2022-2023 Season outlook

[VT4700]

My counter to that goes back to 2020. Because of what Nate could do (and Grant), that made it easier for Jacob, Blake, and Nick. They all had more open looks than they might have had without Nate and Grant out there. We went 24-7 with an offensive efficiency of 53 in the country that year. The past 2 years, our offensive efficiency was 46 and 79, so I just don't buy the our offense didn't click well with Nate argument when we had one of our best 3 year offensive stretches ever with him playing a lot of minutes. By comparison, the 2010 and 2011 teams had offensive efficiencies of 77 and 41, which was a good 2 year stretch.

We fell off some last year because our 3 point percentage dropped, but still ended up a very respectable 79. Nate and Grant got better each year so it isn't a stretch to say they were better in 2022 than 2020. Both players got a lot of attention and got doubled some this past year. The difference is we did not shoot nearly as well from 3 last year as we did in 2020. So, that is not on Nate (and Grant). That is on our 3 point shooters, many who had open looks because of Nate and Grant. Hopefully, we knock them down this year.

 

[Ferrum Spider]

I think this is the year Mooney isn’t on a loyalty binge due to the amount of talent we have. Too many talented players not to make it interchangeable. Burton, Quinn and Jaynel will likely start every game. After that it’s any body’s guess. Just nice to have so many options. Much better off-season for Mooney compared to the last NCAA appearance.

 

[CarolinaSpider]

Glad Grace became a three point threat since for some reason Grant at the end of the season
hesitated to take an open three unless clock was near zero. We are best when players are multidimensional
on offense, but that must include players like Cayo, Goose, Golden and Burton who were willing to attack
the lane when opportunity presented itself.

 

[POMSpidur]

I think this is the year Mooney isn’t on a loyalty binge due to the amount of talent we have. Too many talented players not to make it interchangeable. Burton, Quinn and Jaynel will likely start every game. After that it’s any body’s guess. Just nice to have so many options. Much better off-season for Mooney compared to the last NCAA appearance.

Amount of talent or uncertainty at all the other positions. This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years.

 

[VT4700]

Glad Grace became a three point threat since for some reason Grant at the end of the season
hesitated to take an open three unless clock was near zero. We are best when players are multidimensional
on offense, but that must include players like Cayo, Goose, Golden and Burton who were willing to attack
the lane when opportunity presented itself.

I think Grant going 4 for his last 36 from 3 might have had something to do with him taking less 3s at the end?

 

[Ferrum Spider]

Amount of talent or uncertainty at all the other positions. This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years.

Are you saying this team is less deep than some of the years we didn't even allot all 13 scholarships? If you are then I disagree. It’s undeniably deeper with potential on paper and comparatively to the last rebuild when we finally made the NCAAs which is what I am saying. Several guys with offers from VCU and other a10 programs when we’ve literally had several dudes like Diekvoss, Kovien and several other players who wound up on d2 squads. Not to mention two transfers with high major offers. That argument doesn’t really hold water with me.

I’m not arguing that the previous few teams didn’t have talent. I’m arguing that we’re building better momentum than in 2012. Not to mention these classes got an extra boost from covid and injuries that we got a talent boost of 5th and 6th year seniors.

 

[POMSpidur]

Are you saying this team is less deep than some of the years we didn't even allot all 13 scholarships? If you are then I disagree. It’s undeniably deeper with potential on paper and comparatively to the last rebuild which is what I am saying. Several guys with offers from VCU and other a10 programs when we’ve literally had several dudes like Diekvoss, Kovien and several other players who wound up on d2 squads. Not to mention transfers with high major offers. That argument doesn’t really hold water with me.

We have ONE proven A10 player (Burton). The rest are unknown. There are 3 new transfers who were not there last year and we lost 4 seniors. Everybody else was on the team last year and I don’t believe we were very “deep” last year.
As I have said, the difference between the 3rd best player and the 11th best player is not a big gap. It could be that they are all extremely talented or it could be that we do not know what to expect from them which lets Mooney just interchange them.

