My fear with this team - with so many new players and losing so much is that we struggle in the OOC as guys learnt to play together, adjust, and figure out their roles that I can see us struggling in the OOC, but then getting it together for A10 play. Similar to that NIT year where we were a 1 seed. Our OOC was terrible, but then we got hot in the A10 play (think we finished 12-6 that season). This would require us to win A10 tourney, but at least we would be a on the upswing.
2022–23 Schedule Updates
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
I agree, it’s just silly we do not play either Va Tech or UVA every year.
This does not concern me at all. I might be concerned with that if we had a lot of freshman we were counting on, but we have 7 guys with a lot of college experience, and Nelson and Dji, who have been here learning our system for a couple years.
I think the good thing about this team is most guys likely have a pretty good idea of their roles. I think it's obvious what Quinn will be doing both offensively and defensively, we certainly know what we got Roche for, and Bigelow looks like the versatile piece who can do multiple roles. They should fit in well with anyone else we have on the floor with them. If we get good PG play, we will be fine from game 1.
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
Dayton had landmine losses aplenty last season and were still somehow in the conversation until we knocked them off. I still don't know what they did to deserve those being overlooked though.
Would be great if we could get the H&H back w Cincinnati. Hope staff still working that. We were due to play there in 2020 & host last season. Canceled due to Covid. But it was done under former coach Brannen not Miller, so my guess is they didn’t want to pick it back up & its completely dead. But small chance it just didn’t work out w schedules to restart in 21-22. Cincy hasn’t released schedule this year yet so u never know.
They went 1-3 vs Quad 4 before Thanksgiving then 3-1 vs Quad 1 after Thanksgiving.
I wonder how much that helped?
The board already mcgruffed that one out. Come on spiderdad u got to break some news. No teasers. give us the 411 from moving in & the last game we don't know.
Well Dji is moving back in tomorrow 😀 and me and SpiderMom are going to help…that’s all I got 😂
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
Q4 losses should matter. They used to at least, I guess it just depends on how much "THE COMMITTEE" is in love with you
well, Dayton didn't make it off the bubble, so clearly those Q4 losses did hurt.
I have a small conspiracy theory…the first team Out will most often be mid major or below. Ncaa way of saying they r looking out for the mids. “But but we were so close to adding another non p6 look.”
how many first team out have they specifically labeled? I know pretty recent. So my theory could easily be refuted bc idk. But small sample regardless…watch it will happen a bunch in future I bet.
how many first team out have they specifically labeled? I know pretty recent. So my theory could easily be refuted bc idk. But small sample regardless…watch it will happen a bunch in future I bet.
I think we still have to be Concerned that three guys projected to get a lot of time are transfers. Learning curve may be lower than it would be for freshmen but it’s definitely not nil.
I have absolutely no concern about a learning curve. these aren't high school kids getting used to the size and speed of D1 basketball. these guys have already succeeded at the D1 level.
on top of that, they were here working in June. they're here in August. and we have all fall.
I think the complexity of Richmond basketball is way overstated here. these guys were smart enough to be accepted at UR. it's almost insulting to think they can't pick up our offense or play man defense.
on top of that, they were here working in June. they're here in August. and we have all fall.
I think the complexity of Richmond basketball is way overstated here. these guys were smart enough to be accepted at UR. it's almost insulting to think they can't pick up our offense or play man defense.
I agree with this. The power conferences always take the lion share of the at large bids. And while a cinderella story is good for the NCAA tourney, it really is only good to a point. I think the NCAA likes a good Cinderella until about the sweet 16, but after that if they could have the big names - Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Nova, etc - its better for the business of the NCAA.
Agree completely here. I was making this case for 7 years as the "Amoeba" match up zone that CM talked about for so long started to lose effectiveness. Agree completely, all of the transfers seem like sharp players with good basketball IQ, I don't think it will take them half a season to learn the offense. I do think there could be some time in real games to build some chemistry and figure out roles.
