By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/13/2016 10:56:29 PM

This team and GW under ML has consistently had some problems.

1)     Mike Hall is 100% right - the team lacks fire. We could call that lacking in leadership as well. You could call that emotional toughness as well. Or a lot of things. 

2)     The team also has a shocking lack of athleticism

3)     I don't know that this staff has been effective at developing our players well from year to year OR ML is recruiting guys who have largely already topped out in terms of their development

Several of these things are a function of what I VERY EARLY ON argued would be a limitation of ML - his inability to recruit "those" kinds of players to GW running the flex and slow down system that he runs. It's also a function of ML wanting all serious academic students. Those things aren't absolute disqualifiers but even FQ earlier this season said that he thought that the ML way might never really be able to climb above the 30-40 RPI kind of team (I hope I'm paraphrasing correctly).

I think that ML's coaching style does tend to hurt players' confidence (particularly when your players aren't super tough). I was very struck by ML's on court interview just after the VCU victory. The FIRST thing he commented on was JoeMac missing the late layup that would have clinched the game. He was focused on that :mistake" right after one of the biggest victories of his GW career. I don't recall seeing any comments from him that didn't include criticisms including sometimes  sharp criticisms.I think the players have become more conscious of not making mistakes than they are about making winning plays.

Yuta and Paul have faded more and more into irrelevance as the season has moved on even though we've seen with our own eyes that they have talent and abilities that are unrealized. If they're back next year then presumably we need them both to be starters and major contributors. Right now they both look like their games have been "broken."Certainly it's hard to say that Swan or Roland have been developed such that we could expect them to be significant contributors next year, much less Cimino or Goss.

And as Herve has aluded to, these problems don't look necessarily like they're getting solved next year with players like Marfo, Toro, Bolden who seem like good kids, good students, but not necessarily really athletic or with "fire." Smith I have no sense of either way.

If I were a betting man which i am not, I would bet along with Mentz that Darnell never ends up at GW.

So a big part of my disappointment right now is that it's hard to be optimistic about next year either.

ML doesn't seem to have a page in his coaching book that says "let's just go out there and have fun." He wants to control every detail, even how many fouls a 14 year old scorekeeper has marked down for his JV daughter. OOPS if only GW had won then that incident never would have been mentioned again.

It doesn't look like this team has a ton of FUN on the court.

BTW I still think thst ML has done a very good job at GW and wouldn't think on any level that anyone should be thinking about any kind of change on that front. A big part of the problem as a fan has been that expectations have gotten so far ahead of what the team has been able to deliver..

This is not to say OBVIOUSLY that I don't think there is considerable room for growth and improvement on ML's part. 

But this is ML's team with his players and his coaches 5 years into his GW tenure. It all has to be on him.

By: 2cents (32 posts) - 2/14/2016 12:03:02 AM

I have personally been trying to remain open minded and positive about the Coach, even defending him to friends when I wasn't even sure he deserved defending...but benefit of the doubt and all.  I want him to be great, and I really like a lot of aspects about him, especially his family being so involved and passionate. I believe they ALL love the school and community and are a positive for the program.  He is smart and seemingly caring.  He takes pride in his job and GW.  He has a winning record and clearly knows his X's and O's. But, it has become increasingly difficult to swallow a few things.  (That's what she said)  I think Cutis mentioned elsewhere about the player's body language, and I completely agree.  Dejection, frustration, annoyance, fear...these are what their bodies and reactions seem to scream.   I don't see a ton of respect for the coach.  My grandma used to smile at me while she scolded me. I think she thought it made it seem nicer and less harsh, but it actually seemed condescending and sarcastic and I hated it. I see Lonergan make that same face at his players and I wince. I know how it feels.  The fact that these seniors have not dominated this season is a huge indicator of coaching, whether through recruiting a certain type of player, or just not being able to connect with the players in an effective way. In four years, he hasn't figured out how to get the most out of his best players.  In fact, it almost seems the opposite has occurred.  Player development has to improve both off the bench and through their years at GW.  The proof is in the pudding. We have three seniors, two in particular (Joe and Pato IMO) who have the POTENTIAL to be first team A-10 and yet we struggle. And they actually HAD four years of starting and playing major minutes. Swan, Roland and Goss are not going to help next year at this rate. Why should we expect them to? Something has got to change.   I was at the game today and Adams was lights out. We have no guards that can do what he did. Quick, agile, smart. The Bonnie's were agressive, energetic and had FIRE! They may not have shot too well, but they were getting to the hoop and getting second chances like madmen. Kevin was a no show. He really bummed me out today, because as FQ pointed out, we needed him and he was so lackadaisical. He reminds me of Snuffleufagus.  Slow, soft and fuzzy.  He lacks the skill, quickness, AND strength to get sh!t done inside. Thank goodness for Pato and Tyler or this would have been a real blowout. The crowd, though apparently it was homecoming, was rowdy and rambunctious.  It was a tough atmosphere for sure, but our boys could have done better.  I was disappointed we drove in rough weather to watch a 20 point first half and ultimately, the loss.   I think it all boils down to ML's attitude. If he can find a little more positivity, it could go a long way.  Good coach, glad we have him, don't want him to go, just want him to genuinely smile. Obviously, I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors, and I could be way off and he might be the most uplifting, sunshine up your ass guy in DC...but it sure doesn't look like it from the outside.  BTW, I don't know if it translated on TV, but Yuta was REALLY upset about something today.  Couldn't tell if it was at a player or coach or contact or what? I was too far away, across from the bench, and could only see him from behind with the coaches.  Tough week in VA next week too. 

By: Free Quebec (2/14/2016 12:45:54 AM)

I'm glad you are getting to do a big I Told You So post after a couple of losses.   Do you feel good about yourself now? 

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/14/2016 1:18:24 AM

I feel the same way about myself as I always do. And I was ripped  repeatedly when I posted my thoughts back then and along the way. But when the team really disappoints because the players ML recruited fail in part because they lack athletiism and "fire" then my earlier position is quite relevant. 

Now none of this means that I don't want ML to stay, because I definitely do. What I think is needed is a few adjustments and growth in ML. But it has to start with a recognition of what are some of the things that need adjusting.

By: Balls Out (15 posts) - 2/14/2016 1:57:34 AM

Posted a year ago and nothing has changed...


"Here's the problem:  You have to go to the bathroom.  You're running down the hall, but your Mother makes you stop and orders you to piss or shit first, or take a piss-shit.  You and your three brothers do this for two and a half years.  You can't take it anymore.  So you freeze like a deer.  And shit your pants."


Players are micromanaged on every possession, you miss a shot - you're coming out/you go over the back - you're coming out/you win but miss a layup - you get called out/etc., etc.


Lonergan's act is tired and the players, execution, energy, urgency reflects it.  Four years of his wrath = constipation.  I can only assume Kethan is laughing his ass off.


