rswilli2 wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

JaegerWolf wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

boonewolf1 wrote: ya'll can have Herb, Les, and Sidney....I'll take Gott.

For the long term as well.

This is nothing more that wishful thinking.

I think he's the right man for the job.  4-5 nailbiters mixed with ACC refs doesn't change the upside potential.  His recruits are freshman, so I don't get the criticism of his coaching except that some good fans want it all right now.

There are some fundamental defensive principles that Gottfried's teams are severely lacking in. And that was also evident last year, when we had experienced guys like CJ Williams and Deshawn Painter. That's where the criticism of his coaching comes from. It's like he's only doing a good job of teaching half the game of basketball. My hope is that the assistants, either the current ones or future ones, will be able to make up for his lack of ability in teaching the defensive side of the game.

I like Mark Gottfried and want him to do extremely well, and believe that he can do that. But that doesn't mean that he gets a full pass on obvious deficiencies that his teams exhibit.

rswilli2 wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

JaegerWolf wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

boonewolf1 wrote: ya'll can have Herb, Les, and Sidney....I'll take Gott.

For the long term as well.

This is nothing more that wishful thinking.

I think he's the right man for the job.  4-5 nailbiters mixed with ACC refs doesn't change the upside potential.  His recruits are freshman, so I don't get the criticism of his coaching except that some good fans want it all right now.

There are some fundamental defensive principles that Gottfried's teams are severely lacking in. And that was also evident last year, when we had experienced guys like CJ Williams and Deshawn Painter. That's where the criticism of his coaching comes from. It's like he's only doing a good job of teaching half the game of basketball. My hope is that the assistants, either the current ones or future ones, will be able to make up for his lack of ability in teaching the defensive side of the game.

I like Mark Gottfried and want him to do extremely well, and believe that he can do that. But that doesn't mean that he gets a full pass on obvious deficiencies that his teams exhibit.

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

KarNCSU wrote:

rswilli2 wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

JaegerWolf wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

boonewolf1 wrote: ya'll can have Herb, Les, and Sidney....I'll take Gott.

For the long term as well.

This is nothing more that wishful thinking.

I think he's the right man for the job.  4-5 nailbiters mixed with ACC refs doesn't change the upside potential.  His recruits are freshman, so I don't get the criticism of his coaching except that some good fans want it all right now.

There are some fundamental defensive principles that Gottfried's teams are severely lacking in. And that was also evident last year, when we had experienced guys like CJ Williams and Deshawn Painter. That's where the criticism of his coaching comes from. It's like he's only doing a good job of teaching half the game of basketball. My hope is that the assistants, either the current ones or future ones, will be able to make up for his lack of ability in teaching the defensive side of the game.

I like Mark Gottfried and want him to do extremely well, and believe that he can do that. But that doesn't mean that he gets a full pass on obvious deficiencies that his teams exhibit.

Willi, I totally see where you're coming from. But I'm going to see if these current freshmen will improve their defense with each year. I'm giving Gott a little bit of a loose chain since the players who played for Lowe had no sense of defense and there is only so much you can teach players who were not taught the proper way their first 1-3 seasons. Lets see if next year there is an improvement in defense from the 3 freshmen. My thinking is if you are taught the right way your freshmen year, then you can build upon that base/foundation. I don't believe Lowe's recruits were ever given that base/foundation thus teaching them is harder to do when they've already incorporated bad habits into their playing styles.

What a crock of bull.  Blaming whatever defensive shortcomings Gottfried has as a coach on the players he inherited from Sid is a cope out.  Also, it's the same thing that was done to Sid when he inherited Herb's players. As we found out, Sid's shortcomings had nothing to do with Grant, Costner, McCauley, or Fells.

In some instances, the players a coach inherited may have a negative impact on his ability to coach defense.  Maybe the players aren't fast, don't have good size, or just not very athletic.  I doubt Gott will every have a point guard and forward as fast, well-conditioned, and as athletic as Lorenzo and Calvin. 

IMO, if a Coach can coach the game of basketball, he can teach anyone and any team to play fundamental defense...if it's very important to him.   

michael924 wrote: Howell has a foot injury?  Had not heard of it.  Per WRAL, he did not practice all week before the VaTech game?

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

Yep. It's always the fans. 

Y'all do realize that it's possible to be a very effective offensive team and still play very good defense, right? Where did this idea that it's one or the other come from?