I don't think it should matter very much. they sell out every game regardless of the the size of the alumni bases of the teams playing. and I doubt the schools involved have a huge impact on the eyeballs watching on TV.
college basketball fans watch march madness.
Come on Clark Kent, you can’t actually believe this. It’s insulting? You’re offended?
There is 100% a learning curve that takes times to learn to work together. It’s hard to replicate the pace of live games in practice — this is true at any level.
If you need proof that there is a learning curve, take a look at the Miami Heat after the Big 3 joined (arguably some of the most talented athletes in the world at that point). They were below average for most of the season until they gained experience together and eventually were a formidable force.
lol, no I'm not offended. I just don't think we'll have a learning curve issue. no more than anyone else already on the roster stepping up to a bigger role after a starter leaves. plenty of players transfer and succeeded immediately. Quinn ran a similar offense at Lafayette. I'm going to assume all 3 played man defense.
Mooney's job is to get the team and it's players ready to play. Let's not make excuses for him. Every single team in the country has transfers/new players they are integrating into their systems right now. We are literally no different than any of the other 300 plus other D-1 teams right now.
Defense, particularly man defense, less of a learning curve as you suggested. Generally effort and fundamentals carry the day with a man defense.
However, understanding rotations and the strengths and weaknesses of your teammates also important. For example, Burton doesn’t believe in putting a body in front of his opponent and usually tries to make an attempt at a block from behind which requires another player to rotate to help. I’m sure these transfers will make better adjustments on rotations as they play together more
I think there will be an adjustment period for the new guys. You can't simulate real game situations in practice. But not only do these guys have college experience, which should make the learning curve quicker, lets also remember that because of the transfer portal almost every team in NCAA is dealing with this issue as well. So we are not alone, and will likely be playing teams in a similar situation.
Well, it is probably pretty easy to pick and choose a situation that would match either side of the debate here. But, in this case, you failed miserably here. The Heat were below average most of the season???? Really? They started 4-1, were never below .500, and were 30-11 at the halfway point that season. They finished the 2nd half 28-13, so they were actually slightly better the 1st half of the season. How could this possibly be called "below average most of the season"?
good point. thanks for the research.
there probably are better examples. but regardless ... the NBA shows up for their first practice 3 weeks before opening night. we're together all summer and fall. our transfers will know the system cold. we may not light the world on fire with new players and a new PG. I just don't think a learning curve is a good excuse.
This post is amazing on so many levels. Your entire debate strategy is to use stats to prove your point. If I ever find the need to explain what is “confirmation bias” I am using you as the primary example.
Fortunately, I watch the games and make many of my judgments outside of the stats.
Anybody that followed the Miami Heat know they got off to a disastrous start relative to expectations. They started off 9-8 which represents more than half the season in college basketball and more than the entire out of conference schedule for the Spiders.
Point being, the eventual champions and the most talented players in the world took more than 17 games to learn to play together and get their stride. This is exactly what we were debating.
I can’t think of a better example VT. Can you?
off the top of my head ... Texas Tech last year? they had 8 incoming transfers.
Texas also had 8 transfers.
so did TCU.
SDSU had 4.
Providence had 3.
Ohio State had 3.
North Caolina had 3.
Miami had 3.
Memphis had 3.
Marquette had 4.
LSU had 4.
Kentucky had 4.
Kansas had 4.
Iowa State had 6.
Indiana had 4.
Arkansas had 5.
Arizona had 4.
I may have missed some. and I didn't check how they all started. but they all made the dance, so they couldn't have started too bad.
LOL. "They were below average for most of the season". Your words, not mine. We don't need stats to disprove that. If that's your best example, you have no example. And, nice try with the 17 game college comparison when they play 82 in the NBA. I never knew 17 out of 82 would be considered "most". And, how is 9-8 "below average" anyway? Absolutely hilarious. Show me just one article from then, just one that says the Heat were below average for most of the season and I will stop using stats (you know, facts) for a week. Just one. I am looking for just one member from the media to agree with you here.
