PDA

View Full Version : Mike Hart-just the facts ma'am, just the facts



zag buddy
11-12-2011, 07:46 PM
I just rewatched the entire game focusing on Mike Hart. There has been so much mentioned about him playing 29 minutes that I thought I would watch only him to see what Mark Few sees in a walkon.These are his stats for the game.
FG 3PT FT Rebounds Misc
M M A Pct M A Pct M A Pct Off Def Tot Ast TO Stl Blk PF PPG 29.0 2.0 7.0 28.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 0.0 3.0 1.0 0.0 3.0 4.0

During the first half, Mikes man did not score a point. When he went out with about 3:50 minutes in the half we were up by 12 points-35 to 23. at halftime we were up by three points 38 to 35. During the second half his man actually scored 6 points for the half. Twice he was left to guard two men-damned if he did damed if he didn't cover one or the other. On the foul on the 3 point shooter that he committed he was screened down low and no one made the switch so in desperation he went flying out from the key. If the other players would have played as solidly as Mike we would have blown them out. By far the worst defensive man for us on the court was Elias Harris. Left his man or didn't cover many, many time. He has all the abilities to play at the next level but he definately has a lot of work to do defensively.
I feel that once all the players know their assignments we will be a very strong team. Until then Mike Hart is the glue to keep it together. Mark Few was right in playing Mike and I think we will be seeing more of him until the team gets up to speed defensively and turnover wise. Good game Mike. Go Zags
If you respond to this post please do it with facts - No emotional responses required.

bostonzagfan
11-12-2011, 08:33 PM
2-7 from the floor and 0-2 from the line. there are two facts.

if he played that great of defense - kudos. I haven't rewatched the game, nor do I intend to. there is no reason the scholly players can't play defense and hustle like hart, they need to.

primal23
11-12-2011, 08:40 PM
Those sound like meech type stats. Didn't learn that lession either I guess.

gamagin
11-12-2011, 09:49 PM
I just rewatched the entire game focusing on Mike Hart. There has been so much mentioned about him playing 29 minutes that I thought I would watch only him to see what Mark Few sees in a walkon.These are his stats for the game.
FG 3PT FT Rebounds Misc
M M A Pct M A Pct M A Pct Off Def Tot Ast TO Stl Blk PF PPG 29.0 2.0 7.0 28.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 0.0 3.0 1.0 0.0 3.0 4.0

During the first half, Mikes man did not score a point. When he went out with about 3:50 minutes in the half we were up by 12 points-35 to 23. at halftime we were up by three points 38 to 35. During the second half his man actually scored 6 points for the half. Twice he was left to guard two men-damned if he did damed if he didn't cover one or the other. On the foul on the 3 point shooter that he committed he was screened down low and no one made the switch so in desperation he went flying out from the key. If the other players would have played as solidly as Mike we would have blown them out. By far the worst defensive man for us on the court was Elias Harris. Left his man or didn't cover many, many time. He has all the abilities to play at the next level but he definately has a lot of work to do defensively.
I feel that once all the players know their assignments we will be a very strong team. Until then Mike Hart is the glue to keep it together. Mark Few was right in playing Mike and I think we will be seeing more of him until the team gets up to speed defensively and turnover wise. Good game Mike. Go Zags
If you respond to this post please do it with facts - No emotional responses required.

Thanks for the research. That's what I thought I saw from my seat in the K2.

Should the 5 Zags on the court at any given time, put in a shift like this kid does every time he's called upon, whether it be for five minutes or 25, we'd beat every team we play.

sittingon50
11-12-2011, 09:51 PM
9 boards.

But to hell with that 'cause anyone with a keyboard knows that there are enough possessions in a game for a 7 man rotation to score 140.

cggonzaga
11-12-2011, 10:24 PM
Just curious, if Mike was indeed not the player guarding Chiverton last night why not? Chiverton is a 6-6 wing player correct? Their best offensive weapon correct? Why would our so called best defensive player not be guarding him?

