excuse if we finish 6-10 in the league, especially with how watered down it is. I think we will do well, I'm just saying.

WARNING

THIS THREAD HAS BEEN CONVERTED INTO A CIRCLE JERK

(closest emoticon I could find...

...or is this better?)

 Who would have thought there was a bukkake emoticon!? What a great world!

First to MV - nobody is saying you can't criticize anything - but nothing has happened yet. This thread was about predictions. All I'm trying to get you (and perhaps DEA as well) to understand is that in my opinion the whole thing changed the minute Hobbs ws shown the door. So what we might agree likely would have happened under Hobbs is no longer relevant to Lonergan because there are all kinds of new factors. It surely is relevant to Ramsey/Levine and the decision they made. So my take is if you are going to pass judgment - pass judgment on Lonergan on his own merits not on the decision Ramsey/Levine made to get rid of Hobbs.

To DEA, I honestly don't believe on paper we are one of the most talented A-10 teams coming into the season. Other than Taylor, right now we likely don't have a single player who will be named to any of the A-10 teams. You can say perhaps Kromah. But he is coming off injury so he is an unkown at this point. He could rise back to that level and that's what we all hope. But we are suspect in the post and we have little depth and few scorers. Copes and T. Davis would've helped immensely on all counts. But they are not here. I think there are a number of teams that have better or equal talent right now - Xavier, Temple, Richmond, Duquesne and possibly 2 or 3 others.

That's not true. Richmond and Duquesne do not have equal talent to us on paper in terms of games played, points etc...Both of those teamsa lost their two best players. The only other A10 team who is arguable is Saint Louis really. Everybody else lost a ton. I guarantee you A10 coaches know who Smith, Nemanja and Pellom are. And considering they voted Lasan pre-season all conference next year I know they know who he is too. We shouldn't have to temper expectations for a new coach. If the talent is there than you should win, it's that simple.

If kromah is healthy and himself, we should have 4 pretty good options in the half court (TT, Kromah, Mikic, Dwayne Smith).  That will be more than most A-10 teams so if Lonergan can come up with a scheme to minimize our weaknesses and do things to emphasize our strengths (like put Dwayne in better position to score, get Mikic open easier even if inside the arc, etc.) there's no reason we can't be one of the better teams. 

I'd add that MV's list missed something major:  make shots.    It's so obvious that it almost sounds like being a smartass who says the key to the game is scoring more than the other team.  But it's not.  

i'm becoming increasingly convinced, especially after the last few seasons of GW hoops (not to mention watching teams like VCU go on runs or teams like Dayton lose games where they "should" have won) that the college game is starting to become a make or miss game.  On each possession you either make the shot or miss it.  When things were going bad for us and we were rattled, guys were missing.  When we were confident, especially TT, we were making big shots.  And the majority of our games really came down to a couple key makes or misses. Obviously, a coach who runs an offense that gets his guys easier shots and gets their confidence helps this, but if Mikc gets open looks and suddenly becomes a 30% three point shooter (like what happened to Akeem Richmond at URI last year), there ain't much you can do.  When you get open looks, you have to make them.  When you don't get open looks, you have to find a way to make 'em anyway, like Taylor did so often last year and occasionally Smith.

And to bring it back to the begining of my post, having 4 guys who can make shots consistently is something few teams in the league will have.

I didn't think the A10 was a particularly strong league last year by historical standards and see no reason why it shouldn't get better overall this upcoming year.  XU is obviously a machine right now and should expect to be in the tournament just about every year.  Temple is also loaded and should improve in the backcourt with a healthy year from Juan Fernandez.  I loved Allen but he really didn't have a consistent year for TU last year until the last 10 or so games. 

SLU had one of the youngest teams in the nation last season and should benifit greatly by Mitchell's return.  Charlotte has a big class comming in and now has a year to adjust under coach Majo...they will be better next season than last.  You could see by St Joe's run in the A10 tournament that they had lots of talented young kids that needed to play together and adjust to the college game.  I would expect a big jump in SJU's win total this year.  Even Fordham has completely turned over their staff and roster over the last 2 seasons and look to be going in the right direction.  

Richmond and Duquesne move down but still have a number of good players on their current rosters.  DU's Pomeroy ranking of 62 (vs GW's 161 score) was a more accurate assesment of the truly strong season Duquesne had last year despite their late season slide and 10-6 conf record.  SBU returns 5 of their 6 best players, including POY candidate Nichols. Chris Mooney is one of the best young coaches in the nation right now.  I have no idea about Umass or URI.  Both coaches have to be on the hot seat at this time and have underachieved recently.  Maybe Kellog puts it together in Amherst with the nice PG transfer from Hofstra?  LaSalle still sucks.

