Basketball Expectations

[zephyr]

Miller, and Davis both have recurring back issues. Bartley was everything his junior year that he was his senior year, the difference is Stroman preference as a distributor than Jay Wright. Now maybe Stroman becomes more of Barkley and in effect Jay Wright. But then who's the distributor?

No there's no way we're nearby as good, or deep in the coming year. Not a chance.

Bartley lacked consistency his junior year. Yes, he was the same type of player but he relied upon his outside game way too much his junior year and if you remember, he couldn't hit anything the second half of the year. Last year, he was our best player for the entire year and was consistent the entire time. That makes him a different player.

[Balanced_view]

Miller, and Davis both have recurring back issues. Bartley was everything his junior year that he was his senior year, the difference is Stroman preference as a distributor than Jay Wright. Now maybe Stroman becomes more of Barkley and in effect Jay Wright. But then who's the distributor?

No there's no way we're nearby as good, or deep in the coming year. Not a chance.

Wow, the statement of facts are incredible. on paper, it does not look like like we will be as deep, but that's not a given. depth is about how many players you have that can give you good consistent, efficient and productive minutes.

we are losing 3 of those players. we are adding a juco CG, and freshman PG that i heard the staff expect to be those things, 1 more player steps up that did not have a big role last year, and the deep is equal. personally. i didnt think hardy played enough minutes to be added to the team depth equation last year, so with added minutes this year he could be another player counted to add depth for this year.

again, on paper we may not look as good as last year. but every returning player should and is working to be better than they were last year. with 7 returning players or 58% of the roster, each players has the ability to determine how much growth they achieve from year to year. with over half your roster improving you have a chance to be better than the year before, especially if key players make big improvement leaps. add the new comers to that and i'm not completely sold the team CANT BE better this year. let me put it like this. lasts years team can never get any better than it was. but this years team, made up of over half of last years team still has the ability to get better each day.

[Cajunsmike]

Miller, and Davis both have recurring back issues. Bartley was everything his junior year that he was his senior year, the difference is Stroman preference as a distributor than Jay Wright. Now maybe Stroman becomes more of Barkley and in effect Jay Wright. But then who's the distributor?

No there's no way we're nearby as good, or deep in the coming year. Not a chance.

Stroman will remain the distributor. That is his game. He may shoot a little more simply out of need. Key is Jeremy Hayes (JUCO guard) as he has a game similar to Bartley. He needs to play at a high level right away. I will say the staff has said the staff believes that the freshman point guard from Houston named Wesley will solve our depth issues at that position. Let's hope they are right.

[Hatch]

Well, this kid would really have to be special to be able to fill the gap of Bartley. Bartley was conference MVP caliber this past year and he was our most consistent player all year both offensively and defensively. I agree about Russell last year and I like him a lot but I view him more as a perimeter guy who will hit open shots and benefit from a Stroman getting in the lane and getting kickouts to Russell. Bartley scored from all levels last year and was a good finisher at the rim which helped when his shot was not going down. Marquetti may be more in line to fill that gap than any other guard we have.

I don't think that redshirting Gladney or Lafayette will necessarily mean we are bringing in someone else as I think we are regardless with the loss of McCoy but I think it means more that we have depth in the frontcourt that will allow us to redshirt one of them.

Clearly I don't expect Hayes to completely fill Bartley's void. I really don't know that much about his game but I expect him to be the starting SG just by looking at his JUCO stats. He can clearly score in a variety of ways, as opposed to what we saw from Russell last year which I think gives him an edge. He shot right at 40% from behind the arc but 3's still only accounted for about 1/3 of his made FGs. He also went to the foul line 183 times (ranked 13th JUCO) and shot 82% there.

I fully expect them to sign someone with the open scholarship. The point I was making with considering the redshirt for Gladney or Lafayette was that they may be looking at a Grad Transfer that can play immediately. If that scholarship is used on someone who would have to sit out next season I think Gladney and Lafayette would both have to play next season for depth.

[Cajunsmike]

Clearly I don't expect Hayes to completely fill Bartley's void. I really don't know that much about his game but I expect him to be the starting SG just by looking at his JUCO stats. He can clearly score in a variety of ways, as opposed to what we saw from Russell last year which I think gives him an edge. He shot right at 40% from behind the arc but 3's still only accounted for about 1/3 of his made FGs. He also went to the foul line 183 times (ranked 13th JUCO) and shot 82% there.

I fully expect them to sign someone with the open scholarship. The point I was making with considering the redshirt for Gladney or Lafayette was that they may be looking at a Grad Transfer that can play immediately. If that scholarship is used on someone who would have to sit out next season I think Gladney and Lafayette would both have to play next season for depth.

I agree with this post. One advantage Hayes has over Hardy and Russell is simply size. He is 6'3" while the other two are slightly above 6'. Good point in that neither of the two freshman big men may not redshirt if the last scholarship goes towards a transfer who sits out the year.

[CajunEXPRESS]

Mike what makes you believe he’s the listed height while you’re claiming Russel is’t the 6’2”advertised.

I guess I’m saying we cannot believe anything put out by the administration.

