I'm willing to see the season through, as frustrating as it may be. I'm willing to give that time.

The problem you face here 08, is something you know all too well. You know we're only 3 years removed from what we remember as the worst decade of Seahawk basketball. You have to understand there's an element of fear amongst fans that it doesn't take much to get back there, and it takes a long time of searching to get back out.

Personally though, I'm waiting. I'm being as patient as possible for as long as possible.

(12-12-2017 01:40 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  I'm willing to see the season through, as frustrating as it may be. I'm willing to give that time.

The problem you face here 08, is something you know all too well. You know we're only 3 years removed from what we remember as the worst decade of Seahawk basketball. You have to understand there's an element of fear amongst fans that it doesn't take much to get back there, and it takes a long time of searching to get back out.

Personally though, I'm waiting. I'm being as patient as possible for as long as possible.

I definitely get the fear. People are equating Keatts/McGrath with Brownell/Moss. And that's a very real and rational fear.

It's not the same circumstances, and our Chancellor and AD combo are on a completely different level compared to DePaolo and Capaccio/Mehrtens. But it's still a legit fear.

(12-12-2017 01:43 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  I definitely get the fear. People are equating Keatts/McGrath with Brownell/Moss. And that's a very real and rational fear.

It's not the same circumstances, and our Chancellor and AD combo are on a completely different level compared to DePaolo and Capaccio/Mehrtens. But it's still a legit fear.

excellent point. the administration we have in place now cares about the program and realizes its importance to the university.

whether we like it or not, we are changing styles. this is a year of transition

(12-12-2017 02:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 01:43 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  I definitely get the fear. People are equating Keatts/McGrath with Brownell/Moss. And that's a very real and rational fear.

It's not the same circumstances, and our Chancellor and AD combo are on a completely different level compared to DePaolo and Capaccio/Mehrtens. But it's still a legit fear.

excellent point. the administration we have in place now cares about the program and realizes its importance to the university.

whether we like it or not, we are changing styles. this is a year of transition

The Drexel fan base is going through the same type of transition. For a long time Drexel basketball was a hard nosed defense only style. It would win a lot of games against teams you should beat. You would lose most games you should. Occasional surprises on both sides of the coin. With Spiker it is the opposite where defense is barely a suggestion, where the goal is to score even if it is inefficient.

As fans we are struggling to accept where our growth is or to see the growth because we are starting at a bad defensive team, which is giving us curious results (1-3 against teams worse than 200 RPI and 3-1 against teams better). They are up and down and all over the place. We are in year 2 of our transition where you guys are in year 1. Patience is a funny thing, but at the mid major level you must have a lot of it or you will go crazy. So bear with it, even if change is hard to accept (style changes in your case). Try to find the bright spots and let the process work itself out (for the better or worse)

(12-12-2017 01:40 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 01:38 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  LOL you can post any definition you want, my statement is widely known

It's widely used. Doesn't mean it's accurate. No psychologist worth his/her salt agrees with the definition, and it can actually be dangerous to subscribe to it. Read the article.

This is a board with college-educated people so it's always worthwhile to learn something that challenges your perceptions. And in this case, it's applicable and relevant. I've heard it said by 2-3 different people on this very board in the last few days.

I really don’t care what the clinical definition of it is , to me doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results IS INSANE. Good coaches adjust

(12-12-2017 02:59 PM)dan10 Wrote:  As fans we are struggling to accept where our growth is or to see the growth because we are starting at a bad defensive team, which is giving us curious results (1-3 against teams worse than 200 RPI and 3-1 against teams better). They are up and down and all over the place. We are in year 2 of our transition where you guys are in year 1. Patience is a funny thing, but at the mid major level you must have a lot of it or you will go crazy. So bear with it, even if change is hard to accept (style changes in your case). Try to find the bright spots and let the process work itself out (for the better or worse)

I'd rather be beating pretty good teams and losing to bad ones than the alternative. At least it shows you have a pretty nice ceiling and can win some games at the CAA level. Eventually, the bad losses will disappear.

It's much harder to become a contender when you ONLY beat the bad teams.

You guys seem to be headed in a positive direction.

(12-12-2017 03:17 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  I really don’t care what the clinical definition of it is , to me doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results IS INSANE. Good coaches adjust

This is essentially like saying "I don't care about facts, logic, or reason. I'm right on this one and that's that."