 

[VT4700]

Goose and Grace are proven. Every A-10 team would take those guys. I'm not sure Quinn, Roche, and Bigelow are unknown. I think we probably already have a real good idea what we have in them, and it is likely positive: A 7 footer with talent, one of the top 3 point shooters out there, and a versatile athlete who can do a little of everything. Just because they were at a lower level does not mean they can't play. Add Crabtree, and that is already 7 knowns to me. PG is the unknown, and that is why I have said PG play is the key to our season.

 

[gospidersgo]

We have ONE proven A10 player (Burton). The rest are unknown.

Gustavson doesn't count? I'm guessing just an oversight on your part.

I agree with the basic premise of your point though - so many question marks coming into this season that it's hard to tell at this point if we are "deep" or actually just "unknown". It definitely feels closer to true depth though with the way we reloaded this off-season with proven D1 talent. Time will tell.

 

[RichmondNative]

Amount of talent or uncertainty at all the other positions. This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years.

Only have to go back to 2017-2018 (less than 7 years) and that roster had at least the same amount of uncertainty and I would say this year’s roster has more talent overall. I agree with the other posters.

 

[POMSpidur]

Only have to go back to 2017-2018 (less than 7 years) and that roster had at least the same amount of uncertainty and I would say this year’s roster has more talent overall. I agree with the other posters.

More overall talent than Buckingham (ROY) Golden, Gilly, 2017-2018 Sherod (17 conference PPG), and Khwan Fore. I don’t see anybody coming off of the bench who will turn into a 1000 point scorer like Cayo did. And Johnson averaged 3 to Grace’s 4 this year. The talent is not comparable

 

[urfan1]

Remains to be seen!

 

[UR80sfan]

More overall talent than Buckingham (ROY) Golden, Gilly, 2017-2018 Sherod (17 conference PPG), and Khwan Fore. I don’t see anybody coming off of the bench who will turn into a 1000 point scorer like Cayo did. And Johnson averaged 3 to Grace’s 4 this year. The talent is not comparable

Everyone is entitled to and opinion, but I could not disagree more. Next years team will be much better than the 2017-18 team. There is no comparison

 

[VT4700]

More overall talent than Buckingham (ROY) Golden, Gilly, 2017-2018 Sherod (17 conference PPG), and Khwan Fore. I don’t see anybody coming off of the bench who will turn into a 1000 point scorer like Cayo did. And Johnson averaged 3 to Grace’s 4 this year. The talent is not comparable

But, when comparing that team to anything, you have to look at the players then, not how they turned out. The 17-18 team finished 12-20 and 127th and 234th in offensive and defensive efficiency. With Solly not panning out ( I was excited about him after TJ talked him up ), we were down to JJ and Nate off the bench. Nate turned into a 1,000 point scorer, but he improved dramatically each year, especially from his freshman year to last year. Same with Grant and Jacob, who were much better players the past few years than their freshman years. You have to look at those guys then, as freshman. We started 4 guys 6'4 or less, which is fine if they can all shoot and do other things, and if they had a junior or senior Grant with them instead of a freshman Grant. But, only 2 of them, Nick and Jacob, shot the 3 well, and the result was one of our worst 3 point shooting years. Let's compare then and now:

Buck/Goose. I will take a 5th year Goose over Buck. Buck never improved after his freshman year. He was a great athlete, but didn't handle or shoot it well.
Golden/Quinn: My guess is Quinn will be every bit as good as the freshman Grant was.
Jacob/Nelson(Dji): Probably advantage Jacob, but don't forget this is the freshman Jacob we are comparing this year's guys with.
Nick/Tyler: Nick was great, but Tyler is a POY candidate.
Khwan/ Roche or Bigelow: A 6 foot athlete who didn't shoot it well or a 6'5 guy who shoots it great and a 6'7 athletic guy who does a little bit of everything. Give me Roche or Bigelow all day long.
JJ and Nate/ Grace, Crabtree, Dji, and either Roche or Bigelow. No brainer on where the better bench is.

