Cooley already handed out an “F-minus” to the defense
Only one game to consider for our Week 2 progress reports, and it was a big one.
This was a measuring stick game, and your Georgetown Hoyas came up way short. Not only did they not get a win, but they got soundly beaten by a team in a (seemingly) similar position – a second-year head coach trying to rebuild a program. If your analysis ends there, I really don’t blame you. There are no moral victories for a program that has been at the bottom of the barrel for far too long.
However, I do think there was more to this game than the results. Silver linings? Moral victories? Signs of hope? Maybe not. But I did not see this as simply another entry in the ledger of horrible defense, non-competitive losses that the Hoyas have been keeping the last five or so years.
First, the comparisons between these two programs and coaches are fair. I was personally a big proponent of Shrewsberry and thought Georgetown should have given him a very serious look. While these two programs appear to be at parallel stages of their development, they just aren’t. Georgetown is returning only 20% of their minutes from last season (279th in the country), while Notre Dame is returning nearly 70% of their minutes (5th in the country!!) and 86% of their scoring. The reality is these two teams are not at the same stage. That’s not an excuse. Georgetown is where they are because of the decisions made by this staff last season, but it is the reality.
Finally, and pardon me for getting philosophical…Basketball is a game of rhythm and connection, yet our analysis (mine very much included) is often overly compartmentalized. For example, we evaluate defense and offense separately when they are probably directly connected. That’s what I saw in this game. On the surface, Georgetown gave up 84 points and a 128 defensive rating. But I didn’t see this as a defensive failure necessarily, but rather an offensive one (see below for a full explanation).
Malik Mack – C+
ND: 16pts, 5-15 33% FG, 4-8 50% 3PT, 2-3 66% FT, 6 REB, 5 AST, 2 STL, 2 TO, 36 MIN
I thought Malik was the Hoyas’ best player for most of this game. 5-15 is not good enough, but really, no one shot it well. 4-8 from three was a positive outlier for the group. He was the one who broke Georgetown’s longest offensive drought in the first half. He was making good hustle plays on defense as well. His biggest challenge defensively is something that isn’t going to change – his size, but I think his overall positioning and effort are not bad. I am optimistic that he can be a non-liability on D most of the time. We’ve seen, at best, mixed results from the supposedly high-powered but limited defensively undersized backcourt from the Hoyas, but I think through three games, and particularly against ND, Malik has been better overall.
Jayden Epps – D+
ND: 13pts, 5-17 29% FG, 3-9 33% 3PT, 0-0 FT, 0 REB, 2 AST, 3 STL, 1 TO, 36 MIN
29% on 17 shots and 3-9 from three is just not going to do it this year. That looks way too much like a stat line from last season for my liking. Georgetown, as a whole, couldn’t hit anything, so it’s hard to single out one guy. However, he is supposed to be the one guy, and he has to be more efficient if Georgetown is going to be successful. He had a good stretch late in the first half, where he hit a couple of catch-and-shoot threes. Donny Marshall pointed out on the broadcast, “he’s just a better shooter when he’s not taking them off the dribble.” Jayden then proceeded to miss his next heat-check three that came off the dribble, giving Marshall a great “I told you so” moment. But he’s right. Jayden has shown flashes of being better off catch-and-shoot action, albeit on a much smaller sample size. He just remains inconsistent in general. Georgetown is also a better offense when Jayden is off-ball and taking more catch-and-shoot threes, so that is definitely the path forward. We just need to see it.
Micah Peavy – C
ND: 8pts, 4-9 44% FG, 0-2 3PT, 0-0 FT, 2 REB, 1 TO, 26 MIN
Micah played fewer minutes in this one. He was in some foul trouble, which was probably most of the reason, but I wonder if he was dealing with some of the illnesses that Coach said had been going on around the team (I have no inside knowledge. This is merely wild speculation that is probably wrong). When he was in the game, he was much less active than he had been previously. His two rebounds highlighted the Hoyas’ biggest defensive issue, which was on the glass. I think their defense was actually good enough in stretches, but their inability to secure defensive rebounds absolutely killed them (see below for more on the defense). I would have liked to see them go to Micah in the post when they were struggling offensively. He has been pretty consistent in hitting that fall away from the block and made another one in this game. He’s good in the mid-range and can get his own shot in the post. Georgetown could have used more of that when two of their first three offensive options (Mack and Epps) weren’t hitting.
Drew Fielder C-
ND: 2pts, 1-3 33%, 0-2 3PT, 0-0 FT, 1 REB, 0 TO, 13 MIN
We know Drew has been dealing with an illness – he missed Georgetown’s last game against Fairfield. While he was probably close to 100% for this one after a week off, he definitely looked a little rusty. He, almost more than anyone on the roster, is a rhythm player. He helps keep the engines moving, and when the engines are sputtering, he’s not a guy right now who’s going to restart them by himself. As a result, he looked a little rudderless out there, and that’s definitely concerning. I think he should be focused on one thing and one thing only at the moment, and that’s rebounding. That is what this starting unit and team overall need most. The rest will come. He doesn’t necessarily profile as a natural rebounder, and strength is definitely a question mark, but I think his awareness and positioning could help him become one. He’s already shown promise on the offensive end, nabbing six offensive rebounds through 2 games compared to 34 all of last season (32 games). Five of those came against Lehigh, but he did have one in this one. His offensive rebound percentage is 23.6%. That is an outlier for sure and is not going to last (for reference, Zach Edey led the country with 18.1% last season), but I do think he has a good nose for the ball.