On the second part, yes. Many good coaches make adjustments, some significant and some not, and have success over time. But many good coaches also recruit for a specific system and have success too. Too early to make that judgment call on McGrath one way or the other.

"Scheme masked our flaws, but the flaws were still there. How can we expect a team who never learned to play any semblance of halfcourt D to suddenly learn how to do it now? "

PRECISELY. Is it your opinion that Keatts and his staff simply didn't know HOW to teach man to man to the same players McGrath has now? And, that McGrath DOES know how to teach man to man BETTER than Keatts could? Because that seems to be the problem you are identifying and that McGrath is the solution.

Sorry, not buying it.

The fact is, playing man in the current environment of allowing freedom of movement is much harder than years past. Add to that the overall lack of size at our guard positions and the lack of depth in our post, and you have a roster that is simply not designed to play man minus the press we had(or in this case zone, since McGrath won't press).

Futhermore, this roster is not a bottom five CAA roster. We have perhaps the best player in the CAA and possibly one of the best in the history of UNCW. We also have a PG playing at least 2nd team All-CAA at this point. Add in Fornes, Taylor/Richmond and Bryan, and we have one of the best starting five in the conference. We get weak at the bench, but a lot of teams in the CAA have finished in the top 5 of the CAA with a strong starting 5.

Also, the idea of learning to play man for NEXT year is ridiculous. THIS year is incredibly important for the future of this team. If we come out of this year exceeding expectations fans and donors will stay on board and recruiting can remain at a high level. If we have a sudden drop off the cliff, casual fans will lose interest fast as well as students and some supporters. Recruits will also find themselves being recruited by a 2nd year coach with a losing record in his first year following a very successful coach. Nobody will care about the circumstances around the losses. Win now, and worry about next year or later in the season when you cross that bridge. Winning breeds confidence and excitement and losing does the opposite. Look no further than board participation right here. Even the diehards here had "better things to do" during a televised LSU game. Not many expected nor hoped for an upset. Why?

The whole concept of losing now to get better later is a foolish theory. You become what you practice. And if we practice losing, we'll become accustomed to losing.

(12-12-2017 05:54 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 03:17 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  I really don’t care what the clinical definition of it is , to me doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results IS INSANE. Good coaches adjust

This is essentially like saying "I don't care about facts, logic, or reason. I'm right on this one and that's that."

Not at all, I think it’s foolish to continue to repeat what’s not working

(12-12-2017 06:26 PM)82hawk Wrote:  "Scheme masked our flaws, but the flaws were still there. How can we expect a team who never learned to play any semblance of halfcourt D to suddenly learn how to do it now? "

PRECISELY. Is it your opinion that Keatts and his staff simply didn't know HOW to teach man to man to the same players McGrath has now? And, that McGrath DOES know how to teach man to man BETTER than Keatts could? Because that seems to be the problem you are identifying and that McGrath is the solution.

Sorry, not buying it.

The fact is, playing man in the current environment of allowing freedom of movement is much harder than years past. Add to that the overall lack of size at our guard positions and the lack of depth in our post, and you have a roster that is simply not designed to play man minus the press we had(or in this case zone, since McGrath won't press).

Futhermore, this roster is not a bottom five CAA roster. We have perhaps the best player in the CAA and possibly one of the best in the history of UNCW. We also have a PG playing at least 2nd team All-CAA at this point. Add in Fornes, Taylor/Richmond and Bryan, and we have one of the best starting five in the conference. We get weak at the bench, but a lot of teams in the CAA have finished in the top 5 of the CAA with a strong starting 5.

Also, the idea of learning to play man for NEXT year is ridiculous. THIS year is incredibly important for the future of this team. If we come out of this year exceeding expectations fans and donors will stay on board and recruiting can remain at a high level. If we have a sudden drop off the cliff, casual fans will lose interest fast as well as students and some supporters. Recruits will also find themselves being recruited by a 2nd year coach with a losing record in his first year following a very successful coach. Nobody will care about the circumstances around the losses. Win now, and worry about next year or later in the season when you cross that bridge. Winning breeds confidence and excitement and losing does the opposite. Look no further than board participation right here. Even the diehards here had "better things to do" during a televised LSU game. Not many expected nor hoped for an upset. Why?

