Not sure if anyone posted this little diddy from the folks over at GW Sports:

http://www.gwsports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/032113aag.html

Great recap to be sure but I'm here to offer perhaps a more objective look at this season.  Since the athletic department did a nice job of pointing out the highlights, let's break things down categorically.  I'll eventually get to most everyone but today, let's start with coaching.

Mike Lonergan and Staff:  The obvious starting point is that there was far more belief in this year's edition of the Colonials than a year ago.  The work ethic was apparent; the determination was apparent.  The talent is falling into place but there just wasn't enough of it, coupled with experience, to pull out most close games.  The substitution patters may have irked some but I'm not in that camp.  ML wants to play lots of guys and he wants to see high energy.  The best way to achieve this is through quick and frequent substitutions.  The 1-3-1 defense was a nice wrinkle but it was sadly, the only wrinkle.  It would be pulled out each and every game along the lines of someone proceeding with telling you a joke after you've told them you've already heard it.  The frenzied late-game pressing against La Salle and Butler proved effective enough to warrant a few more opportunities than we witnessed.  Kudos on the decision to bring Lasan Kromah off of the bench, a move that clearly impacted the team's play.

Homework: The micromanaging is more likely hurting the team rather than helping it.  It's easy to understand where it's coming from with such a heavy reliance on younger players.  However, Joe McDonald in particular and the team in general tends to tighten as the game flow is readily disrupted.  Once of the coaches in the Dance (I forgot who) does very little coaching during games according to the game announcer, because he does all of his coaching at practice.  In other words, when the game rolls around, this coach is very secure in his team's ability to execute that he doesn't need to scream and yell instructions.  Something to aspire to.

That seems kind of nitpicky.  We finished around 50th in the country in defense, despite starting 4 freshman and having major minutes from defensively-challenged Nemanja Mikic and Dwayne Smith (and an incredibly inconsistent defender in Kromah). 

On the micro-managing, I have no idea if it helped or hurt. There's really no way to judge that from the stands.

What I do know is this:

1) The team improved as the season went on. That should be the goal of any coaching staff (though, to be fair, we were so bad in November, there was almost no where to go but up).

2) The team played extremely hard.  I think they are trying to change the culture of the program, and one thing you saw this year - led by Armwood's leadership - was how hard they played regardless of whether they were winning or losing. We can't win without this kind of effort, so this was step 1 to the resurgence of the Colonials.

3) The coaches did an excellent job covering our weaknesses.  We had a team that couldn't shoot from the outside. I know some people want to blame the coaches for creating a self-fulfilling prophecy because they said out loud what we all could see with our own eyes, but there were plenty of wide open outside shots to be had and our players couldn't make them.   But what impressed me is that despite this huge, easily exploitable weakness, we still managed to get the ball inside and get open shots anyway. I think that itself bodes well for the future.

Another weakness, as noted above, was that we had a couple of key rotation players who were simply not suited for Lonergan's defense. (for example, see Mikic making Greg Robbins from Richmond looking like Kobe Bryant down the stretch).  However, with the 1-3-1 and with good defensive teaching and team play, they covered up those weaknesses as best they could.

Where I do think they need work is to more carefully manage the substitution patterns to avoid having too many non-options in the half court (like this year getting caught with Mikic, Kopriva, Bynes, Savage on the court together).

 Didn't ML bring these freshmen to the program!!!!

If your team needs shooter, recruit shooters. 

If you need athletic big men that can defend, recruit athletic big men that can defend!!!

Stop throwing kids under the bus after you bring them to your team. 

Maybe somebody tell Lonergan that there's some coach in the Tourmament now (we don't know exactly which coach) that doesn't coach much during the games.   I'm sure he'd find that bit of advice very helpful.

Seriously, I think they were referring to Andy Enfield of FLGC.  He tries to get the team to run and get off a shot within the first 7 seconds of the game clock.  If not, run screens to free cutters.  He wants to let his players freelance more and be creative, especially his better offensive players.

GW had a coach that did very little "coaching" in the games.  He would let his best offensive players get off a shot early in the clock or be creative to find a lane to the basket.  When he had talent, his teams scored a bunch of points.

The reference to Enfield was probably made in contrast with the vast majority of other coaches in the Dance and in college basketball today.  Most "micro-manage".  Right or wrong that's a national trend.

I do think Lonergan and staff could do a better job with GW's shooters.  It's his public comments about the lack of shooters as much as his quick trigger on pulling them.  It's hard for shooters to have confidence looking over their shoulders.  Looking at LaSalle and others, it's not that they have great 3pt shooters other than Galloway. But they shoot with more confidence.  They are not reluctant to pull the trigger.  Lonergan needs to push the team to take more 3s.  There's no reason McDonald, Kromah, Garino and even Savage should not be in the low to mid-30s in 3pt %. 

If Griffen and Johnson are good offensive players from the start and GW can add another decent forward, Lonergan won't have to stuggle to find sub lineups that can score and play defense. 

Should read: It's NOT his public comments about the lack of shooters as much as ....

