Jonathan Beagle - Albany Transfer - Commit
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
I think this is an important point that gets lost in this conversation. So much of the gameplan has to be predicated on the players you have, not the system you run.
So if we have two guys in Walz and beagle who show to be good OR guys, then coach needs to find a way to work that to his advantage.
Beagle doesn’t look like a typical Spider big based on the short highlight video. He is most effective on the offensive rebound tip-in, so seems to be counterproductive to instruct him to not play to his strength. It will be interesting to see what happens. Walz is definitely miles ahead on the usual Richmond offense.
So, did anyone have Beagle on our list of players we were interested in?
I’m think one of you geniuses must have have had him on your list.
It’s pathetic how some you think you know what you’re talking about.
Especially, billboard man!
I’m think one of you geniuses must have have had him on your list.
It’s pathetic how some you think you know what you’re talking about.
Especially, billboard man!
Do you mean before two weeks ago when we knew he was visiting? Or do you mean yesterday before he committed?
I actually predicted that we would end up with Beagle back in December to myself. I also successfully predicted the other transfers we are getting, but just for fun, I'll let you guys wait and find out for yourself in a few weeks. You're welcome.
I will say, the Beagle news has to be chalked up as a W for sman. He is always a proponent of having three bigs on the roster. I was a little surprised ( especially since EL never tipped me on this) when we were going after him. But pleasantly surprised. It gives us two legit physical presences to throw out there for 40 minutes a night. I think Soulis will prove athletic enough to play next to these guys, that would be ideal.
TJ, GG and Quinn were big. but they're not above average run/jump athletes. they're not quick twitch guys.
guys like Burton and Bigelow are. and they rebounded here.
I personally don't expect Beagle to put up the same offensive rebounding numbers here as he did at Albany. if he's below the foul line, sure ... he should go after rebounds. but our big man is sometimes top of the key. he shouldn't be running in to rebound from there. that's a system thing.
I've always thought our ideal big man should be a shooting threat because of where we play him early in our offense. it was sometimes a problem that big defenders could pay off Quinn there and clog the lane. so in that way, Beagle isn't perfect for us. but we certainly need rebounding with Quinn and Bigelow gone. and he's the top rebounding big man we contacted.
Exactly, all I was trying to say. You can send a couple guys to offensively rebound, which will result in a few extra possessions per game and still prevent transition points. It kills me when one of our guys shoots and the ball literally come right back to them and had they just stayed in the same spot, they would have gotten us an extra possession, but they are taught to retreat as soon as the ball goes up.
And 4700 is correct, I do believe it "bleeds" over onto our technique/aggressiveness of the defensive end of things. Obviously, the stats didn't bear that out last year. But again, our offensive rebounding was so anemic that even though we finished 3rd in defensive rebounding we still finished dead last in total rebounding last year.
That to me is not great and feel we could just tweak a few things to just become "average" or hell even below average at offensive rebounding. But finishing dead last in offensive rebounding in the entire NCAA, 362 out of 362 teams, I don't know how anyone can look at that and gee that is something we should aim to replicate. I don't think finishing dead last in offensive rebounding is some type of sustainable strategy to win 25 games and go to the NCAA. It was last year, I suspect that was an anomoly, because we had an incredible shot maker and as Eight said we caught a ton of breaks in close games that could have easily gone the other way.
You said 4700 is correct about your saying it bleeds into our defense? I didn't say that is what you were saying. And, funny you say that when we finished 34th in defensive efficiency last year. And, last year was not an anomoly due to having King. In 2020, we did not have King, and went 24-7 despite being 326th in OR, and in 2022, we didn't have King and went 24-13 with an A-10 title and a dance win despite being 325th in OR. This debate is so ridiculous. It's as if you guys are saying, "I don't care if we win titles and how many games we win, I just want us to get more offensive rebounds." Or, the latest one, "but if our player doesn't play great". Uh, the goal is to have your players play great. King is not the first and won't be the last player to play great for us.
And the anomoly was St Mary's having a guy who averaged over 3 offensive rebounds a game for them. That was extremely rare for them, and I don't see Quinn doing that no matter how we play. I gave you their OR stats the many years before that, and they weren't good.
Last edited:
Last year, Quinn got 32 OR in 910 minutes, and Walz got 29 in only 361 minutes. Our numbers will be better next year with Walz getting more minutes.
Since we are 362/362 I’d think that translates to #1 in country in least fast break points allowed. That is why we do this, right? So no one ever gets a run out, ever?
But I can’t find a stat on it, ncaa site doesn’t have it on defensive side only on FB points scored.
But I can’t find a stat on it, ncaa site doesn’t have it on defensive side only on FB points scored.
Of course teams will get occasional run outs. And, no, we shouldn't be 1 in least fast break points due to our OR numbers. 362 is way too big a sample size to expect the exact reverse with this. But, from watching our games, and other games, isn't it obvious we give up very few transition points, especially compared to most other teams?
My lord, even when I say you are right about something, you find a way to twist it around and complain about it. I give up. 4700, you are a hundred percent right. Do you feel better now.
What Mooney is doing is perfect, that is why he wins 55% of all of his games he coaches.
Last edited:
Know what you mean but the percentage sign was missing .........Mooney has coached more than 55 wins.............................posted this with all good intentions.................
???? But, I didn't say what you said I said. And, I disagreed with it so why can't I reply there and say that wasn't me? My turn....97 is right, Mooney is a great coach. But, bottom line is we all read what you posted. No matter how many times you deny it , you said our OR affects our DR and you were shown that is not accurate.
