fordhamfans.com
December 13, 2017, 08:04:41 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Login Register  

Harvard @ Fordham Pregame/In-game 12/6/17 7PM


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Harvard @ Fordham Pregame/In-game 12/6/17 7PM  (Read 4195 times)
Richie68
Junior
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1847


View Profile
« Reply #210 on: December 07, 2017, 03:27:50 pm »

-2.  I win.   Wink

Seriously, the players?

Eric Paschall plays 26 mpg for 9-0 number 1 Kenpom ranked Villanova.

Christian Sengfelder plays 27 mpg for 8-1 Bpoise St., Kenpom number 61.

Antwoine Anderson plays 34 mpg for 6-3 UConn, Kenpom #90.

Manny Suarez plays 10 mpg for 6-2 Creighton, Kenpom #32.

Nych Smith plays 20 mpg for 5-4 Winthrop, which went to the NCAAs last year.

Jon Severe played 26 mpg for 22-13 Iona last year.

OK, all except Smyth Pecora recruits.  But Pecora had all of them but Smyth in 2014-15. And went 10-21, 4-14.

Neubauer had them but lost Paschall and the very next year they went 17-14, 8-10.

Quibble about strength of schedule.  But Fordham has had good enough players in certain years and the teams were still awful.

Other teams want those players.  Some pretty good teams.  They play.  They may not be stars.  But they are good NCAA level players.  That's a whole team of them out there.

I know some on here hate mentioning the guys that left, the woe is us and what if.  What I'm talking about is the opposite.

People have bemoaned the level of players for years.  That's not why you were so bad. You had terrible coaches.

You bemoan the facilities.  But those "good" players came here.  They didn't play well for Pecora, or for other coaches in the past.

OK, those players aren't the players on the current team.  And you had late defections and injuries.  But all of these guys would get jobs elsewhere.  I heard it all last year.  This team was that close to .500 in A-10 for the first time in a decade. Blown late lead to GW, and to Duquesne.  And all I hear is oh we don't have players when you were 0-3.  Oh, Bunting can't play.  Now we see he can. 

OK, sure, it's the players.  They are 3-5 and only 8 guys.  But you (not you Ace, I'm speaking of generic fans) have all said it's the players and the facilities again and again, but players that came here are winning players all over the place and still lost here under the wrong coach.

Maybe JN can't overcome all of this.  But you have taken steps in the right direction and what I think is delusional is to think it changes overnight.  Any bumps on the road and a woe is us attitude just swamps the board.  It isn't rational.

And it's also pretty irrational to be optimistic about this year given where things stand.  But they still have to play the games.  And things looked suck ass  last year and still ended up with some fun basketball and some nice wins, if ultimately disappointing.  The 2 years combined are light years ahead of anything for a long time.     

Guys are missing.  Evans and raut are freshmen.  It takes time.  each of the last 2 years we got better as the season went on.  I don't like crapping the out of conference bed.  Maybe sometime we'll be good and lucky at the same time.

While I think you make a good argument (although reading your lengthy posts is a bit hard on the eyes Evil), I think that having an offensive set up based upon shooting the 3 pointer doesn't really work if your team is dead last in 3 point shooting percentage.  I know that you have laid out the fact that it is a small sample of games and that these guys shot the 3 much better in their prior careers.  But this overlooks the fact that they really never played with an offensive strategy like this.  Their prior 3 point history was almost certainly based on offenses where they took the 3 when it was available and they felt comfortable.

In our current set up, the offensive game plan is to play basically a half court offense based upon passing the ball around or penetration dribbling and then pass it out to the open man for the 3 pointer.  Unfortunately , we are passing too much and dribbling too much deep into the shot clock so that the result is that the man getting the 3 must shoot with only a few seconds to go.  This is not conducive to hitting those 3's with much success. 