Jordan Burks – C-
ND: 5pts, 2-8 25% FG, 0-3 3PT, 1-1 FT, 4 REB, 1 AST, 1 STL, 1 BLK, 0 TO, 18 MIN
He got the start again next to Drew this time (with Thomas coming off the bench with a reported illness). I didn’t notice him much except for a few misses from three. I am not sure if he’s a shooter. He certainly hasn’t shown he is a consistent shooting threat so far, but that is his best possible profile at the moment (in a perfect world that probably doesn’t exist). He did hit a nice floater off the dribble early in the game. While he definitely wasn’t bad defensively, he didn’t pop as much as he had in the previous games. He struggled a little bit on the perimeter to navigate screens and stay down on shot fakes. His length is legit and he needs to use it. He knows that, but I think he’s relying a bit too much on it to make up for mistakes.
Thomas Sorber – C
ND: 12pts, 3-9 33% FG, 0-2 3PT, 6-8 FT, 4 REB, 4 AST, 0 TO, 23 MIN
Sorber reportedly dealt with an illness that kept him out of the starting lineup in the first half. He came in and played well offensively in the first half but definitely lacked some of the production and energy he showed in the first two games. This is a bit of a throw-away game from Sorber for me. I am just not sure there’s much to glean from it, given he was clearly not a full strength. That’s unfortunate as it was our first opportunity to see him against significant high major talent, but I just don’t think we got any definitive answers. I don’t think he did anything to warrant tempered expectations, either. I just think it’s wait and see. Would Sorber at 100% have given Georgetown enough to win this game? Probably not, though it certainly would have helped. That just wasn’t the reality. I am still as encouraged about his start and potential as I was before this game.
Curtis Williams – D
ND: 0pts, 0-2 FG, 0-1 3PT, 5 MIN
No one player is responsible for this loss. We far too often ascribe failure or success to an individual based on the performance of the team (and, yes, I recognize the irony of that statement, given that seems to be exactly what all this – gestures wildly – is). A player who only played five minutes certainly is not primarily or solely responsible. However, I thought Curtis popped in his limited minutes in this one in a bad way. I am not surprised Cooley went away from him. It was just a bad game for him. Upon checking into the game in the first half, he gave up two wide-open shots from three to Notre Dame’s sharpshooter transfer. During that same stretch, he took a deep three, which was just a bad shot, and missed an open transition three, which was a good shot that just didn’t fall. That all came right in the middle of ND’s 13-0 run in the first half, and those were all swing plays that went against Georgetown. Rough game. On to the next.
Julius Halaifonua – D+
ND: 2pts, 1-3 33% FG, 0-2 3PT, 3 REB, 1 BLK, 1 TO, 14 MIN
This was a tough one to grade as I didn’t think he was necessarily bad, but he definitely did not do the things they needed to help get a win. He had a bad turnover off a hard baseline double that led to a runout dunk in the first half. He also gave up two big offensive rebounds that led to ND threes during the first-half run. Again, those were big momentum swing plays that completely dictated the trajectory of this game. He needs to contribute more on the glass, but he’s been a better defender than I expected. His rim protection has been solid, and I think he has potential there. As with Sorber, I am still very high on his overall potential and start to the year. This just wasn’t a great outing, but that goes for everyone.
Caleb Williams – B-
ND: 2 pts, 0-1 FG, 2-2 FT, 5 REB, 2 AST, 1 STL, 0 TO, 14 MIN
I really liked Caleb’s effort and energy. Again. He has a clear sense of what’s needed from him, and that is just so great to see. He was really producing in 14 minutes, grabbing five boards and two assists. He also scored his first two collegiate points. I was encouraged by his defensive effort and think he will eventually be a very good defender. He had a couple of unfortunate series, one where he just slipped on a closeout after the team had a solid defensive possession. Certainly not his fault, but ND scoring on that sequence after really good defense is a back-breaker. Like many freshmen, he’s using his hands a lot on defense (a problem for the entire team). I’d like to see him clean that up a bit, and I think he will. It looks to me like he’s just adjusting to the speed at this new level. He moves his feet well, and his positioning and instincts are good. He just needs to trust them.
Kayvaun Mulready – INC
ND: 0pts, 0-1 FG, 0-1 3PT, 0-2 FT, 1 AST, 0 TO, 5 MIN
Kayvaun didn’t play much and didn’t stand out when he did. It’s an incomplete from me. He took an ill-advised pull-up three when he entered, which seemed like it came from a good-ish thought (he saw the team was struggling to score and was shooting poorly). Unfortunately, it just wasn’t the right shot.