Ezag
11-12-2011, 11:29 PM
+1 gamagin

cjm720
11-13-2011, 07:24 AM
I admire Hart's game. Strong, heedy, dedicated, and a hustler...a glue guy that will help this team win. I'm of the opinion that he's better suited coming off the bench to disrupt the offensive flow of our opponent, and am baffled by the development or lack thereof with the others, assuming that's why Few used those rotations.

Edited to add: Bell's too good not to let the reigns loose and learn as he goes. The faster he devlops the sooner we'll have our defensive stopper and scoring threat.

bostonzagfan
11-13-2011, 07:36 AM
A couple of questions.

What is the point of having Hart in the game if someone else is going to guard the other team's best/hot player that night?

What is the point of having Hart in if the team is just going to allow open three after open three? Hart wasn't stopping EWU from having open looks. It wasn't his fault, but if EWU was going to get open looks from three no matter who was in, they might as well have had five offensive options in the game.

WallaWallaZag
11-13-2011, 07:37 AM
i don't mind hart and i wouldn't have a huge issue with him in for 30 a game if we were rolling offensively...hart's playing time might not even be a topic of discussion if carter didn't have such an off game. if carter's shooting well and one of the freshman guards gets it going offensively (either pangos or bell though it looks like pangos might be closer as of now), i could live with extended minutes from hart.

the problem is that against ewu carter was off and pangos/bell/stockton didn't provide much offense...well stockton zero actually.

zag buddy
11-13-2011, 10:18 AM
All good points about Mike. Looks to me like it is up to coach Few to take our information and make the right choice now. At least we did our part to help him.

Birddog
11-13-2011, 11:15 AM
Wild speculation on my part, but I'd bet Few and Co decided to go with Hart because he was by far the lesser liability on defense, and offensively he knows the sets and who should be where. True enough that offensively he lacks a little, and the evidence was there for all to see in his shot selection, esp the atempted 3. Wild speculation again, but I'd bet that the staff has been hammering Mike about taking some shots and becoming a threat to score. Contributing on offense is new to Hart, but I bet he remembers what Meech and PMAC were told and what happened as a result. I think he'll come around offensively and be adequate. I doubt he will ever be considered a huge offensive threat. Offense is a new facet to his game but he's obviously a good study on other BB basics. Give him some time to develop.

Virginia Zags Fan
11-13-2011, 11:37 AM
Mike can actually score. In limited time as a Freshman, I remember him getting in and draining a 3 from the corner. He also made two huge free-throws in the WCC tourney last year that helped seal the deal. I think that at GU, his role has always been to rebound, hustle, make a stop, so he has been very hesitant to take the shots. I have heard that in scrimmages, he makes those shots/plays.

On Friday night there were several times when Mike did go out and get his man off the 3 point line. Excellent D. Of course nailing a guy behind was not good D. Hey, I doubt it will happen again. All I can say is that Coach Few says he trusts him and that is that. If the other guys want to play, I say man up, grow a pair, and earn it in practice.

Personally, I think that Guy Edi will get a lot of the minutes Mike played when he is eligible. I believe that Ryan Spangler has Mike's work ethic and drive and will be outstanding.

gamagin
11-13-2011, 11:53 AM
Mike can actually score. In limited time as a Freshman, I remember him getting in and draining a 3 from the corner. He also made two huge free-throws in the WCC tourney last year that helped seal the deal. I think that at GU, his role has always been to rebound, hustle, make a stop, so he has been very hesitant to take the shots. I have heard that in scrimmages, he makes those shots/plays.

On Friday night there were several times when Mike did go out and get his man off the 3 point line. Excellent D. Of course nailing a guy behind was not good D. Hey, I doubt it will happen again. All I can say is that Coach Few says he trusts him and that is that. If the other guys want to play, I say man up, grow a pair, and earn it in practice.

Personally, I think that Guy Edi will get a lot of the minutes Mike played when he is eligible. I believe that Ryan Spangler has Mike's work ethic and drive and will be outstanding.

he was no shooting slouch in the summer games I saw, either.

however, it's not his role. The difference is he's smart enough to take the shot when forced in to the situation. He didn't hesitate. He missed. It happens.