I think JN has to modify this set up and have his players manage the clock a lot better.  This is what I intended to post above.  (My post is a little long too.  Cheesy)
Report Spam   Logged
drunkle
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 741


View Profile
« Reply #211 on: December 07, 2017, 03:38:36 pm »

You mention a bunch of players that are not here, some whose eligibility has been exhausted or would be if they had stayed. That is too small a scattering, you need 2 or 3 of those type of guys every year to be successful. How many of those guys you mention were all A10?

But let's say I give it to you and it is not difficult to recruit here, so what you are saying is that Neubauer and staff suck as recruiters?

I am not saying it isn't hard to recruit here.  I am saying good enough players were here.  A smattering of guys, ok, but 5 of them listed were all here under Pecora in 14-15, and Mandell Thomas, Rhoomes, Bryan Smith and Zarkovic.  That's plenty for 200 minutes a game.

Yes, you need players, and this year we have injuries (counting Zarko, 3 guys) and guys defected.  Which is the college hoops landscape nowadays.  And we have 2 guys transferring in taking up spots.  Syracuse is playing 7 guys.  So is Georgia Tech.  Not saying we are that level, but a lot of teams have that issue, even big schools.  But I think maybe we gambled this year with 2 transfers and then Chuba and Bunting hurt.

This is basically only JN's 2nd class.  He was hired March 30, 2015, he had no shot at that year really and lost Paschall.

More and better players obviously helps.  It isn't why the team was awful for 25 years save a couple of Whitt years, and neither are the facilities. Those are symptoms, and a good coach and staff can, to a degree, overcome that. Maybe JN isn't that coach.  I don't know.  I like the 2 guys coming in next year.  And Portley.  Gazi less enthused, but lots of guys take time.

This year stinks so far but the talent level of the players only explains so much.  Why they are so much worse than they have been even while here in the past is a different story.  It's their mindset and their team play that is worse than their physical level of ability.  And part of that is on JN, but on the whole of the evidence over 2 years I'd say things aren't as bleak as they look and will get better.
Report Spam   Logged
drunkle
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 741


View Profile
« Reply #212 on: December 07, 2017, 03:43:01 pm »

While I think you make a good argument (although reading your lengthy posts is a bit hard on the eyes Evil), I think that having an offensive set up based upon shooting the 3 pointer doesn't really work if your team is dead last in 3 point shooting percentage.  I know that you have laid out the fact that it is a small sample of games and that these guys shot the 3 much better in their prior careers.  But this overlooks the fact that they really never played with an offensive strategy like this.  Their prior 3 point history was almost certainly based on offenses where they took the 3 when it was available and they felt comfortable.

In our current set up, the offensive game plan is to play basically a half court offense based upon passing the ball around or penetration dribbling and then pass it out to the open man for the 3 pointer.  Unfortunately , we are passing too much and dribbling too much deep into the shot clock so that the result is that the man getting the 3 must shoot with only a few seconds to go.  This is not conducive to hitting those 3's with much success. 

I think JN has to modify this set up and have his players manage the clock a lot better.  This is what I intended to post above.  (My post is a little long too.  Cheesy)

Apologies for the length of the posts.  For a message board format too much and I should probably start a blog if I'm going into so much detail.

And while the sample was small it's getting bigger and no denying it.  The shooting stinks.
Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #213 on: December 07, 2017, 03:49:17 pm »

If guys were shooting a little below their expected averages and this was the result I would have a different take.  But these guys are shooting at a rate far below their capability.  I think we can all agree these guys are not that bad shooters.  We would be 5-3 even if we shot slighly worse than last year. They might not be good but they are not the worst in the nation. It is crazy.
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 508


View Profile
« Reply #214 on: December 07, 2017, 03:56:20 pm »

No I'm not.         

   If it takes so many words to make your point, you must be wrong  Wink

   Look, I've argued that we have had and can get better players to come here.  But if you're impressed with the players we've gotten here, it is reasonable to think that we'd do even better with modern facilities and a modern program.  There's a big part of turning those losses around to wins.

   The athletes you listed moved on to squads with better surrounding casts and mostly better facilities.  I believe that impacts their production in many ways.

