The Paul Hewitt Thread

[ArrozBlanco]

My guess is AC only cares about the major numbers like preseason ticket sales (season tickets) and Patriot Club donations. Obviously, these are guaranteed dollars which are unaffected by how the team performs during the season. The only way to take a stand is cancel your season tickets and donations for next season. If you still want to see games, pay the walkup price and sit any where in the empty dome.

 

[Bricker]

Honest question:

Why do sportscasters and other neutral parties always seem to praise Hewitt as being a "good coach" or a "great guy" without being prompted. Even Feinstein did it today, going as far as to speculate on how Hewitt will get the guys going in the right direction over the break.

Is this just some sort of professional courtesy? Or is it like telling your 5 year old that his crayon scribbles are getting better?

 

[gmujim92]

Honest question:

Why do sportscasters and other neutral parties always seem to praise Hewitt as being a "good coach" or a "great guy" without being prompted. Even Feinstein did it today, going as far as to speculate on how Hewitt will get the guys going in the right direction over the break.

Is this just some sort of professional courtesy? Or is it like telling your 5 year old that his crayon scribbles are getting better?

One reason is that many TV people are phony-baloney A-holes who wouldn't know a "good coach" if he walked up and punched them in the face.

I don't doubt that Hewitt is a "great guy," but don't really care, either. People say that about losing coaches all that time. Gimme a douchebag who's a winner, please.

 

[MASONscott]

Honest question:

Why do sportscasters and other neutral parties always seem to praise Hewitt as being a "good coach" or a "great guy" without being prompted. Even Feinstein did it today, going as far as to speculate on how Hewitt will get the guys going in the right direction over the break.

Is this just some sort of professional courtesy? Or is it like telling your 5 year old that his crayon scribbles are getting better?

Hewitt has a very personable and likeable personality one-on-one and in interviews. He comes across as in touch with a bigger picture and about the the game itself.

At least that has been my impression in a couple conversations and when I watched the half - time interview about the three coaches. I'm guessing Feinstein and he got along well this weekend.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

[gmutom]

Gimme a douchebag who's a winner, please.

Are you applying?

 

[gmujim92]

Are you applying?

Nicely done, Tom.

Pretty sure I could have us at 5-4 against this schedule for much, much less than $750,000.

At least the 16-year-olds I coach play their asses off on both ends of the court. That would be a great place for our team to start.

 

[gmutom]

Pretty sure I could have us at 5-4 against this schedule for much, much less than $750,000.

Jim, it's obvious you don't like our coach, and you have every right not to. I just wish you would occasionally throw in some analysis of the players and and what you would like to see us do better to improve as a team. Hewitt's not going anywhere soon, so let's try to look at what we have and what we need to get better.

I've said numerous times I value your input as much as anybody here, so stop ranting for just a second and give your overview of this roster. Surely you can't be happy with Sherrod's performance today.

 

[gmujim92]

Jim, it's obvious you don't like our coach, and you have every right not to. I just wish you would occasionally throw in some analysis of the players and and what you would like to see us do better to improve as a team. Hewitt's not going anywhere soon, so let's try to look at what we have and what we need to get better.

I've said numerous times I value your input as much as anybody here, so stop ranting for just a second and give your overview of this roster. Surely you can't be happy with Sherrod's performance today.

Who's ranting? Honestly, I'm not mad enough to rant anymore.

First of all, we need to play zone exclusively against better teams. We do nothing but give up layups and dunks in the man defense.

Second, since we obviously have no post offense, I would play small with Jenkins/Marko at the 4/5 spots, put Moore at PG and go up-tempo at all times -- turnovers be damned.

Copes and J2 both get to watch. Neither contribute anything anyhow. At least AO hustles and tries to make plays; I'd have him in my "big man" rotation before either of those 2 stiffs.

Our halfcourt offense is just dreadful to watch. We get very few easy baskets, so we need to score before the opposing defense can get set up.

 

[gmutom]

First of all, we need to play zone exclusively against better teams. We do nothing but give up layups and dunks in the man defense.

Second, since we obviously have no post offense, I would play small with Jenkins/Marko at the 4/5 spots, put Moore at PG and go up-tempo at all times -- turnovers be damned.

Copes and J2 both get to watch. Neither contribute anything anyhow. At least AO hustles and tries to make plays; I'd have him in my "big man" rotation before either of those 2 stiffs.

Our halfcourt offense is just dreadful to watch. We get very few easy baskets, so we need to score before the opposing defense can get set up.

Thanks, Jim. I agree with about playing more zone, and it does seem like we looked a little more comfortable today when we did break it out today. We should have used it more. Hopefully, we spend the next two weeks perfecting it. I also agree about Marko and Jenkins. Play them until they pass out or foul out.

 

[KAOriginal]

We should call Siena and get Hewitt's games from there and see what worked with "mid major" kids.

Despite the NC game at GT, everything I read was if you took the NBA talent out of the teams....it would have been worse than it was.

I know we have some boneheads, but I think the Larranaga left overs were recruited for different reasons than what a Hewitt system would be and so..while they may be boneheads, they could still contribute appropriately when needed.

The whole team development vs individual development argument.

 

[Patriot Lawdog]

Well that Mike Lonergan than was given so much more to work with at GW. (Banging head against wall)

 

[CHRISTOPHER JAMES JOLLAY]

First of all, we need to play zone exclusively against better teams.

