Fire Dave Paulsen / Hire Tony Skinn

[GMUgemini]

There's no point going to the games at home anymore this season if this is the product we are going to be producing for the rest of the season

You do get a chance to see Dayton hang 100 on us and win by 55+ points...that's got to be worth something.

 

[Falco]

And what are you basing that on? Has a new President been named?

No just my stupid opinion

 

[Patriot8]

Alright, I’m in.

 

[tblack33]

Watching this just isn’t fun. I had fun 4 years ago watching us get blown out because I thought there was some hope with a new coach. We play the most uninspired basketball I’ve ever seen at this level. For a school who’s motto is innovation is tradition our offense and defense are beyond stale.

For those that say we don’t have the money for a buy out- after Hewitt was fired we increased average attendance by 500 per game. Does that not cover the 200k per year buyout we would have on Paulsens contract if we fired him but ticket sales/attendance increased? Mason basketball is flatlining here.

 

[p8triotfan4life]

Only person I blame is TOC.

 

[GMUYoda]

You do get a chance to see Dayton hang 100 on us and win by 55+ points...that's got to be worth something.

And watch Toppin dunk and make layups all night? No thanks

 

[tblack33]

And watch Toppin dunk and make layups all night? No thanks

Maybe a good preview for a future wizard?

 

[patriot2000]

The motion offense has been employed by our last two coaches who were unable to post winning records in our league. It requires a couple of things we rarely have, most notably shot creators. Or, maybe more accurately, shot creators who can out-size, out-hustle, out-speed, or out-athlete the opponent.

I just searched and can't find it, but I once read an article about how motion is rarely used in high school or college because it sets most teams up for failure. It can work out of conference better than in conference, where you can sneak up on people with a couple of great athletes who are all clicking at the same time. It can work in conference if you have superior size, strength, and/or athleticism compared to the rest of your conference. But it doesn't work against similar or better talent, especially against coaches who have the type of scouting reports you really only get against league foes.

Compare this to Coach L's scramble defense. He literally wrote the book on it but almost every year vastly altered it or scrapped it because he didn't have the horses to run it. We haven't had the horses to run our last two coaches' offensive schemes, yet have not gone away from it or altered it to a working version. At our level, we need a coach with a great deal of creativity and flexibility, or we need to recruit at the level of vcu.

 

[patriot2000]

Edit/Addition: I searched again and can't find it, but even just reading the Wiki entry on Motion Offense gives you a pretty good idea why it isn't working.

 

[tblack33]

The motion offense has been employed by our last two coaches who were unable to post winning records in our league. It requires a couple of things we rarely have, most notably shot creators. Or, maybe more accurately, shot creators who can out-size, out-hustle, out-speed, or out-athlete the opponent.

I just searched and can't find it, but I once read an article about how motion is rarely used in high school or college because it sets most teams up for failure. It can work out of conference better than in conference, where you can sneak up on people with a couple of great athletes who are all clicking at the same time. It can work in conference if you have superior size, strength, and/or athleticism compared to the rest of your conference. But it doesn't work against similar or better talent, especially against coaches who have the type of scouting reports you really only get against league foes.

Compare this to Coach L's scramble defense. He literally wrote the book on it but almost every year vastly altered it or scrapped it because he didn't have the horses to run it. We haven't had the horses to run our last two coaches' offensive schemes, yet have not gone away from it or altered it to a working version. At our level, we need a coach with a great deal of creativity and flexibility, or we need to recruit at the level of vcu.

I just don’t know if we can even call what we are running this year a motion offense. Where’s the backside movement? Guys reading their defender and screening down, setting back screens/ fades? There is rarely any movement on the weak side until the ball handler gets into trouble then everyone panics.

 

[mkaufman1]

The motion offense has been employed by our last two coaches who were unable to post winning records in our league. It requires a couple of things we rarely have, most notably shot creators. Or, maybe more accurately, shot creators who can out-size, out-hustle, out-speed, or out-athlete the opponent.

I just searched and can't find it, but I once read an article about how motion is rarely used in high school or college because it sets most teams up for failure. It can work out of conference better than in conference, where you can sneak up on people with a couple of great athletes who are all clicking at the same time. It can work in conference if you have superior size, strength, and/or athleticism compared to the rest of your conference. But it doesn't work against similar or better talent, especially against coaches who have the type of scouting reports you really only get against league foes.

Compare this to Coach L's scramble defense. He literally wrote the book on it but almost every year vastly altered it or scrapped it because he didn't have the horses to run it. We haven't had the horses to run our last two coaches' offensive schemes, yet have not gone away from it or altered it to a working version. At our level, we need a coach with a great deal of creativity and flexibility, or we need to recruit at the level of vcu.

I definitely agree with your last piece. I don't think recruiting is an exact science but I do think Dave took things too slow and the few things he took swings on hes missed. Reuter was a disaster (yes he was hurt, but a disaster). Mar was the first difference maker recruit and somehow has forgotten to play the game of basketball. I do say the recruiting has improved, but I think by year 3 or 4 he should have been looking for an additional impact transfer in addition to Reuter just to give the team some experience because you never know. Unfortunately taking things a bit too slow recruiting wise, left very little margin for error.

Here we are in year 5. I have to think next year is NCAA or bust because if he can't win with the team coming back next year he wont. I dont see it happening. I was super patient but you just can't be in year 5 and go backwards. My pitchfork is sharpening and I'm stretching my fingers for what appears to be an inevitable letter to Brad.