   If you're saying that we just need a coach who can both get the talent and be a good tactician, then I agree.  But as you say, it is a difficult job as constituted.
Report Spam   Logged
ace93
Arbitrary and Capricious Administrator
Raging Lunatic
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21100



View Profile
« Reply #215 on: December 07, 2017, 04:10:16 pm »

  If it takes so many words to make your point, you must be wrong  Wink

   Look, I've argued that we have had and can get better players to come here.  But if you're impressed with the players we've gotten here, it is reasonable to think that we'd do even better with modern facilities and a modern program.  There's a big part of turning those losses around to wins.

   The athletes you listed moved on to squads with better surrounding casts and mostly better facilities.  I believe that impacts their production in many ways.

   If you're saying that we just need a coach who can both get the talent and be a good tactician, then I agree.  But as you say, it is a difficult job as constituted.

Precisely.

And I did take note that you have always been one to argue that we have had and can get better players to come here. That made your previous post even more on the mark, in my view.
Report Spam   Logged

Nothing replaces success in the revenue sports.  Nothing.  That's not to take away from the success in the Olympic sports - they do matter.  It isn't a replacement for success in the flagship sports. - Debbie Yow, AD - NC State
greenwood
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 763


View Profile
« Reply #216 on: December 07, 2017, 04:42:09 pm »

Regarding the returning players who I have seen shoot 3s better -

Chartouny has the most near misses, in and outs, and is the best bet to improve
Tavares I feel will always be streaky from deep
Slanina at times does not rise up confidently and is the guy who before he releases it you can best predict whether it's going in or not
Havsa is not a 3 point shooter and the GW game was blind squirrel finding an acorn
Pekarek is a raft adrift in a nor'easter
Report Spam   Logged
drunkle
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 741


View Profile
« Reply #217 on: December 07, 2017, 04:43:17 pm »

Precisely.

And I did take note that you have always been one to argue that we have had and can get better players to come here. That made your previous post even more on the mark, in my view.

Those are fair points, both you guys.  To a degree I'm talking this group, but mostly can it be done at all.
Report Spam   Logged
VTRAM
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2576


View Profile
« Reply #218 on: December 07, 2017, 04:57:06 pm »

Regarding the returning players who I have seen shoot 3s better -

Chartouny has the most near misses, in and outs, and is the best bet to improve
Tavares I feel will always be streaky from deep
Slanina at times does not rise up confidently and is the guy who before he releases it you can best predict whether it's going in or not
Havsa is not a 3 point shooter and the GW game was blind squirrel finding an acorn
Pekarek is a raft adrift in a nor'easter

Pretty much agree here. I don;t expect Tavares, Havsa or Pekarek to make huge jumps in 3%. Slanina has been fine.

It really comes down to Chartouny, Hicks, Evans, Raut. Those 4 have taken 114 3's and made 28. 25% form the 4 guys we would have expected to be our best 3 point shooters. Just not good enough.

We need less takes from Taveres, Havsa, and Pekarek and more makes from the other 5. Really as simple as that. The rest of the coaching stuff is small bananas comparatively. 
Report Spam   Logged
Kaup
Freshman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 358


View Profile
« Reply #219 on: December 07, 2017, 05:25:01 pm »

Better facilities certainly sweetens our sales pitch to recruits, but it's not happening any time soon, so let's move on.  There are other programs with less to sell than Fordham who have more consistent success (Or should I say any success) on the hardwood.

As has been pointed out, we certainly haven't had overpowering talent here, but it has been decent (Jashire Hardnett starts at BYU incidentally, and I didn't see his name on any of the lists of transfers).  The problem has been our coaching hires have been abysmal and, for the most part, predictably so. 

As I recall, Nick left Hill arguably the best backcourt in the A10, the 6th Man of the Year and the A10's Most Improved Player.  Not a bare cupboard. Admittedly I thought we were on our way to the big time when that coaching hire was announced and, on paper, we saw a quantum surge in recruiting.  Most of those players didn't pan out and if they did, it wasn't at Fordham.  Bottom line, Hill was the wrong hire for numerous reasons (personality, over coaching and under teaching, understanding and comfort level with Fordham and the college game in general, to name a few short comings), and I would have expected our AD who has spent most of his life on or around the basketball court to have a better understanding of who would be a good fit at the university he graduated from and worked at for most of his adult life.