Zaglaw
11-13-2011, 12:50 PM
Thanks, zag buddy, for your post. I, too, thought that from my seat at K2 I saw more from Hart than most on this board, so I watched my recording of the game. Again, I saw Mike Hart playing hard, being in the right place at the right time and pulling down 9 rebounds. I have to think that the coaches know more about who is going to contribute what we need in any situation than any of us here do.

I like Mike!

milehighzagfan
11-13-2011, 01:11 PM
Hey guys,
Since time has begun the one reward coaches give for superior practice per- formance is playing time. From Friday's game it looks like coach Few was sending a message. "play better in practice and you will earn more playing time". When a player like Mike Hart gets extensive minutes it means he EARNED the playing time. For those wings who were not in the mix in game one---well, practice harder and you will get on the floor. Message sent--now we need to see if the message has been received. This is the way old school coaches communicate.

cggonzaga
11-13-2011, 02:13 PM
Since time has begun the one reward coaches give for superior practice per- formance is playing time. From Friday's game it looks like coach Few was sending a message. "play better in practice and you will earn more playing time". When a player like Mike Hart gets extensive minutes it means he EARNED the playing time. For those wings who were not in the mix in game one---well, practice harder and you will get on the floor. Message sent--now we need to see if the message has been received. This is the way old school coaches communicate.

I'm sorry but I'm so tired of this argument. To even suggest some players work hard in practice and others don't is an insult to the players. Being a coach for over 10 years I can't tell you how often some players just don't practice well. That's not to say they aren't trying or going hard in practice. For whatever reason though those same players are great come game day.

I don't know why this is such a popular theory over the past couple of years as to why certain players aren't playing. I know for a fact during this coaching staff's tenure several "star" players were not good practice players but still saw plenty of playing time. I don't know why the coaching staff isnt playing certain players but I think this theory is overrated.

milehighzagfan
11-13-2011, 04:05 PM
Regarding practice. Maybe some star players are not good practice players that is a luxury that superb talent can afford. However looking at the wing position I do not feel this is the case. I do not see a Dr.J in the mix.

04ZagFan
11-13-2011, 04:11 PM
Like someone mentioned, our defenders aren't really the problem with this team.. Having Mike Hart out there doesn't really help out much. It's the defensive scheme that's the problem. Meech was a great defender, Gray was a great defender, Hart IS a great defender, and yet teams still go off from 3 against us....

Mike Hart was great last season in his role. He was terrible Friday night. It's ONE game. I don't know why we can't just admit that and move on. Too many people worrying about defending the poor guy. He's a huge, huge, huge liability on offense, and he doesn't make up for it on defense (nobody could.)

Baseline
11-13-2011, 04:47 PM
You could see this coming! Back when we were picking the starting lineup I picked Hart. The position is weak in general. If not Hart who? Maybe Landry when he is available, but thats not a given with what little we saw him play. Hoff seems to be just a shooter, Hart brings a lot more. Bell is small for the 3 and so far can't see because off the lights. Carter, maybe, but he is a bit small also and that leaves the 2 to fill. If he goes with Bell we may be exposed at this point. We may be looking at Stockton and Pangos again. The combinations few had out there were his desperate search to find a solution to our huge problem the 3.
I was quite excited to see how Drangenis (sp) played in the short time we saw him. I was hoping he would fill the roll.
Last years Point argument just rotated to the 3 this year.

Bogozags
11-13-2011, 05:10 PM
I like Hart and what he brings to the game...his defense is surperb and as Gamagin stated from what he saw this summer, he can score BUT that isn't his role, when on the floor! Manny was also a rebounding machine but could score and made moves to the basket (yes, I miss Manny).

Please do not try to compare Meech to Hart as they played two different positions...Hart is similar to Knight who played great defense and didn't score much either but had mucho minutes.