The A10 was way too top heavy this year and that looks to change in 2011-2012.  TU and XU still lead the conference but I could see 6 teams battling to lead the 2nd tier: GW, SJU, Duquesne, SBU, SLU and Richmond.  The bottom of the league looks significantly better than last year meaning there will be less easy wins for the better teams to count on.  I think the overall RPI and Pomeroy of the A10 will be improved and 3+ teams will make it to the dance...GW not being one of them.

For once I agree with bobo. Nailed it.

I'm

I'm glad to see we're getting back to hoops and away from payback, enemy fire, and judgment being visited upon the next season.  Sheesh.

The huge question for next year is about Kromah.  I think if he is healthy and returns to form we will have a better season than last and can hope for a top 3 or 4 A-10 finish (and perhaps a post-season tournament to play in).  If he doesn't we will have about the same season as last.

If Kromah is healthy he will be our leading scorer, and he will give TT an sg to rack up some assists with.  Kromah will extend the defense and make it easier for our weak interior to get some better match-ups down low.  We only saw one season of Kromah, and much of what I saw was on TV, but he is the most talented player we have had in 3 or 4 years.  Let's just hope he can come back.

Bobo,  thanks for the summary of the A-10.  i appreciate the insight.  my only beef is with your final statement.  i think we will have a real shot at being one of those 3 teams in the dance.    unlike some of us, i don't see this year as a test for our new coach, but i do see this year as a real opportunity.  granted, there are a whole lot of "ifs" but this will be a veteran, talented and deep team and if we can put it all together, it can be an outstanding year. 

Other than kromah, i see the biggest "if" being how well our big guys hold up.  Edwards coming back was big - if we can keep him healthy and he stays focused, he showed at the end of last year he can be a game changer.  lonergan being able to teach warren to use his body, box out and hold his defensive position will be equally important.  can warren improve to where he doesn't hurt us when he's on the floor.  kopriva could be huge for us as a role player and added depth inside.  then there is pellom, another potential game changer.  he didn't have much of an interior game when he came to us but he showed considerable improvement around the basket toward the end of last year. 

we don't need this group to score a ton of points, we need them to play defense, rebound and collect garbage points.  i also look for smith to log some valuable minutes in the 4 slot.  If this group holds it together, we will be that 3rd team.

Good post, Pops.

Lonergan comes in with a reputation of being able to help big men improve their games and be productive players in his system.  He's done so with lesser tallents than Warren, Pellom and Edwards.  Warren should be a good test case.  He came in as a well regarded recruit that had the size to play at this level and some low post moves yet he's done little at GW to warrent additional playing time.  I think Hobbs' system put a lot of pressure on guys like Warren and the other big men:  they had to regularly leave the low post position defensively to close out on the open shooter when GW pressured the ball with 2 defenders and/or had to quickly slide over to rotate to the open interior player as another GW defender had to close out.  Warren (and Pellom) were often a step slow on the transition, leaving an open man and a quick hook from Hobbs for their efforts.  Offensively, a guy like Warren didn't have the quick post moves and passing ability to be the focus of the offense as the spoke of the "wheel", catching and making a quick move or kick out.

Lonergan doesn't play that gambling style of D but more traditional tough man to man.  Warren will be less exposed in that type of system and can (hopefully) better use his bulk down low as a low post defender.  He supposively has some decent scoring touch down low and could be the recipient (as well as Pellom and Edwards) of low post chances off of down screens and flex screens in Lonergan's "flex" offense that Gary Williams ran at UMD.  Typically they try to pack the offense more closer to the basket than a traditional motion offense to take advantage of their bulky forwards and mid-range shooting wings. 

Evaluation on Warren from ESPN when he was a recruit:

October, 2008:Warren enjoys more offensive success as a face-up 4-man, placing pressure on the defense mostly by using his relatively quick first step to drive to the rim. When he goes to the bucket, he almost exclusively lines up on the left box, to set himself up to drive with his right hand to the middle for finishes. Often, Warren produces finishes above the rim in traffic, relying more on his impressive tenacity when attacking the rim. Warren has good, but not great athleticism and leaping ability, but he does a good job of scoring when he turns and faces in the mid-post for drives. Warren tends to struggle when defenders push him out of the mid-post area and has to make decisions farther away from the paint. He has decent touch on short jumpers, but will sometimes settle for jumpers out of his range when denied his sweet spot on the floor. Warren also needs to improve his ball-handling ability when driving to the rim. When he does get the ball in the post, he can hit jump hooks with either hand, but he needs more work refining his post moves. Warren does hit the offensive boards with good energy, but he sometimes falls asleep on defense. Warren also has a tendency to get snappy and argumentative with his own teammates, which he has to clean up for the next level.