Enter DW.  A college basketball icon who, despite his pedigree and resume, took nearly two decades to get his first head coaching job and it's at ... Wagner?!?  I remember watching their NCAA Tourny game against Pitt in 2003 and thinking, he's just gonna let these kids run up and down the floor with Pitt and get blown out without coaching or making any adjustments at all!  His success at Wagner was based on his ability to out recruit his competition in a lesser conference.  Now he and his staff brought in some talented recruits, but they couldn't coach or develop talent.  To succeed at Fordham,. you have to be a decent recruiter and a decent coach since you're not likely to out recruit the rest of the conference.  Another big name signing, but a competent AD sniffs out DW's weaknesses and his name drops off the list of candidates.

Fast forward to Pecora.  See the paragraph above.  Again, the AD fails to do his due diligence and makes the easy hire after fraudulently announcing a national search.  Malpractice his part which would never be accepted in the private sector (Possibly more malpractice on the part of that used car salesman/head coach, but I digress.).

So now we know what the problem has been for the last 25-30 years.  The minor successes we have had since the early 90s have been despite our AD, and that's a recipe for failure.  Now we've got a new AD, who will still have to fight through the usual Fordham administrative b.s. and meddling BOTs, but I think he's hired our best coach in 20 years (I'm also anxious to see who he lands as our new football coach.).

I like Neubauer and believe he can coach, but he needs to make some adjustments both on the offensive end of the floor, and with how he engages the Fordham community.  We'll see what happens, but the problem isn't our gym, offices or training facilities.  They don't help matters, and it's easy to point to them as the problem, but the problem had been our inability to identify and support to the best of Fordham's ability qualified coaching candidates.  I'm pissed about the results so far, but not yet ready to bury Neubauer under the Rose Hill Gymnasium.

p.s.  Video of Harvard's game winning 3 was just a part of the opening to Around The Horn.  That should cheer everyone up.
Report Spam   Logged
Hambletonian46
Waterboy

Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #220 on: December 07, 2017, 07:39:25 pm »

I tend to agree with drunkie. We have had decent enough players. are they the best? no, but for a team in their part of the ocean they are perfectly serviceable.

the issue in my mind is execution. they do not execute well at all. the question that remains is whether it is because they are under-coached or are chronic under-performers. They just don't seem to care enough to be precise, make those FT's and open threes, protect the ball, watch the effing shot clock. they need to expect more from themselves. they shoot airball after airball, they look like they are playing a pickup game.
Report Spam   Logged
Richie68
Junior
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1847


View Profile
« Reply #221 on: December 08, 2017, 01:31:12 am »

More briefly than i said before, I reiterate, I think we have such a bad 3 point shooting percentage because we are taking the shots too late into the 30 seconds allowed as the shot clock winds down when you have to hoist it up.  Added pressure and not always when you're ready to shoot. 

I think these guys can probably shoot the 3 a lot better but I've seen guys pass up open 3's early to work it around instead and I've seen this quite frequently during the games. 
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #222 on: December 08, 2017, 08:03:16 am »

Facilities is not the issue here. These are D-1 basketball players who have been recruited to our conference level and some, above. That means you should be capable of hitting a wide open 3 pointer, kids in the 8th grade can do that.  I dont like the offense and I dont like al lthe combo guards, but it does create enough opportunities.

The offense is a bit slow and predictable, however, there are enough wide open threes being created to at least make it effective on paper. So right now, the problem is the players. Plain and simple. Evans was an Oklahoma State recruit, one of the highest regarded recruits we have had in years, and he clanks 0-17 to start season. Wasnt Perris Hicks a UTEP target? Chartounty was the A-10 rookie of year and he is shooting 15% from 3.....