By: Cutis (243 posts) - 2/14/2016 8:32:09 AM

Thinker, well said,well done.

By: Colonial NY (95 posts) - 2/14/2016 9:11:58 AM

I hate, truly, hate to compare Lonergan to past coaches but do y'all think that say our coach before Lonergan wasn't a get-in-your-face, screamer who demanded a lot of his players and didn't take crap type of coach? I can see some of the points as valid here, but at a certain point, saying the coach's temperment is costing this team is more on the players being tough enough to take criticism from their college coach. Hell, the first time I spoke with Hobbs he screamed at me and I didn't even play on the team! True leaders step up in the face of that criticism and demand excellence from their teammates. They don't slink away, sullen and upset. They fight back by working harder, fighting to prove they belong and know what they are doing, etc. They take it upon themselves to motivate their teammates and push for everyone to be at their best 100% of the time. The fight isn't there consistently with this team and having a tough coach who yells and screams shouldn't be a reason to back down. For a true leader on the team, it is the time to stand up. I think the way the players react to the coach is more on them than the coach. The coach can have other issues - is the talen he's recruiting good enough? are the X's and O's good enough? - but a coach who yells, screams and demands excellence, that shouldn't cause players to shrink or not play with consistency or fight for every inch on the court for themselves and their teammates.

By: GW_Alum_2004 (28 posts) - 2/14/2016 9:40:23 AM


By: Mike K (1,177 posts) - 2/14/2016 9:40:24 AM

The consensus is that there is not enough fire and leadership on the team, especially from the Core 3.  I totally agree, way too passive - you would think someone 6'10" 260 could get fired up and get some monster slams to get the guys pumped.   

It was mentioned in another thread that TC seems to be the only one with emotion out there (paraphrased), which can be seen, and he may need to defer to the seniors.  I hope "deferring" is true so next year we wont have this problem.  One would think that Sina, a son of a coach, would be a leadership guy, but I have not seen enough of him to know if it translates to the court.  We can only hope.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 9:47:58 AM

The fact that this thread passes for serious discussion here explains a lot. But let me ask the coaching "experts" this. So against teams like VCU and Virginia the same style of coaching worked! I assume the team was tight and ML micromanaged there also? No? ML coaches the same way win or lose. So please explain why we are 18-7. Again you would read this thread and think we are 7-18.


By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:03:26 AM

Bo, you are just another Anonymous person who is scared to say it to our face. Laughable to use your term. Sorry I don't take what you say seriously. Bad week for ML and the Colonials. We are so predictable and as I've mentioned like Balls OUt the team is micromanaged. That's a sure way to take away someone's confidence. He's like your father coaching you. Give the team some space. Sure we're 18-7 after beating up the OOC schedule.

It is becoming increasingly difficult to see where JoeMac, Pato and KevLar have improved much under ML. Pato did improve his jumper while working with the Argentine national team. We expected a lot with some predicting a Sweet 16. Doubt it but it could still happen. We do NOT have 5th place locked up in the A10. We're 7-5 and 3 teams are 6-6. This is the season we've all been waiting for.

By: FredD (598 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:04:34 AM

I'll it give a shot Bo. UVA was game coached for parts of all offseason and the players totally bought in. VCU the seniors decided before or early in the season they were going all in to win that game. More globally this team is not that athletic. No Armwood like player to nuts on the offensive glass. This same lack of athleticism hurts them on defense. As they fail to meet their OWN expectations this team gets tight. They press. I understand ML pleading for guys to totally commit BUT they are not that tough so it's not perfect or desirable or even  that workable but it is up to the coaches just because they are the other half of the equation.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:10:03 AM

Rich I am sure you have an extensive coaching background and have attended every practice which enables you to accurately comment on the current situation. I am sure that after the VCU and Virginia games you had similar comments. I am certain that if only GW would hire you we would be the first team since 1976 to go undefeated present roster notwithstanding. 

By: SW (189 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:12:29 AM

"He wants to control every detail, even how many fouls a 14 year old scorekeeper has marked down for his JV daughter. OOPS if only GW had won then that incident never would have been mentioned again."


As I discussed with my GW season ticket holder and grad is that the first thing he did was call his boy Eric Bickel to give him his "WOE IS ME!" story on nationally syndicated radio, no less. The more I think about it, the more that incident at SJC reflects negatively on ML. Shut your god damn mouth and stay in you god damn seat.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:13:03 AM

PS Rich did you even read Mike Hall's post?

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:15:52 AM

SW don't think too hard you might hurt yourself. You have no idea what you are talking about re SJC non- incident

By: SW (189 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:16:33 AM

"Again you would read this thread and think we are 7-18."


If we were 7-18 no one would be posting here.

By: SW (189 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:18:21 AM

"SW don't think too hard you might hurt yourself. You have no idea what you are talking about re SJC non- incident"

No, I think I have it down.


1. ML's daughter "fouled out" with 4 fouls.

2. ML approaches scorer's table to ask how many fouls they have, because he only counted four.

3. By ML's own admission, words were exchanged.

4. A police officer walks over to the table.

5. ML leaves the game.

Did I miss anything?

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:21:30 AM

SW, I am sure Herve can attest we had plenty of posts here during losing seasons. Of course the front runners disappeared so maybe that's why you don't know.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:24:19 AM

SW, other than #1 and #2 you aren't close. "Words exchanged" ???? Downright embarassing analysis by you.

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:31:05 AM

Say it to my face, Mr. Anonymous. No one NOSE anything but you. Ah the fantasy life. I suggest you go to the It Ain't Lonergan thread as it needs your support. You are embarrassing yourself.

By: SW (189 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:34:47 AM

The only one who is embarrasing himself here, is yourself, Bo Blows. Read ML's words yourself:

"“That could be a little exaggerated. I rush over to St. John’s to catch the Seton JV game. Middle of the third quarter, my daughter — they’re down like four — so start of the fourth quarter, she gets a foul called, and the scorer’s table hits the horn and says she’s got five fouls. So my wife, she’s sitting … near me in the bleachers, I said ‘she doesn’t have five fouls.’ She said ‘no way she has five.’ So my daughter goes to the bench, bawling, she’s crying, so I look over, I say ‘Hey, do you have five?’ She said ‘No.’ So, I thought I was discreet, I waited till the next timeout, and I went over to the scorer’s table and I asked the little young lady that was sitting there, from St. John’s, I said ‘Hey, how many fouls does No. 13 have?’ She said ‘Well, I only had her for four.’

So some middle-aged loser (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) at the scorer’s table starts yelling at me, asking me who I am. 

I said, ‘I’m nobody. I’m just, my daughter’s down there crying, I know she doesn’t have five fouls and I’m just curious why, you know, you got her for five. And then he called over a policeman — who I knew, I used to play basketball with [him] — so I just went into the hallway and talked with him, and then I just said ‘Well I better get out of here.’ So that was a little embarrassing, to say the least.”


