Note: This is the last installment in a series previewing the 2009-10 Hoyas.
Finally, it’s time for a look at sophomore Greg Monroe, and an overwrought, painful, and last look back at the season that was.
Monroe, the 6’11″, 250-lb. New Orleans product, arrived on campus as the highest-rated Georgetown recruit at least since the great Anthony Perry over a decade before (hard to imagine now, but so it was), and possibly since the Answer himself. As such, Monroe fueled unrealistic expectations both about his own performance and about the promise he symbolized. He was the first recruit who my non-Georgetown friends knew even before he put on the blue and gray. Fans of other teams spoke about Monroe with the flattering mix of curiosity and jealousy previously reserved for players like Kevin Durant and Greg Oden — the type players who hadn’t routinely gone to Georgetown since before I arrived.
For the wide-eyed or greedy among us, Monroe heralded the first drop in a stream of blue-chip recruits, the sort of talented, high-character, intelligent, and versatile players that normally ended up in Durham. Monroe was the harbinger of the perfection of the JTIII era. Soon, the Hoyas would be everywhere you looked on national television, embellished by the national media’s glowing praise that Georgetown does things “the right way.” No longer would Georgetown be saddled by the backhanded compliment of “traditional powerhouse,” as if Georgetown were La Salle, or Holy Cross, or the City College of New York (and particularly stinging for those of us who were on the Hilltop between 1998 and 2005).
Monroe, of course, would dominate from day one. He could score, he could pass, he had a handle, he was crafty on D. He manned the post, a spot occupied by so many greats before him. He would fulfill the expectations set by those predecessors, leading a talented if inexperienced group of Hoyas through the brutal Big East, and then….
Then, for a while, it looked like it might all come true. The Hoyas blasted Maryland, outlasted Memphis, and handled then-No. 2 Connecticut on the road to cap a 10-1 start that earned them a top-10 ranking. Sure, they then got muscled by Pitt and lost, just like everyone else, at Notre Dame, but they righted the ship by thumping Syracuse at home. Monroe fulfilled expectations, stepping up when needed. He boasted offensive variety. He shot passably from the outside, and showed intermittent flashes as a back-to-the-basket post player. Still, he was most comfortable and effective facing up from the high post, then dipping, spinning, and driving his way to the hoop. He chipped in on defense, notching steals and blocks throughout, and snagged rebounds better than anyone else on a seemingly board-wary team. Even in defeat, he turned in the occasional virtuoso performance:
But then, of course, the bottom fell out. Signs of selfishness — ill-advised shots, missed box-outs — crept in. Several players became visibly uninterested, seemingly unable to keep the smallest run from turning into a route. On-court bickering and rumors of fights were widespread. The team underachieved, self-destructed, and sleepwalked through much of the season. Top-5 rankings, Big East dominance, and even an NCAA tournament bid all passed the Hoyas by. The season ended in bewilderment and disappointment.
Postmortems parceled blame, largely and deservedly omitting Monroe. After all, Monroe did just about everything for the Hoyas last year. His season would have pleased all of us, had we not been spoiled by 2007′s raised expectations and embittered by 2008′s lingering disappointment. He was second on the team in scoring (12.5 points per game) and assists (2.5 per), and tops in rebounding (6.5 rebounds per, over half again as many rebounds as any other Hoya), steals (1.8 per), and blocks (1.5 per). He shot a filthy 57.2% from the field, and racked up the highest true shooting percentage on the team. In short, he had the all-around game that compared favorably to Jeff Green.
And, what he didn’t do was just as important. He did not heedlessly dial his own number in an effort to boost his NBA stock. He did not stoke turmoil within, or engage in a self-destructive war for alpha dog status. If anything, he was too deferential: starting with the Duke game (the Lehman Bros. of Georgetown’s season), Monroe took 10 or more shots in just 4 of the remaining 16 games. (For comparison, Chris Wright took 10 or more shots in 9 games over the same stretch, DaJuan Summers 7 games, and Austin Freeman 6 games.)
Given the unfair expectations and severe disappointment, Monroe would have been justified in cashing in by entering the NBA Draft, where many pundits had him slated in the top 5. Ultimately, however, Monroe returned to the Hilltop, shaking off last season’s ghosts for another run.
He returns to find a thin, still-young squad equally long on question marks and on talent. Monroe, Freeman, and Wright may be the most talented trio of the JTIII era. Certainly, they represent the culmination of the most fruitful recruiting stretch in memory. Still, the rest of the team is largely unproven or uncertain.
For the sake of nit-picking, Monroe needs a few tweaks to his generally refined game. He needs to polish his outside shot and consistently — or even occasionally — finish with his right hand. More fundamental, though, is the age-old intangible. Monroe’s principal issue is whether he can become a full-bore leader, someone to pound the boards when needed, pick teammates up when times get tough, demand the ball when he wants it, and want the ball when his team needs a bucket. While it is incumbent upon JTIII to get Monroe the ball more often, Monroe also must assert himself more often, and must defy questions about his desire or, to channel Jay Bilas, his “motor.” Whether Monroe steps up and demonstrates an unwavering passion to win will dictate whether he fuel new dreams of glory.