We are dead last in the country at 3 point shooting, in an offense predicated on the 3. That is not facilities. We are not signing guys who had no other D1 offers or no other  options, these are guys recruited at the A-10 level,the mid major level and in some cases, the high major level.

Its the players at this juncture.  Tavares is 25% from 3....Chartouny .156 from 3, Evans  .095 from 3, and alas Mr. Blutarski......Havsa is .000 from 3 point land.... .........the drunk kids in skinny jeans shoot better than that during the halftime contests......so something is wildly amiss in the preparation and the game execution....change something...do something different, change the routine.....simply waiting for trhe day that the 3's start to fall is akin to Frank waiting for the day he gets a check for $50M for a new arena.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2017, 08:26:21 am by 85 » Report Spam   Logged
PA Ram
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2205



View Profile
« Reply #223 on: December 08, 2017, 08:31:36 am »

The D is good enough to win games against good teams.  When the 3's start falling we'll have enough good wins to feel good about the development of the team and to get pumped about next year.  That's my expectation given the pattern the last few years.  It's better than previous patterns of starting off with an inkling of promise and then rapidly circling the drain. 

Coach em up but double down on what has been an awful offense imo.  Evans will eventually break through and when the 3's start falling, combined with our D, I could see us doing better than expected in A10 play.  If I wasn't an optimist I would have left here long ago.

The one thing that baffles me most since I'm a guy who is not as in tune with the details of the team as you guys are is Havsa.  He was such a revelation last year and appeared to be good enough to be one of the focal points of our offense this year.  Now, not only is he not producing but I see you guys ripping him in a way that makes me think there was off the court stuff (or prima donna stuff) that went on.  Is that right or is it just that he's playing horribly and everyone's pissed?
Report Spam   Logged
RamFan78
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2061


View Profile
« Reply #224 on: December 08, 2017, 08:54:16 am »

The D is good enough to win games against good teams.  When the 3's start falling we'll have enough good wins to feel good about the development of the team and to get pumped about next year.  That's my expectation given the pattern the last few years.  It's better than previous patterns of starting off with an inkling of promise and then rapidly circling the drain. 

Coach em up but double down on what has been an awful offense imo.  Evans will eventually break through and when the 3's start falling, combined with our D, I could see us doing better than expected in A10 play.  If I wasn't an optimist I would have left here long ago.

The one thing that baffles me most since I'm a guy who is not as in tune with the details of the team as you guys are is Havsa.  He was such a revelation last year and appeared to be good enough to be one of the focal points of our offense this year.  Now, not only is he not producing but I see you guys ripping him in a way that makes me think there was off the court stuff (or prima donna stuff) that went on.  Is that right or is it just that he's playing horribly and everyone's pissed?

Right now with the D as it is we are not even beating mediocre teams. As good as it is it can't make up for the lousy offense we have. If that is the case not sure how you think it will be good enough to produce wins against good teams. Its too much of a difference to make up for. Also think about this. We are shooting this bad right now and missing uncontested shots. When we play better teams their defense will be better and thus the shots will be contested more. I am not sure I see a dramatic improvement in shooting.
Report Spam   Logged
ace93
Arbitrary and Capricious Administrator
Raging Lunatic
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21100



View Profile
« Reply #225 on: December 08, 2017, 08:59:35 am »

Right now with the D as it is we are not even beating mediocre teams. As good as it is it can't make up for the lousy offense we have. If that is the case not sure how you think it will be good enough to produce wins against good teams. Its too much of a difference to make up for. Also think about this. We are shooting this bad right now and missing uncontested shots. When we play better teams their defense will be better and thus the shots will be contested more. I am not sure I see a dramatic improvement in shooting.