We can play it more against teams like South Florida and Okie who don't shoot that well and are athletic. Pretty sure the other team being "better" than us shouldn't be the criteria, however.

This argument itself proves in itself it isn't all on Hewitt. I'm pretty sure he might be aware of the keeping between your man and the basket concept, which you would think our guards especially could handle a little better. Feinstein told one of my friends later Mason embarrassed themselves in that regard today. And he's right.

Syracuse plays exclusive zone with long, rangy guys. Not sure a starting lineup of Edwards, Allen, Wright, Williams, Marko even vaguely fits a lineup you want to play too much sagging zone with.

BTW, nobody with a Jimmy L thread? Guess that's only relevant in his good years. Pretty poor losing to a VT squad at home that lost to "USC Upstate" (whatever that is), earlier this year at home.

 

[MasonCrew]

Tom, in defense of Jim, he doesn't need to provide analysis of why Hewitt should go. It should be on you to provide analysis of why he should stay.

Mason is literally awful basketball to watch.

 

[Bricker]

Mason is literally awful basketball to watch?

Not if you're a fan of the opposing team...

 

[KAOriginal]

BTW, nobody with a Jimmy L thread? Guess that's only relevant in his good years. Pretty poor losing to a VT squad at home that lost to "USC Upstate" (whatever that is), earlier this year at home.

The St. Francis loss would be the better game to question.

VT is still an ACC school and #65 RPI right now......

 

[gmujim92]

We can play it more against teams like South Florida and Okie who don't shoot that well and are athletic. Pretty sure the other team being "better" than us shouldn't be the criteria, however.

This argument itself proves in itself it isn't all on Hewitt. I'm pretty sure he might be aware of the keeping between your man and the basket concept, which you would think our guards especially could handle a little better. Feinstein told one of my friends later Mason embarrassed themselves in that regard today. And he's right.

Syracuse plays exclusive zone with long, rangy guys. Not sure a starting lineup of Edwards, Allen, Wright, Williams, Marko even vaguely fits a lineup you want to play too much sagging zone with.

Why bring Syracuse into the discussion? Just because our zone won't be as good as Syracuse's is no reason not to use it -- especially since our man-to-man is so awful.

Also, I haven't seen anyone who suggested that Edwards or Williams should start. Pretty much everyone agrees that it should be Moore, Allen, Wright, Marko and Jenkins. No reason why those guys can't be effective in a 2-3 zone.

And I wasn't saying only use it against teams that are "better than us." I merely suggested we should go exclusively zone against the better teams on our schedule, each of whom have the kind of guards that can get to the rim consistently against us.

But it's nice to see you've finally come around to agree that we need some kind of alternative to this terrible man-to-man, instead of ripping anyone who dared mention the word "zone" like you did last season.

 

[Cool Disco Dan]

Honest question:

Why do sportscasters and other neutral parties always seem to praise Hewitt as being a "good coach" or a "great guy" without being prompted. Even Feinstein did it today, going as far as to speculate on how Hewitt will get the guys going in the right direction over the break.

Is this just some sort of professional courtesy? Or is it like telling your 5 year old that his crayon scribbles are getting better?

Feinstein won't criticize Hewitt because Hewitt has agreed to play in Feinstein's tournament. In general, though, the majority of color guys are ex-coaches and aren't going to eat one of their own.

 

[GSII]

Like Jim, I coach 14 year olds and getting them to play good, tough, move your feet man to man defense has been hard but 90% of our focus. It's hard to teach them at first, but once you connect with them it gets easier. It's becomes fun and they want to create turnovers and prevent a score, etc. I digress, and not that anyone here cares, but we won our first game vs last years defending champs by 19 as a result of working hard on defense in practice. No made FG's til 3rd quarter! Anyway, point is either the player buys in or he doesn't. What's troubling is OCM was a defense first coach. So the regression on the defensive side by non hewitt recruits is glaring red flag of a dissconnect with player and coach/scheme.

Hewitt is a nice guy...but he clearly isn't connecting with his players. First year he had Pearson bossing everyone around. Now, nobody. Should be Copes, imo. But he's off with the magic dragon.

 

[Patriotfan49]

Tom, in defense of Jim, he doesn't need to provide analysis of why Hewitt should go. It should be on you to provide analysis of why he should stay.

Mason is literally awful basketball to watch.

Right? Like the "analysis" changes anything. All you have to do is watch the TV and you can see for yourself.

 

[gmubrian]

I have been one of the most optimistic about the Hewitt hire from the beginning, but I have to admit that my optimism is waning fast. The last things left that gives me some hope are:

Hewitt's true recruits. People that he went after because of what he saw of their ability in High School (not because he needed them to keep a full roster or snatched someone up at the last minute to fill the roster). You know, people that he recruited while they were in high school or AAU. The people I put in that category are: Gujanicic, Moore and Jenkins. Royal will count too since he recruited him while at GT, but we have not seen him yet. So, the guys that Hewitt had his eye on from the beginning to play for him that we have seen play at Mason have all been pretty good picks and performing well so far. The only issue with this hope is that it will take the full 5 years to see if it works, and if it doesn't, things could be really bad.

We have seen some minor changes that are going in the right direction. We have started to see more zone, which has been mostly effective the last couple of games. We just have not seen as much as most of us would like to have seen.

Are my rays of hope just grasping at straws at this point?
Are there other areas of hope?