Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Yankees Deny Rumors That Team Is For Sale

Was the 04 Championship Game Appearance good for the program?

 

This was a question a few of my friends and I recently discussed and I wanted to know what others thought. After the jump I'll talk about my answer.

Star-divide

Off the bat it would be hard to find anyone who would trade a national championship appearance for nearly anything. Its not just an NCAA Tournament appearance, Sweet Sixteen, or even Final Four. We were 9 points from winning a National Championship. That is something special no matter which way you slice it. That 03-04 team was special, Bynum as a firecracker that as a young fan I remember the most, Schenscher was great to watch play, and Jack was the best basketball player Georgia Tech has had this decade. That team had a great, energetic, and lovable core of players that had everyone excited from the Pre-season NIT victory all the way to the end. And that team was great to go along with its energy (25th best offense, 3rd best defense,7th overall, according to kenpom.com). It was a season that sparked alot of energy in the program (4 straight sellout seasons afterward). It was also the season that sparked The Contract, and The Contract is why my friends and I have such a tough time deciding which we would rather have; How things are currently, or no Championship Run and no Hewitt. My initial answer was to erase the championship run and have Paul Hewitt fired. I wanted to see if my intense disapproval was merited, "Is Paul Hewitt Really That Bad?".

PERFORMANCE

Paul Hewitt's teams are consistently defensive squads who don't score alot of points and make opponents work for points. Here is the KenPom Offensive and Defensive ranks for GT since 2004....

 

Year O Rank D Rank
2004 25 3
2005 53 8
2006 113 92
2007 15 36
2008 33 96
2009 194 32
2010 62 12
AVERAGE 71 40
MEDIAN 58 34

 

As you can see we consistently perform better on D than O and, except for 2 terrible seasons, 06 & 08, we have a great defense (top 35) and an OK offense (top 60). The offensive ranks kind of surprised me, I feel like Tech is consistently one of the worst offenses in the ACC and struggles so much at times, but the numbers seem to indicate we do a good job of scoring buckets. But how does this translate into wins?

 

Year O Rank D Rank ACC Wins ACC Tournament Wins
2004 25 3 9 1
2005 53 8 8 2
2006 113 92 4 0
2007 15 36 8 0
2008 33 96 7 1
2009 194 32 2 1
2010 62 12 7 3
AVERAGE 71 40 6.4 1.1
MEDIAN 58 34 7.0 1.0

 

We have won at least 7 games each year except for 06 and 08, 2 terrible years. 7 wins out of 16 games year in and year out in the ACC, one of if not THE toughest conferences each year, is impressive. I think what has hurt the perception of the qualities of the teams has been our performance in the ACC tournament. In 06 that team was terrible, ok, but in 07 we had the most pure talent we have had at tech in a long time and we got beat by a bad Wake team in the opening round (granted in 2OT but still). In 08 we seemed to be right where we should be by beating UVA in the opening round and losing to a great Duke team. Then in 09 and 10 we vastly over-achieved from how we played during the season, creating a sort of, "Well where was this during the season" feeling from the fans. In a way this almost made it worse for Hewitt because the talent he had assembled COULD play great, it just rarely did.

TALENT

One thing Hewitt has done well has been bring Talent to Tech.

 

Year Rivals  AVG Stars Recruits
2004 21 3.5 4
2005 20 3.5 4
2006 8 4.0 4
2007 NR 3.7 3
2008 NR 4.0 1
2009 4 3.8 6
2010 NR 3.0 2
AVERAGE 13.3 3.6 3.4
MEDIAN 13.3 3.7 3.7

 

4 top 20 Recruiting classes in 7 years is very good for a non-elite basketball program. I haven't looked at the numbers for any other ACC teams but I would assume this level of recruiting to be in the top half of the ACC, and certainly one of the top results outside of Duke and UNC. And even the classes that were not ranked were usually because of a low quantity of recruits, not a low quality. In 2008 we had one recruit, Iman Shumpert, who this season has been a top 40 offensive player. And in 2007 we had 2 4-star recruits and 1 3-star, which is still a quality class. But recruiting is one thing, what about NBA talent?

 

Year Picks Players
2004 0 0
2005 1 3
2006 0 0
2007 2 3
2008 0 1
2009 0 0
2010 2 2
AVERAGE 0.7 1.3
MEDIAN 0.4 1.1

 

While there have only been 5 draft picks out of tech in the last 7 years, 9 players played at the NBA level for at least a season. And players like Bynum and Anthony Morrow are very good contributors on their respective teams, even if they were not star players at Tech. Paul Hewitt does a very good job of recruiting top talent to Tech but I feel a lack of development of that talent once it gets to tech hurts his perception. Anthony Morrow was a crazy good shooter while at tech but never was a focal point of our offense, only scoring 14 ppg while only being 8th on the team in %poss. And our star recruits, Crittenton, Young, Favors, Lawal, all seem to under perform while at Tech but yet still have high NBA potential, even though, to me, guys labeled with the "high NBA potential" tag are never really great PLAYERS. I think this perception of the talent Hewitt brings in hurts his image from a fans perspective, if we have some of the top talent shouldn't we be winning more?