Sounds like I got it pretty on the money. Again, ML's attempts at saying "I'm nobody" are laughable. EVERYONE AT SJC knows who he is! He should have stayed in his seat, shut his mouth, and made it a teachable moment for his daughter.


No surprise ML's daughter is crying over fouling out with four fouls. His players are just as soft.

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:51:55 AM

SW, it was a conspiracy to toss ML from the game. THEY made sure ML would get to the game. THEY deliberately fouled out his daughter with only 4 fouls. THEY forced ML to go to the scorer's table. THEY forced him to get into a 'discussion which led the cop to come over. THEY kicked him out of the game because he wasthe target being a HC at GW. And ML misspoke when he told his story. So don't hold his own words against him. Comcast, USA Today, MSN, WaPo and others picked up the story because it was a feel good story of a man coming to the defense of his HS daughter. 

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/14/2016 10:55:48 AM


I can't really see as how you'd disagree with any of the following as you've alluded to some of these things as werll:

1 Players lack athleticism such that no one can really create their own shot on offense and keep up with athletic opposing players on defense

2 Team has small margin of error. They must play with great effort, smart defense and tough rebounding and have a very effective game offensively to win against most A-10 teams

3 Surprisingly with everything on the line for this senior laden team (SIX GUYS with 4 years of college) - they are not playing with much effort. The team has seemingly collapsed deep into the season for the second year in a row. You've specifically called out Kevlar, for example for his lack of effort or fire.

You have said all these things in one way or another in recent weeks.

You can't coach athleticism but you can recruit it  and ML mostly hasn't done so.

I don't believe you can coach fire but you can recruit it and ML mostly hasn't done so.

You CAN coach effort but for two years in a row in many of the crucial games ML hasn't been able to get the kind of effort he needs from his players.

So we have a team that lacks athleticism; It lacks fire; It lacks effort at crucial times; It has two sophmores who are critical for the team going forward who seem to have regresssed to the point of apearing to me to have been "broken."; we have a player Jordan Roland who you have hyped for a full year as a guy who will be a real contributor who can't get on the floor for more than a minute or two. 

So Bo, what gives? If ML is doing a great job recruiting and doing a great job developing players, and doing a great job coaching overall then how can we be in the spot we;re in? How can the team play with incredible focus and effort in a bunch of games this year and here in the final run (for the second year in a row) just not show up?

So here I am really criticizing and here I really want to hear you defense. If all this isn't on ML, who or what is it on?

By: 2cents (32 posts) - 2/14/2016 11:01:09 AM

Bo, I respect your opinion and appreciate your empathy in posts.  In most cases, I agree with you that comments could be tempered.  With that being said, do you see the morale of the team on the sidelines?  You don't think by this time of the year the players have lost a certain energy for ML? Is it not somewhat of a reflection on him that we don't have consistency and enthusiasm from the players?  Nobody is perfect...maybe his attitude on the side lines is contagious and could be tweaked a little? Positivity and positive reinforcement go a long way with this age. 

By: Colonial'13 (94 posts) - 2/14/2016 12:55:39 PM

I completely agree. I think ML's style takes a toll on these guys throughout the season, explaining the collapses of last season and this season. I look at this team and they have 0 fun on the court, and that is directly influenced by the coach. It is pretty obvious from the teams demeanor.

By: Poster (5 posts) - 2/14/2016 12:56:05 PM

Colonial NY, it is not simply a matter of a yelling coach making players lose confidence. You can break guys down for playing poorly but at some point you have to build them up and let them know they are your guys and you as the coach have their backs. I believe it to be especially true with the current generation of players. I've heard that Armwood just ignored ML's tirades but others take it personally and shut down. If true, that would explain what we are seeing. 

By: Mike K (1,177 posts) - 2/14/2016 1:11:39 PM

We are a "system" team. We don't have the athletes to create one on one, or play one on one defense well. If we are not functioning well in the system, it doesn't look good for us.  When he was hired, ML said he would recruit Big East talent.  Let's hope it arrives next year.  

By: Alumnus (2,050 posts) - 2/14/2016 1:55:20 PM

Let's hope the incoming players have thick skins as well as athletic skills.  I had my share of controlling micromanagers.  They tend not to be really self-reflective people, or deal well with suggestions that they change, probably because the flipside of being a controlling micromanager is insecurity and an abnormal fear of being blamed.  If you dictate every move your subordinates make, it's a lot easier to get up there and say it was their fault, not mine.  I told them what to do. 

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/14/2016 2:17:10 PM

i suspect I am just as disappointed as anyone over the collapse of this team.  On the other hand, try not to lose sight of the fact that for the 3rd year in a row, we are about to win 20 games.   Again, not too long ago we were struggling to reach 10.   As we all know now, this team was missing certain necessary parts, mostly (1) a defensive force down low;  (2) a point guard who can break down offenses and defend; (3) bench depth; and (4) floor leadership.   The longer a season goes, the more your weaknesses become exposed.  This is what we are seeing.   If you want to be critical of the coach for those deficiencies, it is certainly legit, as he assembled this team.  On the other hand, we are about to have our 3rd 20 game season in a row.  Next year is shaping up to be very interesting, as it is clear that some of our players cannot play under ML's system and will move on.   As stated earlier, I am particularly concerned with both Yuta and PJ.    

By: BC (1,645 posts) - 2/14/2016 2:21:26 PM

Same old asses posting about ML over and over again.  You're making me sick and hating this board.  Crawl back into your holes boys.

By: LA Fan (1,525 posts) - 2/14/2016 2:49:15 PM

LSF, it is difficult to determine the specific metrics for how to judge ML's success as a coach.  

1. Multiple 20 win seasons (and not with cupcake schedules)

2. Able to land Zeke, Creek, Cavanaugh and Sina as transfers

3. Won games against Creighton, Maryland, Pitt, Wichita State, UVA, Seton Hall

So I guess this is all weighed against lack of success in the A10 and lack of multiple appearances or any wins in the NCAA's.  So it's kind of a mixed bag.  The issue seems to be fading late in the season, and other A10 teams understanding ML's game plan and having our number.  I posted a rhetorical question earlier this year about whether GW had the best starting 5 in the A10, to whichever several posters immediately responded, of course we do.  I thought we did too.  So if that is the case what happened?  We are in jeopardy of having a losing record in the A-10 this year.




By: 2cents (32 posts) - 2/14/2016 2:49:26 PM

BC, I'm not sure I've ever even mentioned it. You think everything is fine and dandy with morale?  Do you think the players are hearing or thinking it is a successful season based on what they are getting from the coach? Again, I am only asking if perhaps that is one aspect of the coach's character that might be a tad detrimental and deserve a look?   Could he be better at building players up and giving them the confidence they need to succeed to their full potential? I only posted to this thread because it seemed most appropriate to voice my concerns/opinions.  I tried very hard to communicate that I am not an anti-Lonergan guy. There are just some observations I have made and they might explain some of the team's woes and ways to fix them. 