Not surprising, and I don't mean that in a bad way. It is a realistic view, though some might say pessimistic. I tend to be a bit of a pessimist myself, though I'd argue that I am a realist as well. PA Ram clearly said he is an optimist.
Report Spam   Logged

Nothing replaces success in the revenue sports.  Nothing.  That's not to take away from the success in the Olympic sports - they do matter.  It isn't a replacement for success in the flagship sports. - Debbie Yow, AD - NC State
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #226 on: December 08, 2017, 09:01:57 am »

I think this is where we need a new term, I'm a "Fordhamist. "     Part masochist, part optimist, significantly pessimist, yet always loyalist.
Report Spam   Logged
ace93
Arbitrary and Capricious Administrator
Raging Lunatic
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21100



View Profile
« Reply #227 on: December 08, 2017, 09:03:48 am »

I think this is where we need a new term, I'm a "Fordhamist. "     Part masochist, part optimist, significantly pessimist, yet always loyalist.

I like it. Let's make t-shirts!
Report Spam   Logged

Nothing replaces success in the revenue sports.  Nothing.  That's not to take away from the success in the Olympic sports - they do matter.  It isn't a replacement for success in the flagship sports. - Debbie Yow, AD - NC State
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #228 on: December 08, 2017, 09:31:38 am »

I think this is where we need a new term, I'm a "Fordhamist. "     Part masochist, part optimist, significantly pessimist, yet always loyalist.

This is awesome.
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #229 on: December 08, 2017, 09:31:51 am »


My goodness I just watched it.

I think taking a knee may have been appropriate this time, like please god make it stop!
Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #230 on: December 08, 2017, 09:37:46 am »

My goodness I just watched it.

I think taking a knee may have been appropriate this time, like please god make it stop!

Jimmy Hendrix he is not.  Should have known right there that night was not going to end well. 
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #231 on: December 08, 2017, 09:38:35 am »

Nothing against the kid but you had the military color guard, and about 6 fans in their 90's.  sort of like that scene from Back to the Future. Know your audience for god sakes....or lack thereof.
Report Spam   Logged
drunkle
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 741


View Profile
« Reply #232 on: December 08, 2017, 10:36:59 am »

Right now with the D as it is we are not even beating mediocre teams. As good as it is it can't make up for the lousy offense we have. If that is the case not sure how you think it will be good enough to produce wins against good teams. Its too much of a difference to make up for. Also think about this. We are shooting this bad right now and missing uncontested shots. When we play better teams their defense will be better and thus the shots will be contested more. I am not sure I see a dramatic improvement in shooting.

As far as improvement against better D's, 3 shooting is pretty random.  Havsa was 0-5 in ooc last year, 7-15 in conference.  Pekarek was 3-17 OOC his freshman year, 23-70 in conference.  Which isn't great but I'd take 32% from the bench.  Right now they are playing awfully.  Pekarek played 22 mpg as a frosh in conference for an 8-10 team against A-10 foes.  Havsa played 18 mpg in conference last year.  They are playing awfully, no doubt.  Just playing up to prior levels, which isn't great, would really improve the team.  And they are playing lesser roles than they were before, even on an 8 man team.  Hard to fathom but they may be called upon for more, but oddly enough they delivered before when you wouldn't think they could.

The team as a whole actually shot better from 3 in conference last year than in OOC.  .324 in OOC (which seems like Nirvana now), versus .342 in conference. Hawkins went from 27.8% to 40.4%.  Anderson went from 28.2% to 37.8%.  Sengfelder did the opposite.  It's pretty random.

Not sure why we've been so awful this year, but everyone seems to be underperforming at once, and by a wide margin.  Just hoping that in general Evans and the whole team improve as the season goes along and gets acclimated to this level, as the teams have done the past couple of years.  Unfortunately last year and this we are burying ourselves early.

One problem now is that,as the sample size grows, it starts to look like Pekarek is just a 25% shooter from 3, not the 32% he managed in conference his freshman year.  That Havsa likewise is a 25% shooter over a larger sample.  And worse, that Tavares is a 30% shooter (below that this year), and that JC is a 33% shooter.  That's now his career %, over a fairly large sample.  He looked good last year.  Now he's lost.  Overall our 8 guys have shot .301 from 3, 217-719, in their careers.  Which again is actually a lot better than they have shot this year.  But nothing to shoot for.  A very sad benchmark.  That's how bad they have been to start the year. They will have to get better.  Even if they take fewer 3s they can't win shooting under 33%.