Overall, it certainly looks like this year's team has more talent than that team. The guys then might have put up some numbers, but we played 7 guys then, with the starting 5 all averaging over 30 minutes a game. So, the numbers will be there individually, but we still only averaged 71.8 a game, 235th in the country.

 

[POMSpidur]

But, when comparing that team to anything, you have to look at the players then, not how they turned out. The 17-18 team finished 12-20 and 127th and 234th in offensive and defensive efficiency. With Solly not panning out ( I was excited about him after TJ talked him up ), we were down to JJ and Nate off the bench. Nate turned into a 1,000 point scorer, but he improved dramatically each year, especially from his freshman year to last year. Same with Grant and Jacob, who were much better players the past few years than their freshman years. You have to look at those guys then, as freshman. We started 4 guys 6'4 or less, which is fine if they can all shoot and do other things, and if they had a junior or senior Grant with them instead of a freshman Grant. But, only 2 of them, Nick and Jacob, shot the 3 well, and the result was one of our worst 3 point shooting years. Let's compare then and now:

Buck/Goose. I will take a 5th year Goose over Buck. Buck never improved after his freshman year. He was a great athlete, but didn't handle or shoot it well.
Golden/Quinn: My guess is Quinn will be every bit as good as the freshman Grant was.
Jacob/Nelson(Dji): Probably advantage Jacob, but don't forget this is the freshman Jacob we are comparing this year's guys with.
Nick/Tyler: Nick was great, but Tyler is a POY candidate.
Khwan/ Roche or Bigelow: A 6 foot athlete who didn't shoot it well or a 6'5 guy who shoots it great and a 6'7 athletic guy who does a little bit of everything. Give me Roche or Bigelow all day long.
JJ and Nate/ Grace, Crabtree, Dji, and either Roche or Bigelow. No brainer on where the better bench is.

Overall, it certainly looks like this year's team has more talent than that team. The guys then might have put up some numbers, but we played 7 guys then, with the starting 5 all averaging over 30 minutes a game. So, the numbers will be there individually, but we still only averaged 71.8 a game, 235th in the country.

I understand the optimism but let’s be. reasonable.
Goose/Buck (2017-2018): Buck 12, 7, and 3 compared to Goose’s 4.5, 2, and 1. Even Bucks freshman year was miles ahead of anything Goose has shown. No chance you’d take Goose over any year Buck had in college.
Golden/Quinn: As a freshman GG averaged 16, 7, and 2 compared to Quinn’s 15, 7 and 4 (Patriot League) I’m not sure why Quinn would be ahead of All A10 Golden. But as you said you’re entitled to your opinion.
Gilly/Nelson: Gilly has the freshman record for assists, steals, and minutes. Nelson could be really good and be right there with what we have heard from the staff.
Tyler/Nick: Tyler wins that one. But let’s not forget how good Nick was.
Khwan/Bigelow: Khwan was coming off a junior year averaging 11 and 4 (in the A10) and did it again in 2017-2018 compared to Bigelow’s 8 and 5.5 (in the southland).
I don’t see the talent that you are claiming, but Roche is huge. If he plays well and shoots how he did he makes them deeper with that 6th man.
bench: Cayo and JJ are no different than Grace and Dji. Crabtree isnt much different than Kirby. 2 points to 1 point. So if Roche is impressive then it will drastically help this team. But “FAR DEEPER” seems like a shot in the dark IMO

 

[VT4700]

I will try to make this easy for you. We....were.....not.....a......good.......team......in....2017-2018. We went 12-20. The stats our guys got that year mean nothing because someone had to be out there getting them, and I bet Jacob, Grant, and Nate would be the first guys to say that. Look at Duquesne last year. They went 6-24 overall and 1-16 in the A-10, but they had 4 double digit scorers and another at 9.5. So, does this mean all 5 of those guys were better than Goose and Bigelow because they averaged more points?