By: gwsb14 (77 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:01:43 PM

I feel like 20 wins is a bit of an outdated way to measure success. When 8 of our non-conference games are against 150+ KenPom ranked teams, 20 wins should almost be minimum baseline. 20 wins doesn't get you into the tournament anymore, so I think it is just an old metric to judge. 

By: gwsb14 (77 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:01:44 PM

I feel like 20 wins is a bit of an outdated way to measure success. When 8 of our non-conference games are against 150+ KenPom ranked teams, 20 wins should almost be minimum baseline. 20 wins doesn't get you into the tournament anymore, so I think it is just an old metric to judge. 

By: maypoman (671 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:11:23 PM

 It should be concerning to all of us that for two seasons in a row the team has great success OOC and then becomes very mediocre. With few exceptions, players deteriorate as the season goes on-- 22% shooting in the first half yesterday and too many games recently where we shot 39% or less. Players with significant minutes aren't contributing anything. This team knocked off Virginia for crap sake but it feels like years and years ago. I like Mike as a person but there's something rotten in Denmark. Or maybe it's just because we are Gdub. 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:28:23 PM

6 games left see if we can go 4 and 2 

By: Alumnus (2,050 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:28:46 PM

BC, maybe you should push harder with your brilliant idea about making interest in sports an admissions factor.  That way in 25 years or so, most of us old fogeys who actually think about what's going on will be gone from the board, one way or the other. 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:29:08 PM

6 games left see if we can go 4 and 2 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/14/2016 5:42:51 PM

Thinker,  if you want to pin anything on ML it's been the recruiting (but as I said before that's changing for the better) and we have to accept some limitations here at GW. The same people bitching about recruiting are the same ones who for years think we can draw 5,000/night. But he has done a masterful job of coaching the players up that he does have. We are 18-7 with not much depth. So is that coaching? He has papered over some deficiencies and put us in a position to win almost every night. The great John Wooden wouldn't have made this team 25-0 or probably even 20-5. We are who we are - we have the potential on some nights to play at a very high level (e.g. VCU, Virginia) and on other nights to struggle. But that is dependent on EVERYONE on the top 7 playing pretty well. When Tyler or Kevin have an off night we generallly don't have Plan B. But we are not losing games because of coaching or any of the other nonsense about morale posted here. There is only so much you can do with a short bench and as the season gets longer this tends to be exposed more. I will freely admit I overestimated our bench/depth pre-season. But at the same time, in fairness you can't criticize ML's in-game coaching game to game when he has such limitations (even if he is part of the reason we have them).

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/14/2016 8:08:20 PM


I think ML has done a good job overall. Recruiting is probably 70% + of what makes a program successful, so recruiting failures of ML are a serious issue. And I absolutely don't think it is easy to recruit or win at GW. That's why I wouldn't even fathom a coaching change.

This thread talks about other issues though as well. We have seen with our own eyes how well this team can play if it is energized AND we have seen how often this team has come into critical games with ZERO energy. On a team with SIX guys who have been in college 4 years I don't know who you point the finger at for inconsistent energy and focus if not the coach. It's not just a guy having a bad shooting night -- there have been critical games where the team is just FLAT. TWO years in a row in crunch time. How can they go from the VCU performance to the St Joes and Bonaventure flops in the course of a week and half or so with nothing else intervening? I don't know how that wouldn't be coaching.

Yuta and Paul's games look to me like they are simply broken. We have seen repeatedly what they are capable of and we have seen them both disappear as the year has worn on. How is that not coaching?

You are a basketball coach and absolutely I am not. I have said repeatedly that I will never again try to project a HS player based on my watching a game or two. I just don't have that talent. I similarly don't have the expertise to say "gosh we should play more man-to-man OR he switched into the 1-3-1 too late OR x player should play more minutes." I simply am not expert enough to second guess game decisions by the coach. So very rarely, if ever, will you see those kinds of criticisms from me. I am very comfortable giving your expertise on those kinds of issues deference because I think you do know a lot more about them than I do.

So I have really trusted your repeatedly expressed judgement that Jordan Roland would be a real contributor - that he has what it takes. So when he fails to be able to crack the lineup when we are so thin and lacking in offensive firepower, I ask myself why is that? I'm going to conclude that he's a pretty good player that the coaches have not developed well enough because I trust your judgment that' he's a pretty good player to begin with. Either you seriously misjudged his talent or the coaches haven't developed him well. And when we see how Yuta and Paul have regressed, how Hart Swan and Cimino have failed to progress, how Kevlar, Garino, and JoeMac have stayed relatively the same then I conclude that the staff has not developed players well.

Those things -- not getting maximum effort from a veteran team AND not seeing players develop would seem to be totally on the shoulders of the coach. You have to say that either these players we have just aren't coachble or that the staff isn't coaching them well. And it just doesn't seem to me that these players we have aren't coachable so we're left with the only other alternative.

And I don't think that just getting better recruits fixes coaching problems. I want to be optimistic about next year; I'm ready to give great deference to your scouting abilities and tell me how Marfo, Toro, Bolden, Smith and maybe Rogers are more athletic, tougher, have more fire, are more coachable than our current crop of players. I'm happy to hear a theory of how among Yuta, Paul, Roland, Swan, Cimino, Goss we are going to see a real progression of performances that we haven't seen any evidence of this year. 

I'm not a ML hater even though I do hate the flex because I've always said that I thought that system makes it harder to recruit more dynamic athletes. But if you want to win using a system that attracts lesser athletes YOU have to coach them REALLY well. You have to develop the players and you have to get great intensity and effort from them every night. I don't think ML has done that with this group.

By: RKelley (152 posts) - 2/14/2016 8:39:41 PM

The talent was there to win this conference. Was the gameplan? Was the commitment to and practice of that gameplan there? Was the coaching?

Yuta was in the bottom of the conference in just about every major factor--shooting, rebounding, assist rate, usage were all terrible. He played 67% of court minutes. His 3pt% is 54 of 56 in the conference, his eFG is 42/51, his DR% was 51/87, OR% 43/87, ARate 57/87, STL% 62/87, BLK% 14/87.

Joe Mac had the worst assist rate of the 3 point guards on this team, a higher TO rate than assist rate, and his eFG was near the bottom of the league.

The no-fouls defense backfired this year. On the perimeter, Garino and Yuta have exceptional length but they weren't allowed to use their hands. Their feet alone weren't quick enough to contain the dribble. The perimeter defense crumbled, and we didn't play enough 1-3-1, keeping some quality players off the court.

Hart's 119 ORTG is the best in the A10 and is the best on the team, now in front of Tyler Cavanaugh's. He scores more points per 100 possessions than any player on the team or conference.