Players can of course get better.  Even in season.  If they start to make some hopefully it becomes infectious.  Certainly the awful shooting has been pretty viral thus far.

Report Spam   Logged
RamFan78
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2061


View Profile
« Reply #233 on: December 08, 2017, 10:49:20 am »

Not surprising, and I don't mean that in a bad way. It is a realistic view, though some might say pessimistic. I tend to be a bit of a pessimist myself, though I'd argue that I am a realist as well. PA Ram clearly said he is an optimist.

Good summation. I am trying to think of a silver lining but its tough right now. I guess one could go along the lines of thinking that no team can shoot this bad for a whole season. Right?
Report Spam   Logged
PA Ram
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2205



View Profile
« Reply #234 on: December 08, 2017, 11:16:14 am »

I think this is where we need a new term, I'm a "Fordhamist. "     Part masochist, part optimist, significantly pessimist, yet always loyalist.
ha!

my name is Fahro ...
Report Spam   Logged
SkipPass71
Freshman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 195


View Profile
« Reply #235 on: December 08, 2017, 11:27:04 am »

THUD!!!!  Is this rock bottom, the proverbial nadir?  Has to be.  Hard to say more than has been said on these pages. It was all downhill following the cool electric guitar "Hendrix" anthem.  Looking around the gym and on the floor, nobody seemed to know how to react to this rendition.  How to describe the play of Harvard for most of the game??...oh yes, INEPT, AWFUL!  We came out with several of our players (I don't have to mention names) preening and with a swagger appropriate for say, an undefeated team.  Some looked like they thought Harlem Globetrotter scouts were in attendance and they were auditioning. As Rizzuto used to say, they were "cutting the pie" in a manner indicating that they were confident in blowing out this hapless Harvard squad!   That's how I saw us allow the pathetically performing Crimson to hang around and ultimately beat us-plus all the reasons cited on these pages.  The expression:  "Can't shoot it into the ocean"  in their case that would include being out there in a boat. I mean, they shot 33% for the game and beat us, in part because we managed to be worse!!  

JN is working hard, but I distinctly saw Amaker look nonplussed (and then maybe thankful?) when at the 10 minute mark during a run that looked like we would pull away, he (JN) called one of his patented time-outs after a make.  This was our next to last TO and it did not, to say the least, work in our favor!

Highlight for me...friend held Christmas party at Silvio's up on So. Broadway in Yonkers.  Went there straight from the game-Excellent!

Bring some toys for kids to the game.  As for our Rams, we need some divine inspiration.  Let's see.

 
Report Spam   Logged
Bay Ridge
Freshman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 364


View Profile
« Reply #236 on: December 08, 2017, 11:36:27 am »

That rendition of the national anthem had everyone ( all 500 of us ) shaking our heads in disbelief. And then everything went downhill from there
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #237 on: December 08, 2017, 11:39:26 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 508


View Profile
« Reply #238 on: December 08, 2017, 11:53:41 am »

The one thing that baffles me most since I'm a guy who is not as in tune with the details of the team as you guys are is Havsa.  He was such a revelation last year and appeared to be good enough to be one of the focal points of our offense this year. 

   This is where I depart.  I didn't think Havsa was cut out for this level based on what I saw.  Certainly not that he was "such a revelation" and "good enough to be one of the focal points of our offense this year".  I think too many here overrate some players and make projections that aren't going to pan out.  You have to look at body mechanics, physical ability, basketball skills, all in context of our competition.
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12670


View Profile
« Reply #239 on: December 08, 2017, 11:55:20 am »

Agreed Vin, he is completely unorthodox, herky jerky. Some guys can play that way.... There was a very small snippet last year where he played well but most people took that with a grain of salt.and gave him a let's wait and see.... I think now, we have seen.......NEXT!
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
traffic-masters
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.203 seconds with 12 queries.