Last edited:
Cmon, Sman, even though they all made the tourney, you know they all stunk last year and all of them took a long time to gel, right? Doesn't matter how many games they won, just like it doesn't matter that the Heat started 30-11 that year. Wins are stats. They don't matter. It's the eye test that matters. LOL. But, hey, LI got a like from SDad with his post. If there is one guarantee in life, it is SDad will like a post if it gets on me.
Last edited:
Don’t flatter yourself VT everything isn’t about you…just like my tweet you also assumed was all about you. Triggered much 😂Cmon, Sman, even though they all made the tourney, you know they all stunk last year and all of them took a long time to gel, right? Doesn't matter how many games they won, just like it doesn't matter that the Heat started 30-11 that year. Wins are stats. They don't matter. It's the eye test that matters. LOL. But, hey, LI got a like from SDad with his post. If there is one guarantee in life, it is SDad will like a post if it gets on me.
I definitely assumed the tweet was at me. I don't think there is any question about that. You made such a big deal out of me using stats to mention the 0-9, how could I not? But, I know I know, it's not the 0-9 that means anything, it's the eye test. Silly me for using stats. And, no, I am not triggered at all. But, maybe you are a little? If someone mentioned 0-9 about my son, I would say, "yep, he knows he needs to improve there and has been working on it like crazy." I certainly wouldn't reply by getting on that person and telling them they worry about stats too much, and then throwing the 0-9 out on a "joke's on you" type tweet. But, hey, all good. Everyone is different.
Last edited:
Sman, the debate isn’t whether we have more transfers comparative to other teams. Hard to debate something when you change the argument in the middle of it.
We are talking about whether there could be a learning curve for our team. Reality is many teams have to overcome the challenge of learning to play together but to just assume that practice and a few months together solves all problems is ludicrous. It’s why many of the best teams in the country schedule “lay-up’s” at the beginning of every season.
I’m not sure why certain teams learn to plan together faster than others but the team we see in November will be very different than March (more so than our teams the previous two seasons).
We are talking about whether there could be a learning curve for our team. Reality is many teams have to overcome the challenge of learning to play together but to just assume that practice and a few months together solves all problems is ludicrous. It’s why many of the best teams in the country schedule “lay-up’s” at the beginning of every season.
I’m not sure why certain teams learn to plan together faster than others but the team we see in November will be very different than March (more so than our teams the previous two seasons).
Wondering why you think my and Sman's opinion is "ludicrous". I mean, couldn't we maybe, just maybe, be right here, or do you think it will be impossible for us to play well early and have a good OOC season? You said above we are talking about whether there could be a learning curve, but you post like there 100% will be when the season is still months away. You don't know any more than we do if there will or will not be, but you call our opinion "ludicrous"? The only thing ludicrous is you acting like your "opinion/eye test" posts are 100% accurate.
Yes that’s the point of my posts — im trying to emphasize that I think it will be impossible for us to be good early. Thank you for providing clarity on my posts.
Nope. You are not emphasizing "think" at all here. You are emphasizing "know" when the bottom line is you don't know.
Incorrect again. It’s a fact that it takes time to learn to play together.
it’s also amazing to me how you never are able to pickup sarcasm despite the fact it’s in nearly every post on here and the internet.
“Reality is many teams have to overcome the challenge of learning to play together but to just assume that practice and a few months together solves all problems is ludicrous. It’s why many of the best teams in the country schedule “lay-up’s” at the beginning of every season.”
Thank you
LOL. A fact? Despite all the examples of teams that did not need time to learn to play together? Okay. Just like it is a "fact" that the Heat were "below average most of the season" that year? Hilarious. If your eye test says it's true, it must be true, right?
I'm referring to the tweet not board "likes"...maybe I shouldn't wade into this one, but come on. While those not on the board wouldn't get the tweet reference, everyone here did.
Similar threads