[ManAboutTown]

Wow, the statement of facts are incredible. on paper, it does not look like like we will be as deep, but that's not a given. depth is about how many players you have that can give you good consistent, efficient and productive minutes.

we are losing 3 of those players. we are adding a juco CG, and freshman PG that i heard the staff expect to be those things, 1 more player steps up that did not have a big role last year, and the deep is equal. personally. i didnt think hardy played enough minutes to be added to the team depth equation last year, so with added minutes this year he could be another player counted to add depth for this year.

again, on paper we may not look as good as last year. but every returning player should and is working to be better than they were last year. with 7 returning players or 58% of the roster, each players has the ability to determine how much growth they achieve from year to year. with over half your roster improving you have a chance to be better than the year before, especially if key players make big improvement leaps. add the new comers to that and i'm not completely sold the team CANT BE better this year. let me put it like this. lasts years team can never get any better than it was. but this years team, made up of over half of last years team still has the ability to get better each day.

Oh c’mon BV.

[Cajunsmike]

Mike what makes you believe he's the listed height while you're claiming Russel is't the 6'2"advertised.

I guess I'm saying we cannot believe anything put out by the administration.

All programs exaggerate heights. I stood next to Russell at events last year and no way he is 6' 2". It is possible that Hayes is not 6'3". However his JUCO stats indicate he can get to the rim which Russell did not do much last year. He needs to improve on that in his sophomore year. Russell did move off the 3 point line and sink a couple of mid range jumpers in the NIT game. I think he could be very effective if he did that more often. I wish staff would consider more of the mid range game in their arsenal. They do believe in NBA analytics indicating the mid range is the least optimum shot. That fails to account for one thing, the defense. If they protect the rim and run you off the three point line, the mid range jumper is an effective weapon. You just need to practice it for it to be a weapon. Russell could be the ideal guy to do that. Sorry to get off topic regarding player sizes but my belief that teams going away from the mid range game when the 3 is defended is something I believe hurts basketball.

[CajunEXPRESS]

I'm with the analytical beliefs that mid range shots simply aren't worth the risk unless you are really bad at 3 point line. That's why we need people who hit way over 50% around the rim like Washington did most nights.

[Cajunsmike]

I'm with the analytical beliefs that mid range shots simply aren't worth the risk unless you are really bad at 3 point line. That's why we need people who hit way over 50% around the rim like Washington did most nights.

I used to be as well until I realized that defenses have adjusted to everything being a 3 or a shot at the rim. A guy like Russell will get run off of the three point line and may not be able to finish at the rim. If he practices the mid range shot off the dribble he will have plenty of open looks. Not everyone can do that but it can be an effective weapon with the right player. Reason analytics show the mid range shot to be less effective is because so few players practice it. If people practiced the 15 to 18 footer, they would improve and really give the defense fits. Make a few of those and you may get the open three.

[zephyr]

Wow, the statement of facts are incredible. on paper, it does not look like like we will be as deep, but that's not a given. depth is about how many players you have that can give you good consistent, efficient and productive minutes.

we are losing 3 of those players. we are adding a juco CG, and freshman PG that i heard the staff expect to be those things, 1 more player steps up that did not have a big role last year, and the deep is equal. personally. i didnt think hardy played enough minutes to be added to the team depth equation last year, so with added minutes this year he could be another player counted to add depth for this year.

again, on paper we may not look as good as last year. but every returning player should and is working to be better than they were last year. with 7 returning players or 58% of the roster, each players has the ability to determine how much growth they achieve from year to year. with over half your roster improving you have a chance to be better than the year before, especially if key players make big improvement leaps. add the new comers to that and i'm not completely sold the team CANT BE better this year. let me put it like this. lasts years team can never get any better than it was. but this years team, made up of over half of last years team still has the ability to get better each day.

Every player returning is not a Bryce Washington, J Stove or Bartley. I'm sure there will be some improvement but the question is will there be leadership come from and the same level of productivity?

[zephyr]

I used to be as well until I realized that defenses have adjusted to everything being a 3 or a shot at the rim. A guy like Russell will get run off of the three point line and may not be able to finish at the rim. If he practices the mid range shot off the dribble he will have plenty of open looks. Not everyone can do that but it can be an effective weapon with the right player. Reason analytics show the mid range shot to be less effective is because so few players practice it. If people practiced the 15 to 18 footer, they would improve and really give the defense fits. Make a few of those and you may get the open three.

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

[Cajunsmike]

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

+1

[CajunEXPRESS]

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

Those open mid range shots rarely exceed 45%, most people who cannot hit 30% from 3 point range don't shoot them. So you've got to hit 15 more jump shots mid range to equal 30% in a hundred shots. Not a good risk, but go ahead let y'all bias find exceptions. We're talking the typical player.

Apparently coaches whose living depends on making the right decisions don’t understand.

[Cajunsmike]

Those open mid range shots rarely exceed 45%, most people who cannot hit 30% from 3 point range don't shoot them. So you've got to hit 15 more jump shots mid range to equal 30% in a hundred shots. Not a good risk, but go ahead let y'all bias find exceptions. We're talking the typical player.

Apparently coaches whose living depends on making the right decisions don’t understand.

Our staff is completely bought into favoring the three or shots at the rim over mid range shots. Here is an instance where you agree with them and I don't fully. I just prefer open mid range shots over contested threes if the right player is shooting the open mid range shot. Key phrase is "contested three". If both shots are open, you are correct in that the three is a better gamble. I have no problem with open threes. What some are missing is that defenses are beginning to adjust to the new game and contest a lot more threes than they used to. That allows more open shots away from the three point line.