I don't think that anyone should view the upcoming season as a test for Lonergan.  What happens if the team has a disappointing season?  Would Lonergan have failed the test?  And if so, would you fire him after one season?  Of course not.

This season does have some special significance in that virtually everyone here was in agreement that without a coaching change, which would subsequently have meant seeing both Copes and T. Davis in Colonial uniforms, this team would have been an NCAA tournament contending team.  By that standard, if this year's team fails to make say the NIT, I don't see how you can feel anything other than disappointed compared to what might have been.

The big picture of course suggests that we really won't know if this was a beneficial change for at least another 3-5 years.  While this is true, this doesn't translate into this season becoming meaningless from an expectations standpoint. 

I would also add that the key for Duane Smith to become a more consistent scorer for GW will be in his ability to get to the line.  Last year Smith has 85 FTA vs 265 FGAs.  That's dreadful considering the athletic slasher skill set Smith has. In contrast, Aaron Ware had 71 FTAs vs 139 FGAs (making 52 of them).  As a whole only Tony Taylor and Ware did a good job getting to the line last year and GW as a whole averaged about 21 FTAs per game.

Vermont also averaged about 20-21 FTAs per game last year but have ussusally averaged around 25-27 (hitting a good percentage) and had led their leage for the previous 5 years straight.  I'm sure that will be an emphasis for Lonergan and staff to use the flex cuts and screens to free up room for GW's slashers to get to the hole.  VT had a freshman forward last year, Brian Voelkel, that was described as an unathletic grinder, that got 132 FTAs vs 163 FGAs (making 88) and an athletic 6'5", 225 forward the year before that had 303 FTAs.  

I know Smith made some attempts to the basket, especially early in the year, that resulted in TOs or offensive fouls but those were more of the shot clock running down and Smith trying to make a bull move to the basket from 15-18 ft out.  I can't tell you how much I hated "the wheel".  Hopefully Lonergan's staff can have Smith, Ware, Taylor, J Davis, Pellom and Kromah use the space they get from the motion offense to make quick cuts and drives to the basket.  That would significantly help Duane Smith's point total and make for a more efficient offense. 

It's dwayne not "duane"

That's for your input, Student.

In a Lonergan offense, a guy with Smith's talent could take a big leap.  Wouldn't be shocked if he becomes a consistent double-digit+ scorer. 

And MV, in your second paragraph, thrird line, I would suggest "should:" instead of "would."   Doubts about whether we "would" have are the reason we have a new coach.

FQ, I don't get that.  Unless Copes or Davis were academically ineligible, why wouldn't they have come to GW if KH had remained as coach?

More likely referencing this line: "this team would have been an NCAA tournament contending team."

Theory being that Hobbs' inefficient "wheel" offense and excessive gambling on D could have damaged the team's ability to win consistently enough in the regular season to truly be in contention for a NCAA birth.  Maybe they could have gotten hot in the A10 tournament.

Yea cuz it's not like we got to the tournament with Hobbs or anything.

 Yea cuz it's not like we got to the A10 tournament with Hobbs or anything.

BURN!

Bobo, I've got to ask you to please stop holding back and let us all know how you really feel about The Wheel.

Do we have anything for sure on Kromah's health?

Was there really an offensive strategy in there? Always seemed like a bunch of guys passing desperately around the perimeter and often, oddly seeming to move further away from the basket.

Bigfan, random passes around the perimeter is what the "wheel" was all about.  Around and around with no beginning, middle or end...at least until the shot clock wound down.

With all due respect bobo - you have no idea about "wheel". It is an effective continuation motion man offense run by quite a few successful college programs in variations (I believe Tony Bennett runs it at Virginia, Texas has run it in the past and a few teams in the Big 10 may run it from time to time (previously Wisconsin and Penn State to name two) - I'm sure there are others). There are different versions 3 out 2 in and 4 out 1 in. It is designed to get shooters coming off stagger screens and post entries off of back screens, and drives to the basket which put pressure on defenses to recover and adjust to screens and weakside attacks. When defenses cheat the motion hard you can run some counters such as fades off screens and back screen bumps.