One concern might be his passing. But that is hard to tell without watching a lot of him because some of that might be determined on how Albany used him in their offense. He had high turnovers to assist at Albany, but again - that could be how he was used. I would expect the coaches at this point value the passing ability at that position and trust their judgement there.
I tried to give you as many clues as I could. If you go back to my posts from early December, you will find that I spelled out "B-E-A-G-L-E" a number of times, through the use all of those letters in my posts, though not in that exact order. I'm really surprised you missed this.
And as I said, that is my belief. There is a stat that doesn't necessarily support that observation out there (total defensive rebounding) but that stat doesn't necessarily disprove that either.
Just like you can't prove that foregoing offensive rebounding makes us one of the best teams in preventing transition bucket. If you can find a stat that says that I will listen though.
You seriously don't think we are good at preventing transition points? Watch other games and see how many not only layups but wide open 3s teams give up in transition compared to us.
My point was facetious.
We are last in OR.
We don’t have to be unless the upside is such an overall advantage.
Also, some teams do not run out barely at all. Why get back the same way against that team than you would against Alabama or Kentucky who want to run all day?
I picture UR vs UVa with a ball at center court just sitting there.
We are last in OR.
We don’t have to be unless the upside is such an overall advantage.
Also, some teams do not run out barely at all. Why get back the same way against that team than you would against Alabama or Kentucky who want to run all day?
I picture UR vs UVa with a ball at center court just sitting there.
Also, re Beagle, Albany’s coach is terrible and had previous run ins with at least one player (may have even been reprimanded I cannot recall.) I wouldn’t put too much stock into anything that happened involving that coach. I do fully trust our staff with regards to player relationships and evaluations of character.
We need to try something different. If trying to grab an offensive rebound once in a while is a change CM makes, Im all for it. What we are doing isn't working. 3 for 19 NCAA. 1 NCAA since 2011. That's not definition of not working to me.
Yes let's revert to the Tarrant percentage of post season appearances.....................
Former UAlbany Men’s Basketball Player Sues UAlbany and Head Coach Dwayne Killings
By Shawn Ness | November 18, 2022Coach Killings and Luke Fizulich during a home game in February.Photo Credit: Hans Pennink/Times UnionUpdated Aug. 28, 2023. Luke Fizulich, a former University at Albany men’s basketball player, filed a lawsuit against the university on Monday after an...
www.albanystudentpress.online
So, it doesn't matter if we won 24 games in 2020, won the A-10 tourney and a dance game in 2022, and won 23 games and the A-10 regular season title in 2024, and are 100-57 the past 5 seasons? We are still gonna say it's not working because of pre 2020 years?
All in on Beagle. 6'10 double double machine. Sign me up.
Links above are probably story Brooklyn recalls. I thought the comments from Skillings about Beagle's absence were not very well though out or worded - so have to believe this may have been mostly a sour relationship with the coach. From everything you hear - I do think Mooney and our assistants, and teammates will offer a much more positive environment, not to mention better league, arena, attendance, etc. Win / Win.
Links above are probably story Brooklyn recalls. I thought the comments from Skillings about Beagle's absence were not very well though out or worded - so have to believe this may have been mostly a sour relationship with the coach. From everything you hear - I do think Mooney and our assistants, and teammates will offer a much more positive environment, not to mention better league, arena, attendance, etc. Win / Win.
No, we are saying it isn't working because we have only qualified for the NCAA tournament 1 time since 2011. I thought my post was pretty clear.
yeah, I think the Albany players are letting their feet do the talking regarding that coach.
7 of them are in the portal. they had talent.
pretty amazing that a 13-19 team had the follwing guys in the portal with so much interest:
Beagle: Richmond, SBU, GMU, UMASS, UNCW, etc ...
Sebastian Thomas: Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, etc ...
Amar'e Marshall: Virginia Tech, GMU, Seton Hall, GW, etc ...
So the guy apparently assaulted a player and kept his job. But probably be fired after this season for losing too much.
8legs1dream
Team Manager
I agree, no reason to try to change anything, Everything is going perfectly. Really excited for that next NCAA tournament appearance maybe sometime in the next ten years.
FIRE BENNETT!
EXTEND MOONEY!
Regardless.... is it reasonable to make the argument or observation that maybe we could be even better moving forward with a more nuanced approach to offensive rebounding? I think that's really my whole perspective. I don't mind that we ensure defensive balance to prevent fast-break points. But I do think we could be a little more intentional about offensive rebounding. For example, any shot from a wing, whomever is occupying the opposite wing or corner should go try and rebound, since something like 65/70% of shots from the wing are rebounded on the far side, and if someone is in the lane, they stay. But everyone else gets back. I'm sure there are analytics about this. I wish we would make an attempt to try something a little different to see if it in fact helps. I don't wish to relitigate past seasons.
I really noticed the difference in that type of approach with our women's team. They would send at least one person to crash the boards on offense, and it paid off a lot. If you miss a three and can get an offensive board and score, it can be a huge benefit, especially if you are a good three-point shooting team. Say you go 8 for 20 on threes but can get offensive boards on four of them and score on three of them. There's six points, which would be like going 10 for 20 on threes.
Well put. Again finishing last in the NCAA in any statistical category should be cause for at least a recalibration of approach. It's not like any of us are asking him for to completely change his approach to coaching basketball, but hey, this area didn't go well this year, so maybe we put a little focus on changing up our tactics.