CONTRACT

Lastly we talk about The Contract. It is awful, it is one of the worst contracts for an institution that I know of, especially one without a very big fan base and commitment to athletics as Tech. The current buyout, according to the AJC, is 7.25 million dollars. Not only would that amount be required to fire Hewitt we would also need more money to sign a new basketball coach. And unless we can get a great coach, would it be worth it to spend around 10 million in upfront money to replace a bad coach with an ok one? Also with the Alexander Memorial Colosseum II opening soon, a 45 million dollar investment, does the Athletic program have enough money to even think about this? I do not think so. As much as D-Rad would love to make a new hire to energize the fan base, he isn't dumb and he knows when to much money is to much. Of course we would not be in this position if our last AD, Dave Braine, did not institute the rollover contract after the 04 season. Even at the time it seemed a little off to handicap a program to a coach essentially for life. If we had not made such a great championship run perhaps Hewitt would have only gotten a raise, or only an extension, but I think the rollover stipulation only happens when we make it to that championship game. So this brings me to the whole point of this discussion (rant), in the long run was the 04 championship run good for the program? After researching all this I believe that yes, it was good for the program. I do not like having Paul Hewitt as our head coach and I hope he is let go as soon as possible, but we have enjoyed a lot of success in the ACC tournament, had multiple NCAA appearances, and attract high profile recruits. And if you are in doubt, think back to the 03-04 season, the initial 12-0 start, beating UCONN in the preseason NIT, and finally that magical March Madness run, Will Bynum making that layup against OK ST, those things don't happen often, and I would not trade that experience for many things, Paul Hewitt included.

Comment 6 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Yes, overall the San Antonio experience was worth it to the program,

especially since I sat at mid-court for the Semi’s and Final hoping for a GT vs. Doook final.

Any high level performance like ’90 or ’04 is memory making, and worth the inevitable slide in the ensuing years.

Thanks for the run down on stats. I am appalled at the trend on the D side of the ball. CPH and his staff were always about the D, active, aggressive, don’t back down to anyone.

Charlton Young (now at Georgia Southern) always preached hands up and in their face D, so I’m struck by some of these low rankings. Of course, having Jeremis Smith, Anthony McHenry and Luuuke on the same team lead to some stiff Defense in 2004.

by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Feb 14, 2011 8:54 PM EST reply actions  

Jeremis didn't play on the 04 team.

Muhammad was the stud defender on that team with an h.m. for McHenry.

by GTwill on Feb 17, 2011 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

I'll still say yes.

Even though maybe I have more emotions wanting me to say ‘yes’ than I should. I do have a conspiracy theory that’s not perfectly airtight but whatever: Paul Hewitt recruited TEAMS back in the early 2000s. When he got to the Final Four and National Championship Game he wanted to get back so bad that he started recruiting highly touted INDIVIDUALS aka one-and-dones and fell to the wayside.

Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat

by Winfield Featherston on Feb 15, 2011 8:55 AM EST reply actions  

Bosh kinda blows that up huh?

That and 2009’s haul as well. With Lawal and Favors there was no need to pick up a true 5, so he essentially recruited a ton of pieces to put around those guys with the hope that they would fall in-line and make a run last year. That didn’t leave us in a great place this year down low, but that core group should be coming together as a team with Shumpert, Mo Miller, etc.

What happened in 04 was more than just Hewitt putting together a team of players. We didn’t do particularly well during the regular ACC season and made a hell of a run in the Tourney with close game after close game. It was a confluence of events that made it all possible. The bigger problem, now and even then, is that Hewitt is a Gailey clone in that he doesn’t grow the talent once he gets them on campus. Essentially, the players are who they are, for better or worse, the entire time they spend at GT. I have yet to see one single player to actually grow while at GT, with the only exception possibly being Jack.

But to the point of the post, I don’t think I could give that year up for anything.

"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.

by Jesse28 on Feb 15, 2011 1:15 PM EST up reply actions  

I am willing to consider your premise

but I have to say Luke Schenscher grew from a kid who did not know what he was doing under the basket to a respectable player.

by Atlanta's original team on Feb 15, 2011 5:18 PM EST up reply actions  

I think that's the key

A player needs a few years to develop. A single season usually isn’t enough, and these one-and-done guys hurt the consistency of the team. Look at Duke’s recruiting classes over the past several seasons. Most players aren’t good enough to be one-and-done’s, but are good enough to dominate in basketball (as a team) after a few years.

It’s kind of hard to turn down an elite player though when one walks through the door.

by acedarney on Feb 16, 2011 12:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to FromTheRumbleSeat, a "bastion of capitalization and grammar skills."

SHOP THE FROM THE RUMBLE SEAT STORE

Gameday Depot University Apparel


Regional Co-Managers

Hokiesplat_small BirdGT

Gravatar_small Winfield Featherston

Assistants to the Regional Managers

Ramblinracket_small Ramblin Jeff

Orwin_smith_small Jesse28

Dscn2741cropped_small orientalnc

Nate_small GTNate

Images_small Atlanta's original team

Small LilBroey700

Directors of Personnel

Small acedarney