The whole concept of losing now to get better later is a foolish theory. You become what you practice. And if we practice losing, we'll become accustomed to losing.

I'm saying McGrath is going to put his focus there, and recruit towards the goal of playing fast on offense while still playing strong halfcourt defense. Because that's what he himself SAID he was going to do when he arrived. I'll believe that until he gives me evidence otherwise. And we really need to give him the chance to show progress over the course of the season, and also bring in at least 1 legit recruiting class, before we should be saying we don't "buy it".

I'd prefer to win now AND win later. But if we can choose one or the other, I choose winning later.

"Practice losing". No, I don't think that's what McGrath set out to do, nor is it what I'm saying I want to see happen. I'm saying I'd rather take our lumps now if that means we learn how to play defense down the road. We're not going to learn how to play tough halfcourt defense by trying to mimic what Keatts did.

So, you don't think Keatts knew how to teach man and McGrath does and we'll see it soon? Got it. Cause' conference play is around the corner, so we better learn fast.

(12-12-2017 08:20 PM)82hawk Wrote:  So, you don't think Keatts knew how to teach man and McGrath does and we'll see it soon? Got it. Cause' conference play is around the corner, so we better learn fast.

No. I'm saying we don't know yet if McGrath can or cannot.

We know Keatts didn't PRIORITIZE it, either in his coaching style or his recruiting method. Starting 4 guards made it nearly impossible to play effective halfcourt defense with consistency, and especially against teams with athletic bigs. He made a calculated tradeoff with his recruiting and lineup decisions.

McGrath's FOCUS is on halfcourt defense. But he is working with a team not built for that....yet.

And I agree with you. If this season will end up with a strong W-L record and conference finish, we'll have to figure that out. But I'm not just thinking about this year, and nor is McGrath. The losses are piling up and the fans are quiet, but that can't be one of the high-ranking factors in the decisions he needs to make. The fans will come back if his long-term vision and plan works out. And he needs time before we can simply outright say his plan is a poor one.

(12-12-2017 08:58 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 08:20 PM)82hawk Wrote:  So, you don't think Keatts knew how to teach man and McGrath does and we'll see it soon? Got it. Cause' conference play is around the corner, so we better learn fast.

No. I'm saying we don't know yet if McGrath can or cannot.

We know Keatts didn't PRIORITIZE it, either in his coaching style or his recruiting method. Starting 4 guards made it nearly impossible to play effective halfcourt defense with consistency, and especially against teams with athletic bigs. He made a calculated tradeoff with his recruiting and lineup decisions.

McGrath's FOCUS is on halfcourt defense. But he is working with a team not built for that....yet.

And I agree with you. If this season will end up with a strong W-L record and conference finish, we'll have to figure that out. But I'm not just thinking about this year, and nor is McGrath. The losses are piling up and the fans are quiet, but that can't be one of the high-ranking factors in the decisions he needs to make. The fans will come back if his long-term vision and plan works out. And he needs time before we can simply outright say his plan is a poor one.

It's foolish to think you can't work on long term goals and short term simultaneously.

(12-13-2017 08:02 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 08:58 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(12-12-2017 08:20 PM)82hawk Wrote:  So, you don't think Keatts knew how to teach man and McGrath does and we'll see it soon? Got it. Cause' conference play is around the corner, so we better learn fast.

No. I'm saying we don't know yet if McGrath can or cannot.

We know Keatts didn't PRIORITIZE it, either in his coaching style or his recruiting method. Starting 4 guards made it nearly impossible to play effective halfcourt defense with consistency, and especially against teams with athletic bigs. He made a calculated tradeoff with his recruiting and lineup decisions.

McGrath's FOCUS is on halfcourt defense. But he is working with a team not built for that....yet.

And I agree with you. If this season will end up with a strong W-L record and conference finish, we'll have to figure that out. But I'm not just thinking about this year, and nor is McGrath. The losses are piling up and the fans are quiet, but that can't be one of the high-ranking factors in the decisions he needs to make. The fans will come back if his long-term vision and plan works out. And he needs time before we can simply outright say his plan is a poor one.

It's foolish to think you can't work on long term goals and short term simultaneously.

NOT so fast my friend...Signed, Coach Kevin Keatts

(12-13-2017 08:02 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  It's foolish to think you can't work on long term goals and short term simultaneously.

It's foolish to think you can PRIORITIZE both at the same time, especially in our situation.