For most of the year, Hart has been 1 or 2 in ORTG, and was used in 25% of possessions when he was on the court. For whatever reason, the coaches stopped utilizing him, even when the team was in desperate need of his scoring and 40% 3PT and energy. ORTG is practically the measurement of player value that WAR is in baseball. Not using him would be like benching Jose Bautista or Chris Davis.

In the 3 games Mitola started at the point, played 24+ minutes and was given some slack to work with, he averaged an insane 137 ORTG and the offense scored an average of 81 points. They haven't eclipsed 80 points in the 7 games since, and they hadn't topped 70 points in the 4 games prior to starting him for those 3 games.


By: RKelley (152 posts) - 2/14/2016 8:44:35 PM

ML is a much better coach than most. He has a lot of variables to work with. I presume his budget, his access to talent, and his support staff are all relatively handicapped. I think if he had more support, preferably more recruiting money and access to an analyst, he'd be able to take the team to the top. Dayton is filthy rich by comparison.

By: RKelley (152 posts) - 2/14/2016 8:56:58 PM

@Thinker, +1 "Those things -- not getting maximum effort from a veteran team AND not seeing players develop would seem to be totally on the shoulders of the coach."

By: The Dude (529 posts) - 2/15/2016 2:16:46 AM

Still a believer in the ML regime, think he must correct some flaws in his leadership and woeful (largely) incoming HS recruitment. (13's 14s and 15s)

Lets not bury the lede, ML resurrected a morirbund program and the arrow still points north



By: Colonial NY (95 posts) - 2/15/2016 9:08:26 AM

Thinker - I'd disagree with you that a team with that many four-year college students coming out flat and not motivated is on the coach. I actually believe it is just the opposite. If a player who has been around for that many years - some of which have been to the NCAAs and had tastes of great success - cannot motivate themselves to play hard and strong, then I don't know that anyone can. I don't recall if it is this thread or the MIke Hall one but someone said they had heard that Armwood tuned out ML and went out and worked hard and hustled on his own accord. If that is true (I have no way to verify it) that is proof that a player in ML's system can get beyond any perceived issues with coaching and still fight for everything and motivate himself.

I do believe ML has shortcomings and recruiting the past few years is one of them. Perhaps he failed to get the guys like Armwood and Creek that can be leaders on the court and play hard every game. I hope starting with next year's class that we see some players like that - true leaders who take it upon themselves to play hard no matter the circumstance and can motivate and make their teammates better. That is definitely missing form this team and that is on ML for missing on recruiting that type of player. But I don't think it is on ML for his not being able to motivate his players enough this season with so many upperclassmen. At a certain point the fight has to come from within.

And Dude is right - for the flaws of this program right now - it is still trending in the right direction and I'm excited about the future though a bit disappointed in the present (expectations are a bitch sometimes).

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/15/2016 10:46:08 AM

20 doesn't mean quite as much as it did in years gone by.   Once upon a time, it was almost a certain invite, but now with the increase in number of games teams play (up from 26-27, sometimes fewer if an inept Athletic Department was running the show) but now most teams are playing 29-31.  Lets say 20 is the new 17 or 18...good enough to get you into the NIT but not to the NCAAs, unless with an exceptional resume/RPI.   It is still pretty damn impressive, albeit disappointing for a team that we all once though may have been one of our best teams ever.

By: Tennessee Colonial (1,179 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:02:58 AM

Just got back from PA yesterday. Airports and flying can be a hassel when they overbook. But a thought came to me while being away. First day in PA saw a totally unexpected victory over VCU. 1 player went nuts for us. (Pato), Then the disaster against St. Joe, and again against St. B. How did the coach influence this? I got home and was flashing through the TV channels and saw a glimpse of the "Walking Dead".  The zombies reminded me of something. It was sad. How can you coach that?  How can you coach KL to not miss easy layups game after game after game. What is he doing at the 3 point line taking 3's the last number of games. You can't tell me the Game Plan called for KL being the point guard. You can't tell me that ML told the players to throw the ball away or not set screens, or not box out. Main thing is that our shooting has been awful. If we made just a reasonable # of outside shots and 3's we would have won at St B. But missing all of those chippies, especially by Larsen, puts the team in a big  hole. I just hope the new bigs coming in next year will not be afraid to play the game. Don't blame ML.

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:25:41 AM

I mostly agree, TC, but your post only singles out one player.  The last 2 games have been a team stinkfest, which, at least in my opinion, includes the coach.    In both games, the team came out extremely tight and nervous.  Part of the coach's job is to have them loose and confident.   Further, I think we were least in the St. Joes game, which had a masterful game plan against us on both offense an defense.  We looked lost on the court.    In the end, it is on the players who have the talent to play much better than they have...but the coach is not without responsibility too.

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:29:05 AM

Colonial NY,

If all these veterans can't bring the right level of effort then the coach isn't at fault.

If what you say is true, then what you're really saying is that the core of this team is simply not coachable. So if Kevlar, Garino, JoeMac, Yuta, Paul, etc. are simply not coachable players then you should just say that. Say that ML isn't coaching them poorly because no coach could reach them.

By my sense, these players DON'T look uncoachable. Maybe Savage was uncoachable but not this crew.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:39:09 AM

Thinker -

First, with respect to JR, I don't think it is a case of either one (misjudgement of talent) or the other (coaches failed to develop). I think there is a third explanation. JR for whatever reason seems to be pressing. Maybe it's the limited minutes, maybe it's the speed of the game, maybe it is the adjustment. I understand from the coaches he practices very well most days. So it would appear his issues are mostly on gameday. When he gets in the game he looks as if he has to make something happen immediately - especially on offense. Then he either rushes or decides to pull in his horns. I still think he is the player everyone saw 2 summers ago. He needs to relax and let the game come to him. I think the talent is there. But he does need to take the next step whether in the remaining games this year or by early next year. Again, as I and others have said, this is not an exact science (recruiting). It is always a projection to the next level and some guys handle the bright lights better than others. Not ready to give up by any means on JR - still way too early for that. But it's not inconceivable that I could have been wrong. I've been wrong before and I am sure I will be wrong again. Let's hope that is not the case.

As far as the team being flat, I do think you have to look at the personalites of your players. I am not sure we have a real vocal leader on that team that leads with his play and his mouth. Joe is more a quiet leader. Pato and Kevin are also quiet guys by and large. Tyler has some fire but he is new to the team as far as playing and may not want to wrest that mantle from the seniors. That said, I would say that this team has to be punched in the mouth sometimes before it responds. We have nice guys, upstanding citizens and no bad character guys on this team. That's good for GW, good for the larger picture but nice guys are not always as good for consistency of effort on the floor. And BTW, I don't know if any of the 2016 recruits will have that toughness/leadership mentality either. They do in high school but whether that translates remains to be seen.