Question, if a player is a lock down defender who doesn't score much on the AAU circuit, does he get ranked like a player who scores in bunches and plays zero "D"?
Some players have a knack for playing "D".  However you have to have good team defense and I'm not seeing it from any team in the ACC.  Brown was playing hard "D" yesterday, Wood is slow buts gets a few sneaky blocks. TL can't physically play much "D". Leslie blocks a lot of shots, RH is a little undersized, Warren is like the AAU question above and Purvis I would say never had to play much "D" in his life.  Maybe they'll get better in time.  

9th in the nation in scoring and 5th in FG%.   

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

Yep. It's always the fans. 

Y'all do realize that it's possible to be a very effective offensive team and still play very good defense, right? Where did this idea that it's one or the other come from?

jimmyVrules wrote:

Question, if a player is a lock down defender who doesn't score much on the AAU circuit, does he get ranked like a player who scores in bunches and plays zero "D"?
Some players have a knack for playing "D".  However you have to have good team defense and I'm not seeing it from any team in the ACC.  Brown was playing hard "D" yesterday, Wood is slow buts gets a few sneaky blocks. TL can't physically play much "D". Leslie blocks a lot of shots, RH is a little undersized, Warren is like the AAU question above and Purvis I would say never had to play much "D" in his life.  Maybe they'll get better in time.  

9th in the nation in scoring and 5th in FG%.   

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

Yep. It's always the fans. 

Y'all do realize that it's possible to be a very effective offensive team and still play very good defense, right? Where did this idea that it's one or the other come from?

Bryanth1a wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote:

Question, if a player is a lock down defender who doesn't score much on the AAU circuit, does he get ranked like a player who scores in bunches and plays zero "D"?
Some players have a knack for playing "D".  However you have to have good team defense and I'm not seeing it from any team in the ACC.  Brown was playing hard "D" yesterday, Wood is slow buts gets a few sneaky blocks. TL can't physically play much "D". Leslie blocks a lot of shots, RH is a little undersized, Warren is like the AAU question above and Purvis I would say never had to play much "D" in his life.  Maybe they'll get better in time.  

9th in the nation in scoring and 5th in FG%.   

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

Yep. It's always the fans. 

Y'all do realize that it's possible to be a very effective offensive team and still play very good defense, right? Where did this idea that it's one or the other come from?

So is the Pack the only team in the ACC that recruit players that have never played defense before? 

RaleighBound wrote:

savagepagan wrote: Gott had a whole week to prepare for VT and we have to go into overtime to squeeze out a four point win over one of the worst teams in the acc?

This makes sense until you factor in the refs.

Bryanth1a wrote:

KarNCSU wrote:

rswilli2 wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

JaegerWolf wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

boonewolf1 wrote: ya'll can have Herb, Les, and Sidney....I'll take Gott.

For the long term as well.

This is nothing more that wishful thinking.

I think he's the right man for the job.  4-5 nailbiters mixed with ACC refs doesn't change the upside potential.  His recruits are freshman, so I don't get the criticism of his coaching except that some good fans want it all right now.

There are some fundamental defensive principles that Gottfried's teams are severely lacking in. And that was also evident last year, when we had experienced guys like CJ Williams and Deshawn Painter. That's where the criticism of his coaching comes from. It's like he's only doing a good job of teaching half the game of basketball. My hope is that the assistants, either the current ones or future ones, will be able to make up for his lack of ability in teaching the defensive side of the game.

I like Mark Gottfried and want him to do extremely well, and believe that he can do that. But that doesn't mean that he gets a full pass on obvious deficiencies that his teams exhibit.

Willi, I totally see where you're coming from. But I'm going to see if these current freshmen will improve their defense with each year. I'm giving Gott a little bit of a loose chain since the players who played for Lowe had no sense of defense and there is only so much you can teach players who were not taught the proper way their first 1-3 seasons. Lets see if next year there is an improvement in defense from the 3 freshmen. My thinking is if you are taught the right way your freshmen year, then you can build upon that base/foundation. I don't believe Lowe's recruits were ever given that base/foundation thus teaching them is harder to do when they've already incorporated bad habits into their playing styles.

What a crock of bull.  Blaming whatever defensive shortcomings Gottfried has as a coach on the players he inherited from Sid is a cope out.  Also, it's the same thing that was done to Sid when he inherited Herb's players. As we found out, Sid's shortcomings had nothing to do with Grant, Costner, McCauley, or Fells.