 You must have watched a different team from me because I don't remember guys consistently getting yanked for missing shots.  

How many times did folks on this board gripe about why Mikic and Bynes played so much despite poor shooting?  

I mean, guys yanked for defensive mistakes?  Sure.   Guys yanked because they didnt dive for a loose ball or give maximum effort?  Yes.  Guys yanked because they were struggling in a particular matchup?   That's fair.  

But I think this notion of guys getting yanked every time they miss a shot is just something a fan invented to explain away the poor shooting. 

I didn't notice the "quick substitution after missed shot" trend either but let me go back to my comment on micromanaging which I don't feel is at all nitpicky.  Watch the Duke-Michigan State game and you'll see two great examples of what I'm referring to.  Coach K and Tom Izzo will both be active by way of working the refs and motivating their teams.  However, what they will not be doing is to completely slow the game down by regularly having their point guards receive their play instructions while dribbling the ball in place.  My point doesn't have much to do with playing a freelance style.  Instead, it has everything to do with a coach making sure that his players are so well-prepared at practice that there isn't a need to control the actions of five players from the bench.  Now, like I alluded to, maybe ML felt the need to do this because he was playing a freshman point guard and/or his team wasn't very experienced.  Or, maybe this is simply who ML is, a "control freak" type of coach regardless of the experience level of his players.  What I'm saying is that I believe this team will be better off if the explanation is the former and not the latter.

I think MV's point is valid and I do think it had a lot to do with the freshman at the point factor.  Joe Mac spent too much time looking over his shoulder getting instructions from ML, but it happened less frequently when Bynes was running the point.  Joe is a smart kid and will figure it out, and I think there will be much less of that next year.  I do think ML is intense and animated on the sideline though, and that will likely not change.  

And umh how many other teams not named "Army" or 'GW" started four freshmen this year? Anyone think frosh might need more coaching? Just a guess.

MV, i agree with your point on micro-managing. we'll know more about ML's style next season when he has all five starters back. one thing we know is that style doesn't quicken the offense's pace.

ML reacts the "mental mistakes" both visually showing his distain and by often pulling players.  Some of it is on defensive mistakes, some of it is due to "ill-advsised" shot selection.  I think the players realize this and sometimes act nervously to it.

Do you really believe MiKic forgot how to shoot? I think he clearly was looking over his shoulder during games.  You'd see him look at Lonergan after a mistake (missed shot, bad pass, defensive breakdown).  Mikic should be shooting at a much better percentage than he did.  Same from Kromah on his 3s.  FQ, what' your explaination of why several GW players have regressed in their 3pt shooting under ML? It can't always be just the players.  I think in this area the coaching is also important.  I say they lack confidence.

McDonad and Garino had the reputation of being able to shoot the 3 ball.  ML had undertandably more patience with them but I don't think ML pushed them to shoot more from distance.  Their first inclination when they had an open look beyond the 3pt line was NOT to let it fly.  It was to pass the ball or look down low.  I think if the team is going to become a better 3pt shooting team, it's not really going to happen strickly from getting new recruits.  It's going to come from a mindset of the team to shoot more 3s.  They need to be encouraged and even demanded from ML and staff.  If the team knows they'll be hearing about it in practice the next day if they did not attempt 15-20 3s in the game, they'll shoot the ball more and not fear they'll be hearing about their taking bad shots.

Johnson will help next year if he can burry the 3 as will Griffen.  But I'd be surprised if Griffen gets more than 12-16 minutes/game next year.  The player even admitted he needs to get stronger physically and work on his handle.  It's unlikely he's ready defensively as well.  ML doesn't have a lot of patience for those types of players.  So it's up to the returing players to shoot and make more 3s.  It's up to ML and staff to get them to do so. 

GW took 300 3pts last year.  That is WAY too low, even considering their shooting ability.  ML's vermont team regularly took about 450-500.  Some A10 teams like LaSalle take about 600.   I think Maurice Joseph himself took about 200 one year at VMU.  So I don't think it's something that ML and staff haven't done better at in the past and can't do better at next year.

Herve, they got more coaching but the open-ended question is whether they needed to be coached in this manner?  Or, more to the point, did this help the team more than it hurt it?  Without meaning to offend, there were several freshmen on this team who appeared to know their offensive and defensive assignments more confidently than some upperclassmen on this team.

Bobo, 4 of his 6 teams at Vermont shot over 35% from three, so I don't think it's something specific to his methods that result in bad shooting percentages. 

Mikic, I suspect, just lost confidence with a coach riding him to play defense, rebound, set screens and generally do somethign other than just standing at the 3 point line in case the ball gets kicked to him.  I certainly think he could thrive under a system with less responsibity, but so be it.

Kromah, I think, lost his shot with the injury.  Maybe he'll get it back, maybe he won't. 

But back to the point - perhaps he ruined Mikic's shot in service of the system (which seems a reasonable sacrifice given we were much more competitive this year), but there is nothing in his track record that suggests his methods produce a low shooting percentage overall. 