Did we execute it properly? Maybe not. We exclusively ran a 3 out 2 in motion. Did we have the right personnel to execute that properly - at least this past year definitely not. But in fairness, we ran very little of it this past year at least at the games I was at. When run correctly, the various versions of wheel can be effective.  Wheel in and of itself was not the problem. The execution and application of it might have been.

 Thank you DMV...the myth that this team wasn't being coached under Hobbs was unfair and uncalled for. 

Don't think that anyone said that the team wasn't being coached under KH.  Clearly, KH had a defnite coaching style on both offense and defense.   My primary problem was his inability to adjust his coaching style to the teams on the court, either the Colonials or the opposition; that hs in game adjustments were weak and his strategy the  last 2 minutes as woeful on both sides of the ball, both in his being too quick to foul when GW fell behind even a little late in the game or his inability to run a high percentage play coming out of a time out/dead ball.  Remember, even what was probably his best buzzer beater in 10 years (the Elliott putback vs. Charlotte) was off the wrong player (Wilmore) throwing up an air ball that luckily landed in Elliott's hands.  Further, I can go on and on about his inability to maximize the potential of most of the team due to his sticking to a coaching philosophy that was frequently just not suited for the players on the court, resulting in either unnecessarily close games or losses to teams that had no business being in the game with us.  He was able to get away with that when the team was super talented, but once the talent level dropped back, well you saw what has happened over the last 4 years.   Yes, we weren't as talented those years as the Hall, Pops, Pinnock, Elliott years, but we should not have been so bad that we could not even finish in the top 12 in the conference 2 years and in the other 2 years could not get to Atlantic City.  And, although I am in the camp that says that we really should not judge ML on his first couple of seasons, on the other hand, I am anxiously looking forward to seeing the changes that happen with the KH team under a different coach and I will to a certain extent be expecting that ML will get more out of these players this upcoming season.

Nobody's saying Hobbs didn't make an effort to coach the team and certainly Hobbs wouldn't intentionally run an offensive system that never works on the college level. I was at one of his open practices when he walked the team though the "wheel" sets that they run with some explainations.  Of course what he was trying to do was use the screens to let the wing players catch the ball with a triple option: shoot, drive or pass.  For quick atheletes that GW has, this could be an effective system to take advantage of their skill sets.  But my arguement was alsways with Hobbs' "wheel" half court offense. Namely, he was a very poor teacher of the system.  GW has been a consistently inefficient half court offensive team over the last 5 years: Ken Pomeroy Offensive Efficiency Ratings of 148 - 204.  Yet year after year, Hobbs stubernly stayed with that basic half-court system, even after it was clear to anyone paying attention that GW just couldn't run it correctly. There's been lots of different players here over the last 5 years, but the one constant has been Hobbs.  It's his inability to teach/coach that system correctly that's been the problem.  

LSF makes a good point in noting Hobbs' unwilllingness to adjust as Hobbs couldn't recognize this problem and try to implement a different system.  That was also true on the pressure defense at times.  Even when it was backfiring against GW by leaving the open 3, Hobbs would stay with it too long at times.  In his defense, Hobbs could teach pressure defense and transition basketball.  When he had talent, GW was fantastic at both.  But even with that talent, the half court offense was average at best. The points came from turnovers and the fast break.  

So after 10 years, I think we could conclude that Hobbs was never going to be able to teach/coach an above average half court offense and that GW was going to run that same, poorly executed "wheel" offense fo as long as he was going to be at GW.  That's why I hated the "wheel" so much at GW.

All wonderful thoughts and theories, LSF and Bobo.  And yet despite these major deficiencies in KH's teaching abilities, he coached his lesser talented team (compared to Pops/Mike/JR, etc.) to a 10-6 conference record last season while missing arguably his best player.  So as you continue you to describe what YOU THOUGHT he did wrong, I'll continue to point out what HE FACTUALLY did right.

Half empty or half full.  The 10-6 conference record was good.  The OOC performance and RPI wase not.  At the end of the day, we still did not see Atlantic City, yet alone the NCAA or NIT.   Nor did we have more than 1 or 2 wins vs. top 100 teams.   Probably the best coaching decision KH made all season was to start Ware over Bynes.  That helped turn things around a bit.  As did the emergence of a healthy Edwards as a factor.