In some instances, the players a coach inherited may have a negative impact on his ability to coach defense.  Maybe the players aren't fast, don't have good size, or just not very athletic.  I doubt Gott will every have a point guard and forward as fast, well-conditioned, and as athletic as Lorenzo and Calvin. 

IMO, if a Coach can coach the game of basketball, he can teach anyone and any team to play fundamental defense...if it's very important to him.   

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote:

Question, if a player is a lock down defender who doesn't score much on the AAU circuit, does he get ranked like a player who scores in bunches and plays zero "D"?
Some players have a knack for playing "D".  However you have to have good team defense and I'm not seeing it from any team in the ACC.  Brown was playing hard "D" yesterday, Wood is slow buts gets a few sneaky blocks. TL can't physically play much "D". Leslie blocks a lot of shots, RH is a little undersized, Warren is like the AAU question above and Purvis I would say never had to play much "D" in his life.  Maybe they'll get better in time.  

9th in the nation in scoring and 5th in FG%.   

rswilli2 wrote:

jimmyVrules wrote: I would rather put up 90 points a game than play lock down "D" and play games in the 50's.  Or an offense like the badgers.  Someone mentioned the Lowes leftovers.  Without Leslie, Brown, Wood and RH we would be in last place.  He coached them up.  We could play "D" like no other, score 100 a game and still have fanbase who complained.  No wonder it's hard to find a top tier coach to come.  The fanbase!!!

Yep. It's always the fans. 

Y'all do realize that it's possible to be a very effective offensive team and still play very good defense, right? Where did this idea that it's one or the other come from?

Duke routinely gets McDonald's All-Americans who come into college and play great individual and team defense. If a coach prioritizes defense, then it can be taught and executed. Gottfried is just a poor defensive coach and has been for years.

I'm not the smartest BB analyst in the world.  Before we say NCSU BB is terrible at defense, what are the usual defensive qualities you look for in a team?  I understand that slapping the floor looks great and all, but does it truly equate to the opposing team having trouble scoring?   We scored quite a bit on Duke if I recall.

Engineer65 wrote: KarNCSU- When we were looking at Gottfried before he ever coached his first game at State, we heard from people with knowledge of his work before he came here.  Yes, he got Alabama a high ranking- but it was NOT on the strength of their defense.  Some coaches- especially those with Bobby Knight connections- insist on good defense, both individual and team defense.  Those coaches may have a high school star sitting on the bench because that guy won't play "D".  Those coaches spend a lot of time in practice working on defense.  Gott does not have the reputation of being one of "those guys".  Could he change?  He sure could and maybe he has- but it's hard to see right now with this team.  I think Bryanth was looking at Gott's body of work- not just at what he's done since he got to Raleigh.  Just because you don't agree with his perspective, that doesn't make it a "crock of bull", although sometimes he may sling a little bs.

SidsSouljahBoy wrote: Slap fights around here are getting kind of lame. Very low quality too. If you're going to go back and forth at each other at least make it worth while. Also if you didn't watch the game don't offer your opinion because no one gives a **** about the thoughts you formulated looking at a box score.

Next year will tell us all we need to know about Gottfried. Enough of this 10-year crap that we gave Sendek or 5 long years that we gave Lowe. Next year all Sid's recruits will be out of the program.

If we come out with the same lack of effort next year.. the same too-cool-for-school attitude.. then we know what to expect as a product of the entire Mark Gottfried era.

My fear is that we already have the answer to that question. I think I've struck out every time that I assumed that our guy would be successful once he got his guys in the program.

Right now, my thinking is that Gottfried might be the 4th or 5th best coach in this league.  Not really what I was hoping for.

KarNCSU wrote:

Engineer65 wrote: KarNCSU- When we were looking at Gottfried before he ever coached his first game at State, we heard from people with knowledge of his work before he came here.  Yes, he got Alabama a high ranking- but it was NOT on the strength of their defense.  Some coaches- especially those with Bobby Knight connections- insist on good defense, both individual and team defense.  Those coaches may have a high school star sitting on the bench because that guy won't play "D".  Those coaches spend a lot of time in practice working on defense.  Gott does not have the reputation of being one of "those guys".  Could he change?  He sure could and maybe he has- but it's hard to see right now with this team.  I think Bryanth was looking at Gott's body of work- not just at what he's done since he got to Raleigh.  Just because you don't agree with his perspective, that doesn't make it a "crock of bull", although sometimes he may sling a little bs.