MV, how could anyone answer that question? the only thing you could do with that question is confim your own biases.  In a perfect world, he eases off the coaching and everyone plays better - or someone else's view, he eases off the coaching and the team that lost to Mt St. Mary's never improves.  We have no way to know.

All we can really do is evaluate certain aspects, adn the bottom line - which is that pretty much any objective observer would say that he righted the ship, and the future appears very bright for the Colonials.

 I agree with Bobo on this. You can't hit threes if you don't take them. We have zero shot at becoming a postseason team until we develop some sort of perimieter offense. 

FQ, I am not accusing him of being a bad coach, of having not righted the ship, or suggesting that the future isn't bright.  I'm not sure why the tone of your posts seem to suggest that this is what I'm saying.  It's very possible to feel that someone is doing a good job while offering a criticism at the same time.

I'll agree that we can't know for a fact what less micromanaging would have produced.  Yet at the same time, I can likely count on one hand the number of times that the game was slowed down so that ML could yell instructions to Joe only to end up with an easy basket off of a set play.  What I observed was the offense consistently being disrupted, players having to think/over-think (depending on your point of view), and many possessions resulting in late shots (time running out on the shot clock).  We did get a fair share of open shots but this was more often the result of the players running the offense without interruption as opposed to slowing down play first.  Most times, an offense works better when the players are secure in what to do, where to be, etc, and can simply play the game.  Hopefully, we'll see more of this next season.

Does anyone think we can be sucessful without another F/C? Who is going to eat up those 20-25 minutes per game when Armwood and Larsen need to rest OR what who will be there to step up if either get injured? I know the 3's are the biggest issue but this has to worrisome too.

Yes, Jordan.  We need more frontcourt depth for sure.  KevLar and Armwood are great, but we need something behidn them (besides Kopriva, unless he's one of the league's most improved players).

MV, you asked if we would have been better off with less micromanaging. I am saying we have no way to know.  All we can do (on that front) is judge the results and they were good.  And if you can count on one hand the times we scored off set plays that he called, then you should see a doctor about your freakish growth of extra fingers.

 It is a concern especially because Armwood is playing his last season next year.  We simply don't have an underclassman who is being groomed to take his minutes.  I wonder if the coaches are looking for another Armwood type player at BCS schools who is sitting on the bench too much and wants more minutes.  Armwood is a great case study in what happens when you transfer to a program like GW that is desperately in need of players like this.  The answer is you get a ton of minutes.  You wonder about our odds of landing another Armwood type transfer and having him sit out next year vs. landing a high school senior who can grow into the role.  Armwood was a top 50 player out of high school, so that tells you how tough it can be to find a high school senior at this point who hasn't already been heavily recruited by big time programs.

i agree we need more bigmen.  if nothing else we will need to replace smith.  i can see maragkos becoming part of the rotation.  and i got to believe  if you can hide mikic in a zone you can  hide maragkos.  i do also believe there will be another bigman coming in.  this staff has been too proactive in their recruiting not to be all over this.

as for 3 point shooting, look for garino especially to increase and improve his outside shooting.  also both savage and joe mac.  if maragkos gets time he will shoot.   johnson  could also be key, tho i agree from what i've learned of griffin, he will see limited minutes as a frosh.

i think what doomed mikic more than anything was not fear of missing but ml's insistance he become a more rounded player.  mikic was a one trick pony who knew and practiced only one thing - getting free for an open look at a 3.  he shot from nowhere else on the floor nor could he.  even under hobbs this was true.  look at his freshman year, not only could he not shoot from 2 even then but he was clueless on the foul line as well.  trying to do other things with a basketball cost him his shooting rythm.

if you watch mikic today, he is much better at every other facet of the game than he was, except that it cost him his shooting touch.  ironically even the improved mikic isn't good enough to stay on the floor if he can't score.

Mikic wasn't a bball player when he came to GW, and he still isn't. He ought to have been redshirted, like quite a few guys we've seen here over the years. Hide him? From whom? He's a weak link, and every team that scouts GW knows it. I imagine every coach on every team points him out to every one of his players, and says, at least: "Drive on that guy."  Maybe in two years or more, he'll be a player; and I hope he is. I also hope he's enjoying his time at GW, and learning a lot.

ML is a coach. He coaches. Maybe he coaches with a tight rein, but the results have been worth it. This team is notably better than it's been, and I expect to see increased improvement at an accelerated pace, mainly because of his coaching. That doesn't warrant any whining or complaining.

 You dating yourself ziik. I can't remember the last DI college basketball player who redshirted on purpose.

 Rene Harry?

Herve--I do believe that the centers on Gonzaga and Kansas are rumored to be redshirts, this year. I'd look that up, but I am too much of  geezer to figure out how.

David Stockton also redshirted.

You've got to learn about the new trends, herve. You're getting dated. The Gonzaga center, Kelly O., redshirted to improve skills and strength. The Kansas center, who I had thought redshirted for the same reason, was a transfer. But Stockton: a redshirt.

I don't often make this stuff up, as I know there are some real smart guys --- GWU grads  --- who hang out here.

4 years of Mikic on scholarship is enough.