Have no idea why the other "threes" didn't play but not sure anyone who posts here does...if so they ain't saying for a very good reason...it may not be any of our business for one...

I have raved about Hart since he began playing at GU. He is the "glue" of this team and when Guy becomes eligible Coach Few said he will be getting lots of minutes or words to that effect!

Trust in Hart!

bballbeachbum
11-13-2011, 05:33 PM
I'm sorry but I'm so tired of this argument. To even suggest some players work hard in practice and others don't is an insult to the players. Being a coach for over 10 years I can't tell you how often some players just don't practice well. That's not to say they aren't trying or going hard in practice. For whatever reason though those same players are great come game day.

I don't know why this is such a popular theory over the past couple of years as to why certain players aren't playing. I know for a fact during this coaching staff's tenure several "star" players were not good practice players but still saw plenty of playing time. I don't know why the coaching staff isnt playing certain players but I think this theory is overrated.

it's not an argument, it's the way many decisions on playing time get made, whether this tires or not or whether it applies here or not. maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but you've coached so I think you know this.

anyway, it's early still. maybe some other player does emerge for these minutes and makes them his. Sounds like they were Landry's already, which perhaps gives more clue as to the minutes Hart received in the staff's analysis re. this team and roles, future roles, that game, etc.

who knows? I know from re-watching the EWU game that Hart on the floor in that game wasn't why GU struggled to execute some things on both ends of the floor

let's see what happens tomorrow, from others getting run to even perhaps Mike Hart making more shots :)

GO ZAGS!!!

04ZagFan
11-13-2011, 06:27 PM
I like Hart and what he brings to the game...his defense is surperb and as Gamagin stated from what he saw this summer, he can score BUT that isn't his role, when on the floor! Manny was also a rebounding machine but could score and made moves to the basket (yes, I miss Manny).

Please do not try to compare Meech to Hart as they played two different positions...Hart is similar to Knight who played great defense and didn't score much either but had mucho minutes.

Have no idea why the other "threes" didn't play but not sure anyone who posts here does...if so they ain't saying for a very good reason...it may not be any of our business for one...

I have raved about Hart since he began playing at GU. He is the "glue" of this team and when Guy becomes eligible Coach Few said he will be getting lots of minutes or words to that effect!

Trust in Hart!

What an insult to Knight... You should apologize. Knight could make a lay up. While he was no offensive genius, he didn't miss point blank put backs, and he wasn't terrified of the ball.

Bogozags
11-13-2011, 06:40 PM
What an insult to Knight... You should apologize. Knight could make a lay up. While he was no offensive genius, he didn't miss point blank put backs, and he wasn't terrified of the ball.

You are entitled to your own opinion as am I and Hart plays just as hard as did Knight. Both were known for their defense and filled that role nicely.

Birddog
11-13-2011, 07:13 PM
04ZF, If you haven't already guessed, your persistent rectal orientation is getting old, really, really old, but then maybe that is your goal.

zag944
11-13-2011, 10:54 PM
We had considerably more effective scorers from the 1-3 positions when Errol Knight was on the floor.

A defensive stopper and a true hustle player is a very nice luxury to have, but we are going to have to put the ball in the hoop too. Hart is going to have to be a heck of a lot more effective in that sense if we are going to compete with good teams with him getting big minutes (I dont know that he wont grow into scoring better, or that he will continue to get minutes...just saying).

LynetteG
11-14-2011, 06:54 AM
IMHO Hart is what we call a "morning glory" in horse racing-- spectacular in morning workouts (practice) but just average in a race (game). Hart has a role on the team, but as a starter? I don't think so.

EngineerZag
11-14-2011, 06:58 AM
I don't understand why we don't play Harris at the 3 and Dower at the 4 at least for 10 minutes of the game. It would be a dynamite lineup, and Harris is more of a natural 3 than 4 anyway.

Baldwinzag
11-14-2011, 07:08 AM
and this is a perfect analogy.


IMHO Hart is what we call a "morning glory" in horse racing-- spectacular in morning workouts (practice) but just average in a race (game). Hart has a role on the team, but as a starter? I don't think so.