Totally agree with ya Engineer. His past history shows a lack of focusing on defense. I'm not saying he has changed or he will. I'm just waiting to see based on the product of NC State's team in the next upcoming season and the following season. Not on teams in the past he coached at. Good coaches adapt and keep adding small things to their systems. Lets see if Gott has or not. Also I was being facetious with Bry since he called my perspective/viewpoint a "crock of bull"

JonnyJackson wrote: The one thing that gets to me is the players body language.  To use Duke as an example (coach K teams are best I can think of for this point), they exhibit body language that exudes competitiveness.  I am referring to dead ball situations (fouls, TO's, etc).  They are always "engaged".  Slap the floor all you want, but that's not what I am referring to here.  Watch his teams after a foul or in a huddle during a TO.  Then watch our guys.  Its disturbingly different.  I won't say our guys are uninterested, but they just appear to be going through the motions in those instances.  Duke looks like a TEAM.  This is nothing more than a pet peeve of mine and in no way suggests that I am unhappy with Gott.  I would just love to see a little more fire in those situations.

Bryanth1a wrote: I think we should leave Coack K out the conversation when it comes to discussing the Pack's intensity and motivational level, team cohesiveness, and defensive ability.  Coach K is in a class all by himself.  Also, it implies that State must reach Duke's level if it is going to be successful.  The Pack can be very successful without duplicating Coach K's coaching philosophy.  

I like Coach Gott and glad he's our coach but I'm not expecting State to ever become a "very good" defensive team under him.  I'd love to be proven wrong, but there's nothing about his past nor present, or his coaching acumen that leads me to think differently. 

It does not make Gott a bad coach and as long as the Pack can remain an efficient offensive team and he continues to recruit at a high level, the Pack may not have to be "very good".  Just being good and/or solid defensively may be sufficient enough.

As far as intensity level of his teams, I think that will depend more on the type of recruits he brings in.  Gott isn't the emotional, fiery type of coach so it will be imperative for him to have Rodney Purvises in the program.

PackDynasty wrote:

JonnyJackson wrote: The one thing that gets to me is the players body language.  To use Duke as an example (coach K teams are best I can think of for this point), they exhibit body language that exudes competitiveness.  I am referring to dead ball situations (fouls, TO's, etc).  They are always "engaged".  Slap the floor all you want, but that's not what I am referring to here.  Watch his teams after a foul or in a huddle during a TO.  Then watch our guys.  Its disturbingly different.  I won't say our guys are uninterested, but they just appear to be going through the motions in those instances.  Duke looks like a TEAM.  This is nothing more than a pet peeve of mine and in no way suggests that I am unhappy with Gott.  I would just love to see a little more fire in those situations.

An astute, insightful observation.  

This is what bothers me the most.  Duke's players look like they've been friends for 10+ years and would fight with anyone who messes with any one of them.  Our guys are ho-hum.. oh yeah.. good looking out on that free-throw, brah (lazy five).  Now let me stare out into the crowd for a while.  Man yo, that honey in Section 27 is off da chain.

One thing that K's teams have always had that no one else has been able to duplicate is team unity and motivation.  K got right in Murphy's face when he made that steal and then fast break dunk against Maryland.  "THATTA BOY!!!!!!" he screamed in his face.

I guess K's West Point background has given him the ability to inspire guys to reach deep within themselves and play the game like it was a war.  He can reach players on a subterranean level of which no other coach is able to.  They care a lot about each other and will fight tooth and nail for everything.

PackMentality87 wrote: Since everyone is pontificating about our defense, or lack thereof, here is a  link   to the actual statistics of all ACC teams.

Carry on.

Bryanth1a wrote: I think we should leave Coack K out the conversation when it comes to discussing the Pack's intensity and motivational level, team cohesiveness, and defensive ability.  Coach K is in a class all by himself.  Also, it implies that State must reach Duke's level if it is going to be successful.  The Pack can be very successful without duplicating Coach K's coaching philosophy.  

I like Coach Gott and glad he's our coach but I'm not expecting State to ever become a "very good" defensive team under him.  I'd love to be proven wrong, but there's nothing about his past nor present, or his coaching acumen that leads me to think differently. 