 

[patriot2000]

I just don’t know if we can even call what we are running this year a motion offense. Where’s the backside movement? Guys reading their defender and screening down, setting back screens/ fades? There is rarely any movement on the weak side until the ball handler gets into trouble then everyone panics.

Similar to the joke of Hewitt's "motionless motion" offense? Seriously, read the wiki page. "Generally not used because it's too hard to teach." "Takes advantage of superior quickness of the offensive team." Lists the "rules," several of which you mentioned we do not follow.

By the way, my 11-year-old (who has heard me talk about Mason way too much) pointed out tonight our bad luck with coaches with "Paul" in their name.

 

[GMUgemini]

I definitely agree with your last piece. I don't think recruiting is an exact science but I do think Dave took things too slow and the few things he took swings on hes missed. Reuter was a disaster (yes he was hurt, but a disaster). Mar was the first difference maker recruit and somehow has forgotten to play the game of basketball. I do say the recruiting has improved, but I think by year 3 or 4 he should have been looking for an additional impact transfer in addition to Reuter just to give the team some experience because you never know. Unfortunately taking things a bit too slow recruiting wise, left very little margin for error.

Here we are in year 5. I have to think next year is NCAA or bust because if he can't win with the team coming back next year he wont. I dont see it happening. I was super patient but you just can't be in year 5 and go backwards. My pitchfork is sharpening and I'm stretching my fingers for what appears to be an inevitable letter to Brad.

Two years ago, we had 9 scholarship players on this team, 8 were available to play (Reuter was red-shirting). Granted, we had two transfer late (Relvao like right before the season, and I think Newman was a late summer transfer), but even then that's 11 scholarship players and you have 13 scholarships to give, so still you'd think we could have/should have gotten at least one more transfer and a grad transfer or two to come in and fill up all the missing minutes.

I semi-get his reasoning that getting grad transfers would have delayed the development of your freshman (which is a little BS because those freshmen would get to practice against experienced players, not walk-ons, but whatever), but on the other side of the coin, one, we had 8 damn players and three of those were freshman, a fourth was a red-shirt freshman, and two, doesn't winning and being relevant help you recruit better freshmen who might develop quicker/need less coaching up to be impact players?

There was an opportunity cost to squandering Otis's best season in a Mason uniform because he lost his only wingman (Grayer) and had no one else really to play with him.

 

[mkaufman1]

Two years ago, we had 9 scholarship players on this team, 8 were available to play (Reuter was red-shirting). Granted, we had two transfer late (Relvao like right before the season, and I think Newman was a late summer transfer), but even then that's 11 scholarship players and you have 13 scholarships to give, so still you'd think we could have/should have gotten at least one more transfer and a grad transfer or two to come in and fill up all the missing minutes.

I semi-get his reasoning that getting grad transfers would have delayed the development of your freshman (which is a little BS because those freshmen would get to practice against experienced players, not walk-ons, but whatever), but on the other side of the coin, one, we had 8 damn players and three of those were freshman, a fourth was a red-shirt freshman, and two, doesn't winning and being relevant help you recruit better freshmen who might develop quicker/need less coaching up to be impact players?

There was an opportunity cost to squandering Otis's best season in a Mason uniform because he lost his only wingman (Grayer) and had no one else really to play with him.

exactly, and I think we are on the same page here. I was all for a slow build, but I do think a transfer a few years in should have been attempted. So many other schools do it since there’s so many transfers. I probably didn’t say it back then, but now looking back it absolutely could have made a difference even for depth or experience if someone he’s growing needs time. Time is definitely ticking it feels like.

 

[KAOriginal]

Here we are in year 5. I have to think next year is NCAA or bust because if he can't win with the team coming back next year he wont.

Let's be real.....there's nothing...I MEAN NOTHING in the players or more importantly, this coach that says they can make the NCAAs next year.

 

[mkaufman1]

Let's be real.....there's nothing...I MEAN NOTHING in the players or more importantly, this coach that says they can make the NCAAs next year.

yeah, I don’t disagree. As I said, I don’t see it happening. It would take a downright miracle to go from 0-100 like that.

 

[jessej]

At least some of us can make money off these asinine lines we are getting. That’s the only positive from this season. Not sure if I can keep donating to Paulsens experiment.

donate your winnings to the funds to pay for Paulsen's buyout?

 

[GMUgemini]

yeah, I don’t disagree. As I said, I don’t see it happening. It would take a downright miracle to go from 0-100 like that.

AJ would have to stay. Greene would have to become consistent. Miller would have to learn to be more aggressive. You’d have to get big improvements in Hartwell and XJ. You’d have to get massive improvement from Oduro. And Henry would have to be good enough to force Mar on the bench. Oh and either Kolek or Polite would have to be solid enough to be a major rotation player.

In short, a miracle.

 

[gmujim92]

AJ would have to stay. Greene would have to become consistent. Miller would have to learn to be more aggressive. You’d have to get big improvements in Hartwell and XJ. You’d have to get massive improvement from Oduro. And Henry would have to be good enough to force Mar on the bench. Oh and either Kolek or Polite would have to be solid enough to be a major rotation player.

In short, a miracle.

You are forgetting a major piece of the puzzle.

 

[Patriotsince81]

I was curious so I decided to look into DP's record against A10 opponents. Records below include A10 Tournament play.
DP has a losing record against 7 teams. .500 record against 1 team. Winning record against 5 teams.

Dayton 2-2
Duquesne 1-3
Rhode Island 1-4
vcu 2-8
Richmond 6-3
St. Louis 2-5
St. Bonaventure 1-6
Davidson 2-4
GW 4-5
UMass 8-1
LaSalle 3-2
Fordham 3-2
St. Joe's 4-2