+1

Baldwinzag
11-14-2011, 08:00 AM
I guess I'm just confused by all this Hart bashing. Sure, he was 2-7 from the floor, so what? The entire team struggled from the floor Friday night, but since it's Hart he gets ripped for it.

Remember the name that is on the jersey these boys are wearing. It's not UNC or Duke, it's Gonzaga; this program was built on stories and players like Mike Hart. I loved that the 23rd ranked team in the country (deserved or not is another question altogether), one of the winningest programs in the past decade, started 2 walk-ons on opening night. This is GONZAGA embrace it.

04ZF and bostonzagfan, and whoever else keeps ripping Hart's playing time, I suggest you get a copy of "Decade of Excellence" and watch it. If you already have it, watch it again. It might remind you of what this program is all about.

Kudos to Coach Few for making the RIGHT DECISION and starting Hart on Friday.

I'm sure as the team progresses this year, Hart (and Stockton)will see less playing time. But it was the right move on Friday.

Well said & terrific post, GA.

:clap:

cjm720
11-14-2011, 08:04 AM
I guess I'm just confused by all this Hart bashing. Sure, he was 2-7 from the floor, so what? The entire team struggled from the floor Friday night, but since it's Hart he gets ripped for it.

Remember the name that is on the jersey these boys are wearing. It's not UNC or Duke, it's Gonzaga; this program was built on stories and players like Mike Hart. I loved that the 23rd ranked team in the country (deserved or not is another question altogether), one of the winningest programs in the past decade, started 2 walk-ons on opening night. This is GONZAGA embrace it.

04ZF and bostonzagfan, and whoever else keeps ripping Hart's playing time, I suggest you get a copy of "Decade of Excellence" and watch it. If you already have it, watch it again. It might remind you of what this program is all about.

Kudos to Coach Few for making the RIGHT DECISION and starting Hart on Friday.

I'm sure as the team progresses this year, Hart (and Stockton)will see less playing time. But it was the right move on Friday.

Much of your post is dead on BUT but my concern is for the development of the players that saw little or no time and the message it sends to future recruits.

CDC84
11-14-2011, 08:26 AM
I guess I'm just confused by all this Hart bashing. Sure, he was 2-7 from the floor, so what? The entire team struggled from the floor Friday night, but since it's Hart he gets ripped for it.

Part of the reason why the team struggled offensively is because EWU didn't have to gameplan for Hart. It was 4 on 5 out there. All they had to do was look at game tape from last year. Very much like Demetri Goodson, except possibly even worse because at least Goodson could occasionally break down the defense off the bounce for scoring opportunities. All Hart can do is score on fast breaks, defend and crash the glass. His defender can leave him wide open when he's 10 feet or further from the basket. Another major issue with having Hart out there is that it is much more difficult to "hide" guards and wings who can't score than it is big men. Good teams can get away with having that defensive oriented power forward that rebounds everything in sight and blocks shots. With wings it's more troublesome.

You can't, nor should you rip any player for what he isn't capable of doing. Hart is just never, ever going to provide offense, but he is a useful member of this team. Especially as an energy guy who can absorb fouls, set powerful screens, and rebound out of his area (which GU's bigs still don't do well). I just don't think it's in the team's best interests, in the long term, for him to be playing 30 MPG. I suspect the staff knows this as well. Then again, you can't have Gary Bell Jr. turning the ball over every second possession either. I suspect that once GBJ gets settled down and into the flow, we'll start seeing him more and more of him with Carter as a wing or second shooting guard...however you want to label it. Unfortunately, Guy Landry Edi being suspended is really having an impact on things because he's like Mike Hart but with more athleticism and offense. He's inexperienced with the system and has to get his feet wet as well, but Guy at least gives Few another option.