The man-to-man defense will improve because it has to. This is gut check time for the team. But the long-term vision of the team is pretty drastically different from the vision Keatts had on the defensive end. Keatts never PRIORITIZED half-court man-to-man defense. He prioritized a press defense that got turnovers, and used a 4-guard lineup to accomplish that. McGrath is doing quite the opposite. He's not only prioritizing halfcourt defense, but he wants to run a more traditional lineup with 2 bigs. And his recruiting will reflect that.

The offensive vision between Keatts and McGrath is similar, of course. And I think it's worth noting that we're currently 32nd in the nation in scoring. That hasn't really gotten mentioned yet. Granted, some of that is a reflection of the number of possessions we're getting because we allow a lot of quick buckets on the other end. So I'd need to look at points per possession rankings to see how we're TRULY doing on that end. But still. The offense is mostly passing the eye test, at least.

(12-13-2017 09:37 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(12-13-2017 08:02 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  It's foolish to think you can't work on long term goals and short term simultaneously.

It's foolish to think you can PRIORITIZE both at the same time, especially in our situation.

The man-to-man defense will improve because it has to. This is gut check time for the team. But the long-term vision of the team is pretty drastically different from the vision Keatts had. Keatts never PRIORITIZED half-court man-to-man defense. He prioritized a press defense that got turnovers, and used a 4-guard lineup to accomplish that. McGrath is doing quite the opposite. He's not only prioritizing halfcourt defense, but he wants to run a more traditional lineup with 2 bigs. And his recruiting will reflect that.

The offensive vision between Keatts and McGrath is similar, of course. And I think it's worth noting that we're currently 32nd in the nation in scoring. That hasn't really gotten mentioned yet....

You don't have to prioritize the Zone, it's there and a band aid while the rest is being worked out. Or we can stay in the bottom 5 in the nation in team D and keep clapping our hands saying "don't worry he's working on it."

Below are our efficiency rankings based on Ken Pomeroy's numbers. It takes points scored/allowed per possession, then also factors in strength of schedule:

Adjusted Offense: 106.8 (110th)
Adjusted Defense: 109.5 (289th of 351)
Overall Efficiency: -2.60 (190th)

Not great overall but better than I would have thought.


The other CAA team rankings in overall efficiency, for comparison purposes:

1. Towson (+5.72): # 101
2. Charleston (+5.26): # 106
3. Northeastern (+2.91): # 129
4. Hofstra (+2.19): # 142
5. Elon (-1.69): # 180
6. UNCW (-2.60): # 190
7. W&M (-3.49): # 198
8. Drexel (-4.79): # 223
9. Delaware (-5.78): # 237
10. JMU (-7.83): # 258


6th place. Sounds about right.

(12-13-2017 09:39 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  You don't have to prioritize the Zone, it's there and a band aid while the rest is being worked out. Or we can stay in the bottom 5 in the nation in team D and keep clapping our hands saying "don't worry he's working on it."

I mean, all we can do is clap our hands anyways. Because McGrath probably isn't going to listen much to what the fans want. It's fun to talk about this stuff though.

(12-13-2017 09:52 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  Below are our efficiency rankings based on Ken Pomeroy's numbers. It takes points scored/allowed per possession, then also factors in strength of schedule:

Adjusted Offense: 106.8 (110th)
Adjusted Defense: 109.5 (289th of 351)
Overall Efficiency: -2.60 (190th)

Not great overall but better than I would have thought.


The other CAA team rankings in overall efficiency, for comparison purposes:

1. Towson (+5.72): # 101
2. Charleston (+5.26): # 106
3. Northeastern (+2.91): # 129
4. Hofstra (+2.19): # 142
5. Elon (-1.69): # 180
6. UNCW (-2.60): # 190
7. W&M (-3.49): # 198
8. Drexel (-4.79): # 223
9. Delaware (-5.78): # 237
10. JMU (-7.83): # 258


6th place. Sounds about right.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket...efficiency

342 and last in the CAA

(12-13-2017 10:18 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket...efficiency

342 and last in the CAA

Interesting. Site is blocked for me at work because they think it falls under the "gambling" category. lol. Does it say what their methodology is for that number? Just curious to see what makes it vastly different from Pomeroy's.

My guess is Pomeroy might be using some of last season's numbers as part of his formula.