It does not make Gott a bad coach and as long as the Pack can remain an efficient offensive team and he continues to recruit at a high level, the Pack may not have to be "very good".  Just being good and/or solid defensively may be sufficient enough.

As far as intensity level of his teams, I think that will depend more on the type of recruits he brings in.  Gott isn't the emotional, fiery type of coach so it will be imperative for him to have Rodney Purvises in the program.

ArmandJ wrote: I don't know if anyone else at the game noticed this:

This was somewhere in the second half/overtime after a foul shot. I remember Gottfried trying to get Zo's attention, he kept saying 'Zo! Zo!' but Zo didn't respond.

Did anyone else see it? It's a little odd...

ArmandJ wrote: I don't know if anyone else at the game noticed this:

This was somewhere in the second half/overtime after a foul shot. I remember Gottfried trying to get Zo's attention, he kept saying 'Zo! Zo!' but Zo didn't respond.

Did anyone else see it? It's a little odd...

legacyman wrote: An earlier poster stated that Coach K has had decades of building teams.  He gets to select which players he wants each year as do the other top coaches.  

Caoach Lowe came in after we couldn't find anyone else to take the job for whatever reasons. He had no prior recruiting experience nor a recruiting base although he did get a great recruiter to stay on his staff.  We got only the leftovers and some transfers for the first few years.

Coach Gottfried came in only a few years removed from recruiting and having a base.  He was able to get some good players to add to the really good base left by Coach Lowe.  Gott now has the opportunity to be much more selective and, if he wants good defensive players, he can go after them.

Coach K recruits fanatical players who subscribe to his wild, hack em-whack em style of D.  And he is now very successful with his program.  NC State has had too much turnover such as five coaches during Coach K's tenure...that is as much a key to dook's success and our lack of same as anything.

In one of my classes several years ago, I had the girlfriend of one of the players from the Ryan, Leslie, Brown class.  She said that the players loved to party and hated to play defense.  Your Honor, the defense rests...

Bryanth1a wrote:

ArmandJ wrote: I don't know if anyone else at the game noticed this:

This was somewhere in the second half/overtime after a foul shot. I remember Gottfried trying to get Zo's attention, he kept saying 'Zo! Zo!' but Zo didn't respond.

Did anyone else see it? It's a little odd...

What's odd about a player not hearing a coach during a tightly, contested game inside a loud, packed coliseum?

legacyman wrote: An earlier poster stated that Coach K has had decades of building teams.  He gets to select which players he wants each year as do the other top coaches.  

Caoach Lowe came in after we couldn't find anyone else to take the job for whatever reasons. He had no prior recruiting experience nor a recruiting base although he did get a great recruiter to stay on his staff.  We got only the leftovers and some transfers for the first few years.

Coach Gottfried came in only a few years removed from recruiting and having a base.  He was able to get some good players to add to the really good base left by Coach Lowe.  Gott now has the opportunity to be much more selective and, if he wants good defensive players, he can go after them.

Coach K recruits fanatical players who subscribe to his wild, hack em-whack em style of D.  And he is now very successful with his program.  NC State has had too much turnover such as five coaches during Coach K's tenure...that is as much a key to dook's success and our lack of same as anything.

In one of my classes several years ago, I had the girlfriend of one of the players from the Ryan, Leslie, Brown class.  She said that the players loved to party and hated to play defense.  Your Honor, the defense rests...

Engineer65 wrote:

RaleighBound wrote:

savagepagan wrote: Gott had a whole week to prepare for VT and we have to go into overtime to squeeze out a four point win over one of the worst teams in the acc?

This makes sense until you factor in the refs.

Another totally IGNORANT post!  Raleigh, it's hard to believe you watch the game, and easy to see that you don't know anything about the officials- especially the officiating in this game. VT shot 7 free throws.  Seven.  NC State shot 43- that's all your fingers and all your toes, plus your nose and your ears.  Please explain to all of us how that shows that the refs did anything to hinder NC State.  I watched closely, and I didn't see a ref block a shot, or make a steal, or set a pick, or grab a rebound.  The problems our team had were of their own doing, and the refs had nothing to do with it.  It's embarrasing and frustrating that our "fans" bring out the same lame whiny excuse after every singel game.  Maybe they are not real State fans- maybe they are eweNC fans, trying to make us look bad by posting silly posts on our board.