I would also say that given the short bench, the number of minutes are piling up on certain players, particularly our bigs. I believe this has had an effect on the uneven play as well and becomes more of an issue as the season extends. What we may be calling flat may be fatigue from too many minutes in too many close games lately - even the ones we have won. You only have so much emotional energy and we are a team win or lose in a dogfight most nights. We really need a couple of blowout wins but I am not sure where we get them. 

But my objection is that all of this cannot be laid at the feet of ML. You can say he recruited this mix of players and is responsible for the depth but then you can't double dip and blame him for not coaching around some of the same deficiencies. We've come to learn these deficiencies over the past 2 years. But some act shocked and dismayed that they continue to reappear on a game by game basis. I look at it the other way. I thought we might be able to get past these inconsistencies this season (and if so, we would have a chance to get to the Sweet 16) but by the same token, I am not surprised they are continuing. And, I also didn't think we would have zero frontcourt depth - Cimino not even being able to give us 5-10 minutes a game really hurts the entire team by forcing the big guys to play more minutes. So in light of what ML is working with he is doing a very good job on gameday. Since he can't make a trade for players or pick up somebody on waivers, I am not sure what more we can ask at this point. ML can only do so much with this roster. The only ones who can make it better are the players. We can only hope there is more gas left in the tank. I think there is but I don't know for sure and in any event, we are all going to find out together over the next 3-5 weeks.


By: ziik (2,950 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:39:09 AM

This is absurd.


I the history of GW basketball,there have been two uncoachable players.

1) Mean Man Howard Matthews, who did not need no stinkin coachin.

2) The Texas tornado, who went through the systsem  in a semester or so.

All the rest are their mama's little boys.

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:50:28 AM

We can ask basketball coaches like Bo:

Is effort coachable? 

I expect that the answer is yes.

Are these players capable of playing with great effort?

I know the answer is yes.

So why does this team play with great effort some games and not in some other games? Not in a trap game but it key games at crunch time in the season with everything on the line?

A - The players are uncoachable

B - The coach isn't effectively coaching them

I don't see how the answer can be something other than A or B

By: Poog (3,875 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:51:28 AM

So if GW wins it's because individual players are fulfilling their personal bucket lists but if they lose it's because morale is bad because the coach micromanages them and won't adjust to the obvious solutions presented by observers from the stands? OK, Professor Higgins. I think I've got it.

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:54:56 AM

I was posting above as Bo was posting above.

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/15/2016 12:19:08 PM

Poog, you're missing the point. Here is ML's formula - if we win it's because of the coach and if we lose it's the players Or if we lose maybe it's on the students who don't . He constantlypoints out the flaws in the players yet takes no responsibility in a loss. ML recruited and signed the players to play at GW. So he gets them here and then does what? ML complains players are not following his instructions. He should substitute. Oh that's right we have no bench. Why don't we have a bench? That's on ML.

By: ziik (2,950 posts) - 2/15/2016 12:21:22 PM

Thinker, you're a "life coach," right? Well its not the same as being a baskeball coach. I have pals who think being smart, being a lawyer, being a doctor, being an engineer or a school teacher makes them coaches, too. Basketball coaches.

Well, its not rocket science. But, its harder.

My gramps was a mediocre high school coach. But, he corresponded with John Wooden, among others. 

He simplified his philosophy to 1) play your best guys the most minutes and 2) make sure every player gets his eyes tested.

He coached at a small vocat high school comprised almost entirely of minorities. He played two games a year against a similar school, the rest were games against bigger schools. He had to beg to get on their schedules. But, he won his fair share. Frankly, he embarrassed the shit out of better programs. Not every game, but a lot.

ML can run circles around most coaches. But, none are going to give him a win. He's got to coach every game, all game. This second guessing of his micro-managing is inane. He's got serviceable players, but no real depth. He does what he needs to do to win each game. And when he stops, he loses. Simple as that. 

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/15/2016 12:43:17 PM

Bo, will you concede that ML is responsibility for GW's roster? If not, who is? It's not about in-game coaching to me, it's about not having a complete roster of guys who can play D1 basketball this year. I do think motivating players is a coaches job. Your mention of Cimino giving us 5-10 minutes a game is pie-in-the-sky. Cimino played 9 minutes against Lafayette, 1 minute vs UVA and 2 against Army. It is difficult to imagine him giving us valuable minutes in A10.

Bo on a personal note you are a helluva friend to ML, and I hope he appreciates it.


By: Poog (3,875 posts) - 2/15/2016 1:33:05 PM

I don't know, Rich. I've heard Lonergan take responsibility for losses and I've also heard him shoot straight and say I asked them to do X and they did Y. Yes, he does typically look at a glass half empty. Funny, seems like most posters here do as well. That's his personality. Kids adjust to that. Some stuff may be cringe-worthy to outsiders but laughed off or ignored by those inside. Almost everyone seems happy with the direction of the program under Lonergan but why don't his players smile? Why don't they win all these games against their opponents who obviously don't want to win as much as we should? Why does he foolishly use the 1-3-1 defense in one game when it didn't work at all times and then turns around and foolishly doesn't use it in another game when perhaps it would have confounded the opposition? Is he perfect? NO, nobody is. Is he beyond reproach? NO, why have fans if they can't second guess or easily make the right moves from the peanut gallery? And oh yeah, why does he recruit players who don't fit in at GW or able to play at the A-10 D-1 level under his system? Matter of fact, why the heck are there so many collegiate transfers every year from everywhere? Don't those coaches know how to identify player skill levels and properly coach, utilize and motivate them?

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/15/2016 2:31:37 PM

I believe that ML as any coach has a lot of things he's responsible for.

1) Recruiting - we've discussed his successes and failures. This thread isn't about that.

2) Game management. Many have discussed this but I don't because I just don't have enough expertise to do so. This thread isn't about that.

3) All the other stuff that takes place before and after the games. That's really what this thread is about. Getting players ready to put effort into games happens before the game. Developing players happens year round and mostly outside of the games. That is the type of coaching I'm talking about.

So - I say effort is coachable and that these players are coachable. So if they aren't consistently putting forth effort to me that's coaching. Bo, you can say that effort is coachable and the players are coachable but that they're too worn out to put forth consistent effort. Do I think this is a factor for say Kevlar and Cavanaugh?

Cavanaugh is averaging 30.2 minutes per game and in the last 5 games (after the horrific double OT game against Richmond) he's played 30, 31, 28, 28, and 34 minutes. That doesn't seem like a real grind me down workload.

Kevlar I can totally see it. He's averaging 33.7 minutes a game and in his last five he's played 35, 31, 36, 35, and 32. And he's a lot bigger. That's a lot of minutes so could he be worn down definitely.

Garino has by far been playing the most minutes - he's only sat for 11 minutes total in the last 5 games - but his effort has been more consistently there than anyone else's.

But Yuta and Paul certainly aren't worn down from so many minutes. It seems both have regressed. How is that not coaching? Unless you're saying that they were recruiting mistakes as well.