Baldwinzag
11-14-2011, 08:32 AM
Part of the reason why the team struggled offensively is because EWU didn't have to gameplan for Hart. It was 4 on 5 out there. All they had to do was look at game tape from last year. Very much like Demetri Goodson, except possibly even worse because at least Goodson could occasionally break down the defense off the bounce for scoring opportunities. All Hart can do is score on fast breaks, defend and crash the glass. His defender can leave him wide open when he's 10 feet or further from the basket. Another major issue with having Hart out there is that it is much more difficult to "hide" guards and wings who can't score than it is big men. Good teams can get away with having that defensive oriented power forward that rebounds everything in sight and blocks shots. With wings it's more troublesome.

You can't, nor should you rip any player for what he isn't capable of doing. Hart is just never, ever going to provide offense, but he is a useful member of this team. Especially as an energy guy who can absorb fouls, set powerful screens, and rebound out of his area (which GU's bigs still don't do well). I just don't think it's in the team's best interests, in the long term, for him to be playing 30 MPG. Then again, you can't have Gary Bell Jr. turning the ball over every second possession either. I suspect that once GBJ gets settled down and into the flow, we'll start seeing him more and more of him with Carter as a wing or second shooting guard...however you want to label it. Unfortunately, Guy Landry Edi being suspended is really having an impact on things because he's like Mike Hart but with more athleticism and offense. He's inexperienced with the system and has to get his feet wet as well, but Guy at least gives Few another option.

Straight-forward, succinct, and spot on.

Well put, CDC.

Your post appeases each dichotomy on this board as well -- perfectly stated.

A reasonable voice ensues.

zag944
11-14-2011, 08:36 AM
I guess I'm just confused by all this Hart bashing. Sure, he was 2-7 from the floor, so what? The entire team struggled from the floor Friday night, but since it's Hart he gets ripped for it.


Hart is playing his butt off and I dont mean to bash him, so please dont take this that way. From what Ive seen, he is rather limited from a scoring perspective and it is a lot more than just him "struggling" (like Carter or Bell was). That just isnt his game or his role. What we saw on the offensive end was how he plays, and it wasnt pretty statistically or by the eye test.

While the program was built on the backs of players with his heart and spirit, a lot of those players had the uncanny ability to score like crazy and that was a pretty big contributing factor too. Nor do I buy that he is working insanely harder than our new guys trying to find their place in this program. I think the start was more of an experience and familiarity thing....which is fine as long as the adjustment is made when it is appropriate.

NEC26
11-14-2011, 08:39 AM
I don't understand why we don't play Harris at the 3 and Dower at the 4 at least for 10 minutes of the game. It would be a dynamite lineup, and Harris is more of a natural 3 than 4 anyway.

Offensively that would be great but I think Elias is worse at defending the three than Monninghoff. He is a terrible defender and is much better off guarding a four than a wing player that can drive and shoot.

CDC84
11-14-2011, 08:41 AM
If people want to question Coach Few for how much he used Hart on Friday night, I think that's fair game - although I don't share the anger that some people do on this site regarding that decision. It was the first game of the season against a local rival that resulted in a win. The problem is when you criticize Hart. It's not his fault - he can only do what he can do. It's up to the coach to understand that player's limitations and to use him appropriately.

Baldwinzag
11-14-2011, 08:47 AM
Offensively that would be great but I think Elias is worse at defending the three than Monninghoff. He is a terrible defender and is much better off guarding a four than a wing player that can shoot.

Very true...

I've said it before and its hard to believe to any casual observer, yet as good & athletic as Elias is in nearly every phase of the game, he may be the least sound defender on the team.

"E" is just fine vs isolated back-to-the-basket post moves, but any sort of facing up, switching, moving along the perimeter, ball screens, closing out, he becomes a liability in this area.

After the watching the replay(I encourage everyone to do the same), I counted at least (4) three-pointers given up due to Elias chasing the wrong player or failing to switch off his man in time. This was an unfortunate trend last season as well. He isn't utilized at the 3 b/c of his defensive woes & somewhat loose ball-handling, not his ability to shoot or slash or rebound. Again, this is not bashing, just stating facts on why Elias struggles on defense on occasion and doesn't play the 3 more.