Drew McKenna – INC
ND: 3pt,1-2 50% FG, 1-2 50% 3PT, 2 REB, 0 TO, 10 MIN
Despite playing for 10 minutes, he didn’t get in until late, and the game was already over. He immediately hit a deep three when he did, and I do think we’re going to need to see more of him over the next few games (or hear from Cooley about why we’re not). He, at least in theory, can do two things that this team needed against ND: rebound and shoot. I think he is a good option at the PF spot if the other Drew isn’t playing well. I’d like to see more of a straight rotation between the two of them. I would not be surprised to see more of him in the next week, even as Ed says he wants to shorten the rotation. If McKenna is playing hard, it’s going to be tough to keep him off the floor.
Offense – F Currently ranked 80th in Off. efficiency per KenPom (previously 70th)
ND: 96 Off. Rating, 37% eFG, 25% (32 attempts), 68% AST Rate
In some ways, this game was pretty simple. ND hit shots. Georgetown did not. Everything else aside, it’s going to be hard, if not impossible, to win when you shoot 37% and 25% from three on 32 attempts. I know everyone wants to point out how bad the defense was and has not shown any improvement from the debacle that was last year, but this is a spot where I think the connectivity of basketball needs to factor in. Georgetown’s defensive struggles were a direct result of their offense. See below for more explanation, but I think this was an offensive failure, not a defensive one. I also don’t think there was much from a scheme perspective that was a problem. I mostly just think Georgetown missed a lot of shots, both easy shots and difficult shots, from all over the floor. That doesn’t mean I thought the offense was humming along, but I thought it was largely fine, aside from that kind of important step of making the ball go through the bucket. In the first half, they went on a 0-15 stretch over more than five minutes. That stretch featured all facets of bad offense, turnovers, bad shot selection, bad passing, but mostly, it was just missed shots. That streak ended with a Mack three off a nice dribble handoff brush screen. A play that they ran a couple of times prior that resulted in missed shots, for what it’s worth. That was indicative of the offense in this game. They needed three tries to score one basket. Whether that was because of the ND defense (which was good), their sets and actions (I don’t think it was), or just unfortunate shooting, it doesn’t really matter in the end. This is a young team that is certainly going to be streaky at times. They don’t have great shooters and may not even have many good ones. This can absolutely happen again. Cooley is going to need to figure out a way to steady them offensively and restore confidence. Sorber is one option for that, and I think this is where the circumstances just hurt them – Sorber was not at 100%. I think going to Peavy in the post is another option that they should go to more. Micah isn’t a world-class scorer, but he’s seasoned and consistent in getting to his spot in the post. I would have liked to see them go to that action to slow things down and get a good, high-percentage shot. Both Mack and Epps are too streaky at the moment. I am more confident that Malik will be able to stabilize things than Jayden. One option may be to split them up and play Malik with a defensive guard like Kayvaun. The biggest unknown is whether either (or both) of the Drews can step up and hit shots. Both have shown flashes, and I think can be shooters. So far this year, Drew Fielder has not been, and Drew McKenna has not played enough to know.
Defense – D Currently ranked 196th in Def. efficiency per KenPom (previously 130th)
ND: 128 Def Rating, 67% eFG, 15% TOV Rate, 61% Def Reb Rate
No, Georgetown’s defense was not good in this game. But! I think the reason has more to do with the offense than with either individual or collective defensive play. I thought the Hoyas were actually pretty solid on defense for stretches of this game. It just gets really difficult to continue to play solid defense when you are not scoring for long stretches on the other end. That’s both a practical and mental reality. Emotionally, I think executing good offense and making shots helps you want to play better defense. You’d like for effort and focus to break through that, but it’s just human nature. Practically, it’s also just a lot harder to defend when you’re having to play in transition because you’ve missed 15 straight shots. Even if your opponent isn’t necessarily running, you have to match up in transition rather than get your defense set while your opponent inbounds the ball. I saw both of these at play with the defense in this game, and I really think the overall defense was a reflection of how poor they were on the offensive end. The one area that I think stood out and was not necessarily tied to offense was defensive rebounding. Their defensive rebound rate (61%) was much lower than their first two games (80% and 70%), and there were a number of possessions when they played solid defense and forced a miss, only to see ND get an offensive board and reset. A handful of those, particularly in the first half, led to made threes. That was a not-insignificant part of the ND offense in this game and a prime example of the results and process not quite telling the same story. From a results perspective, the defense was bad (and yes, rebounding is absolutely part of defense). But in looking at the process, on many of those possessions, the initial defense was not bad. In fact, in some cases, it was quite good. Unfortunately, I am not sure we’ll know for a while if this was a reflection of how they’ll rebound against high-major athletes or if this was an outlier.
Next Week
The bakery is open! Bring in the cupcakes. Georgetown has two home games against sub-250 ranked opponents. Mount St. Marys (254) on Wednesday is the better opponent but lost by 30+ to Maryland. The Mount did beat Georgetown’s Saturday opponent, St. Francis (337), by 8. This should be a week about getting the offense right.