If you are right and Roland has the talent to play but his "head" isn't right, isn't that the ultimate thing that coaches are supposed to address?

So lack of effort can come from being worn out physically and it can come from being worn out by the coach as well. If your players aren't tough enough to take your coaching then I'd like to see the coaching a little more aware of that.

And the development of players factors in as well because if players don't develop then they can't play and then you are left having to play the reamining players too many minutes such that you can't get enough effort because they're worn out.

So if:

1)  You are getting virtually no contributions from Cimino, Swan, Goss, Sina (redshirt), Roland, or Hart, even though Swan, Roland and Hart appear to have the talent to contribute, and

2)  You have a regression in play from Yuta and Paul so they are not having the impact one would expect at this point,

3)  Kevlar gets worn down from too many minutes

We're left with all these things bleeding together and result is a late year collapse two years in a row. Guys lacking effort in games, not developing into better players and on and on.

By: ziik (2,950 posts) - 2/15/2016 2:53:54 PM

Yuta is rebounding the ball, playing D, handling the ball a bit, and, most of all, blocking shots. He also is driving the hoop, instead of just laying off for the 3. 

ML is helping Yuta transform himself into a complate ball player. Open your eyes, gents. There is a big picture.

By: GW69 (2/15/2016 3:11:44 PM)

The issue for me is not that the program hasn't improved under ML,

it clearly has. What we might be seeing now with a possible repitition

of last years "collapse" is that given his style(micromanaging) and 

abilities at recruiting is that this type of season becomes the standard

for seasons to come.Probably need one more year to know.



By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/15/2016 3:29:57 PM

Poog, show me where I criticized ML's in-game coaching. I said it's not in-game coaching. I do agree ML is far from perfect. If you want to address me discuss things I mentioned. Thank you in advance. ML could have taught his daughter a valuable lesson by explaining that someone made a mistake and that happens at JV BB and in the real world. But no instead he mishandled the whole situation. And then outs himself. Nice play calling. It wasn't funny to Comcast, MSN, USA Today, WaPo is that the kind of publicity you want for GW? I guess you do.

By: GW69 (2/15/2016 3:38:59 PM)

The issue for me is not that the program hasn't improved under ML,

it clearly has. What we might be seeing now with a possible repitition

of last years "collapse" is that given his style(micromanaging) and 

abilities at recruiting is that this type of season becomes the standard

for seasons to come.Probably need one more year to know.



By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 3:46:15 PM

Thinker - effort may or may not be coachable. Depends on one's motor and mentality. There is an old expression that inconsistent motor guys can be coach killers because they tease you on some nights into believing that should be every night but in the end they almost always let you down. It's far easier to deal with guys on either end of the spectrum.

As for JR, if you address it directly too much you may make the problem worse. Sometimes, you just have to let the player grow out of it. 

Finally, there is a great expression in coaching and it is true for all the good/great ones - the players have to adjust to the coaching not the other way around. That's not to say ML doesn't need to adjust any that's to say he has certain non-negotiable aspects of his program that he is not yielding on - many of which we all like - high character guys or you have to play defense to get on the floor.

Poog you need to stop being so damn reasonable :-)

By: GW69 (2/15/2016 4:08:00 PM)

Apprentice,Journeyman,Master,Virtuoso. ML is at the "low master"

level right now. We will see if he can move up to "full master" or not.

Obviously, few move on from there.

By: Bigfan (2,829 posts) - 2/15/2016 4:16:34 PM

The sad part of this is that,with opinions raging on both sides,there is a bit of truth to most every argument on this thread.

Which,in a nutshell, can explain the raging and head-shaking inconsistencies we see from this team.

By: Poog (3,875 posts) - 2/15/2016 4:17:08 PM

Rich: I'm not sure where I get the hall pass to address you but I did read you write that Lonergan "...constantly points out the flaws in the players yet takes no responsibility in a loss." I was responding to that by saying that he has taken responsibility and also saying that he ALSO says his players don't always do what he instructs. As for your obsession with the JV girls basketball game and the purported missed Dalai Lama opportunity by Lonergan, I'm a little perplexed. First, I never mentioned it in my unauthorized post that addressed you so I'm not exactly sure why you mentioned it. That aside, isn't it possible that the Lonergans could have had a kitchen table discussion after the game at home about the situation? Isn't it conceivable that your desired teaching moment (whatever the lesson is supposed to be) is better handled in a calmer setting with more facts in hand rather than in the heat of the moment with a justifiably upset teenager? You keep wanting to describe this as an unfunny situation because several posters thought that it was. Guess that's what RKelley keeps writing about with all those stats about offensive inefficiencies. You obviously see something offensive that is harmful to Lonergan as GW's coach and to the institution itself, many of us simply dismiss this as something of little concern other than to keep this thread alive to the consternation of others. Now as to where I can get that permission slip...

By: maypoman (671 posts) - 2/15/2016 4:52:54 PM

Maybe Lonergan should just coach the OOC part of the season and the assistants should take over for the A10 portion. 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 5:01:09 PM

Who knew we had all these coaching geniuses in our midsts? I am truly honored to be posting on a board with the anonymous screen names for Krzyzewski. Williams, Izzo, Boeheim etc. Herve you have really outdone yourself this time.

By: notta hater (2,492 posts) - 2/15/2016 5:04:28 PM

I think he has done a fair amount with players who have a ceiling on their abilities. Is there a coach who could get more by changing the system - i donno - Is there a coach who could get more via game situation strategy - i donno - Is there a coach who could get more by careful subbing to preserve the players for critical stretches - i donno. Is there a coach who can get 3-5 FTA  and 3-4 no-calls per game because he knows how to coax the refs - i donno. Is there a coach who could get about 3-5 more baskets per game and a few more rebounds because he is a leader who motivates his team and they respond - i donno . . . .

By: Hugh Jaynus (5 posts) - 2/15/2016 5:20:43 PM

Poog...RKelley's bottom line is that Hart needs to start. I do not waste my time reading anymore of his posts with all those numbers that are not really reliable due to the fact he plays 5 mins a game. Obviously his stats per entire game are gonna look very good.  And Rich just wants to talk about a JV girls basketball game.  Move on, for all of us.

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/15/2016 5:22:36 PM

Poog, I'm in a rush so will only address one issue. That is ML's misadventures at a JV game. Why don't people like you, Poog, admit what most of us know ML screwed up? No Poog Comcast, MSN, WaPo, USA Today put his antics in the funnies right. You have some sense of humor. Sorry Poog we agree on most things but not here. Also. kiss my ass and you get a permission slip OK. The End.

By: GW69 (2/15/2016 6:22:29 PM)

I vote for Rich.ML made a mistake. "little league derangement syndrome"

He,of all people, should know better.Not the end of the world,just a 

mistake.This whole episode may turn out to be more of a teachable 

moment for him than his daughter.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 6:39:46 PM

I don't think ML has nor should he have given it another thought since last week. But GW69 you are welcome to use it as a teachable moment for your family. And while you are at it perhaps you and SW (assuming you are 2 different people) can also teach the importance of knowing the actual facts and not exaggerating a situation to be as you might want it to be.

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 6:42:51 PM

I guess Rich can also use this as a teachable moment too!

By: Rich Maier (17 posts) - 2/15/2016 6:51:49 PM

Bo, obviously you don't play poker. You should learn when to fold a losing hand. 

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/15/2016 7:23:04 PM is one thing to address what appear to be criticism of the coach with arguments why the critics are off base, but I think you are off base on your comments that essentially say that the posters should not do so because we are not Krzyzewski. Williams, Izzo, Boeheim, etc.  This is a discussion board, and whereas I disagree with much of what is being said, I certainly understand the viewpoints of those who are saying it.   We did not have to be a baseball manager to criticize Williams for pulling Zimmerman in the playoffs last year.   We did not have to be politicians to criticize Middle East strategy.   We are just discussing these things, most (but not all) of which has been in a fairly rational manner.   Sadly, for the second year in a row, things have fallen apart during conference play, and we do not need to be John Wooden or Al McQuire to opine that part of the problem may be the coaching.  As I said previously, there is probably plenty of blame ot go around.  

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 7:55:01 PM

Rich - perhaps you should take your own advice. My hand is pretty strong and I can read a bluffer a mile away. 

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 8:38:46 PM

LSF, everything in this game does not come down to coaching except for those who never coached. ML was not out coached against SJU. He was out manned that night - they executed and played better. No telling what will happen if we play them again. That is the rational explanation except if someone wants to believe ML did not have SJU scouted or the team practiced while mysteriously just days earlier he had VCU scouted and prepared for. We have people here telling us that ML is too tough on the players or in the alternative they won't play hard for him. Yet we've seen plenty of evidence to the contrary (VCU, Virginia and 16 other wins). Seriously, on what basis does someone make such a nonsense comment? 

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/15/2016 9:41:25 PM


I understand your argument that uneven and inconsistent effort from this team is primarily a function of

1) Innate and inalterable qualities of the players, and

2) Some of the players have gotten worn out because of playing a heavy load of minutes, and 

3) Not something that coaching can really address.

I don't agree but we've both laid out our views and so people can decide for themselves.

But what of my other issue -- that players are not improving? I understand your point on Roland - that he essentially has to work through his performance issues on his own. Again, I can't agree with that. But what of the apparent regression of Yuta and Paul? Is Yuta's entire year long shooting funk something that he just needs to work out on his own? I'd think that's what a coach is for.Every game Paul looks more lost. How is that not coaching?

By: Bo Knows (705 posts) - 2/15/2016 11:25:25 PM

Thinker - let me ask you this. Don't you think Yuta works on his shooting almost every day? Do you think they don't practice that? Do you want ML to take the shots for him? I am not sure what you would like ML exactly to do. Your posts just sound "do something do anything" to me. It doesn't work that way unfortunately.

By: thinker (2,825 posts) - 2/16/2016 2:24:25 AM

Do something do anything? What is it that I've said to convey that? I've always understood the point of coaching is to find a way to reach a player and help him overcome his internal and external struggles and maximize his performance. So I would want ML to coach the players. Unless you're saying that when I player loses his confidence and his shot mechanics get lost that's not coachable either. 

By: Tennessee Colonial (1,179 posts) - 2/16/2016 7:22:06 AM


Also a reason for us falling apart this year as well as last year at this time is that we play the top teams in our conference this time of year. That's why the loss to St. Louis and Richmond really hurt. If you can't win those, what can you expect to do against the better teams?  And I don't buy the tired thing. If an old man like me (over 60) can hoof it up the high ranges of Yosemite doing 12-15 miles a day with a pack, then these young college level players can play 40 minute games. Dayton players had no problem with it. 

By: GW69 (2/16/2016 7:39:43 AM)

Bo-did George Bush keep us safe?

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/16/2016 8:37:41 AM

All I was saying Bo was that in the St Joes game, the Hawks seemed to have had our number on both offense and defense   They seemed to have a better game plan. Jeez.   They blew us out on our own court in what may have been our most important game of the season and that both the players and coach  are likely to blame.  We have seen far too often all season that the team was unable to respond to the other teams best shot, be it DePaul, St. Louis down the stretch or Richmond.  

By: GW (2/16/2016 9:01:18 AM)

Saturday 8 min to play down 10 inbounding under our goal after a media time out. JMac has the ball surely ML has a play. We need a hoop. 5 second violation, another of many empty trips on the day. Bona hits a 3 moments later, game over. Senior PG cannot find a man, we don't have a play for a good look. Failure of execution and coaching. Sums up the day. Frames the debate.

By: Long Suffering Fan (4,106 posts) - 2/16/2016 7:11:12 PM

All I was saying Bo was that in the St Joes game, the Hawks seemed to have had our number on both offense and defense   They seemed to have a better game plan. Jeez.   They blew us out on our own court in what may have been our most important game of the season and that both the players and coach  are likely to blame.  We have seen far too often all season that the team was unable to respond to the other teams best shot, be it DePaul, St. Louis down the stretch or Richmond.  

By: RKelley (152 posts) - 2/19/2016 12:05:12 AM

I believe in ML. Whenever I've doubted him, he has reassured me. He's fairly candid in interviews, and he's a very smart, progressive coach.

Recruiting is largely a matter of money. Probably not news.

ML has found some excellent, underrated talents and attracted some star-level overlooked transfers to piece together a tournament caliber team. Unless some more money is put into the program, this is the best it gets. 

Some of the things he did this year, even if they didn't work out perfectly, were pretty intelligent in theory. The no-fouls defense was a very smart move given the rule changes and the direction of the NCAA. He recognized the way the NCAA was changing the game, and looked at his team's skills, and managed to create an insane disparity in free points to free points given away.

Unfortunately, our point guards just weren't quick enough. Joe is a great player, but none of the point guards are adept at creating opportunities or space. For this offense, and this mix of players, that's a tough one.

The wings didn't end up having the feet to play perimeter, no-fouls defense, against teams with good guards. Garino has slowed down and Yuta's defense has progressed as well as the coaches probably would've hoped. Pair that with the big men both being offensive-minded players and the problems mounted against players like Terry Allen and talented guards.

This is still a very gifted team. I predict 22 wins. Next year, Sina + Cavanaugh is going to be a lethal mix.

GW RECENT RECRUITING, Classes of 2013 2014 2015...2016

Easy fix for those Pat Andree devotees. We can leave young Pat's thread to Pat Andree: The Dude (529 posts) - 8/10/2015 7:39:09 PM Anyone else here a little concerned about the recent recruiting efforts? The 2013 class was a disaster, the 2015 cl


Top Transfers Sitting Out Next Season (Includes Kethan Savage)