And, the comment you said was "This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years." So, you said the word team, but keep focusing on individual stats. A good team has to have pieces that fit. That team in 17-18 went 12-20, and did not have a good mix of pieces. If you think they are more talented than this year's team, which appears to have a solid mix of the right pieces, I guess I can assume you are saying we will go worse than 12-20. Allow me to disagree big time with that.

 

[POMSpidur]

I will try to make this easy for you. We....were.....not.....a......good.......team......in....2017-2018. We went 12-20. The stats our guys got that year mean nothing because someone had to be out there getting them, and I bet Jacob, Grant, and Nate would be the first guys to say that. Look at Duquesne last year. They went 6-24 overall and 1-16 in the A-10, but they had 4 double digit scorers and another at 9.5. So, does this mean all 5 of those guys were better than Goose and Bigelow because they averaged more points?

And, the comment you said was "This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years." So, you said the word team, but keep focusing on individual stats. A good team has to have pieces that fit. That team in 17-18 went 12-20, and did not have a good mix of pieces. If you think they are more talented than this year's team, which appears to have a solid mix of the right pieces, I guess I can assume you are saying we will go worse than 12-20. Allow me to disagree big time with that.

A talented team isn’t always a good team. Yet, that bad team was tied for 5th in conference just like you’ve claimed this years team is expected to be around. And I wouldn’t be shocked if this team goes .500 in A10s just like 2017-2018.
And seriously? Duquesne? Give me a break. Not comparable.

 

[spiderman]

I bring them up only to dispute sman's take that we had multiple guys who didn't shoot well from 3.

thought that was one of the least arguable takes I've shared.

 

[VT4700]

A talented team isn’t always a good team. Yet, that bad team was tied for 5th in conference just like you’ve claimed this years team is expected to be around. And I wouldn’t be shocked if this team goes .500 in A10s just like 2017-2018.
And seriously? Duquesne? Give me a break. Not comparable.

But, your comment was "This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years". You didn't say players, you said team. There is a big difference in a "talented team" and a "team with talented players". A talented team would win more than they lose, not go 12-20. A team with talent could win a lot, but could also go 12-20 if their pieces don't fit. Look no farther than 2020. Replacing Khwan and Buck with Blake and Nate got us from 12-20 to 24-7 because the pieces fit so much better. Nothing against Khwan and Buck. They were good players. If you want to call them talented, that's fine, but both had holes in their games and were far from complete players.

As for going 9-9 in the A-10 in 2018, well, let's look at the A-10 that year. St. Joe's went 10-8 and finished 4th, they were 16-16 overall, and finished 116 with Kenpom. 116???? The 4th best A-10 team was at 116. We tied for 5th at 9-9 with VCU (18-15 overall, 144 Kenpom, St. Louis (17-16 overall, 148 Kenpom, and George Mason (16-17 overall, 220 Kenpom). So, finishing 9-9 in the A-10 that year hurts your argument even more, not helps it.

 

[VT4700]

thought that was one of the least arguable takes I've shared.

No kidding. I have no idea where he is going with this. I guess as long as you shoot the 3 some, that is all that matters to him?

Wilson 9-37 (.243)
Grant 23-82 (.28)
Grace 25-88 (.284)
Goose 16-52 (.308)
Crabtree 9-29 (.31)

You can try all you want, but it's impossible to dispute sman's take that we had multiple guys who didn't shoot well from 3.

 

[urmite]

No kidding. I have no idea where he is going with this. I guess as long as you shoot the 3 some, that is all that matters to him?

Wilson 9-37 (.243)
Grant 23-82 (.28)
Grace 25-88 (.284)
Goose 16-52 (.308)
Crabtree 9-29 (.31)

You can try all you want, but it's impossible to dispute sman's take that we had multiple guys who didn't shoot well from 3.

Looking at the Offensive & Defensive 3 point shooting % rank from 2018 to 2022 seems interesting. better, better, worse, worse...

 

[POMSpidur]

But, your comment was "This team isn’t anywhere near more talented than any team we’ve had in the last 7/8 years". You didn't say players, you said team. There is a big difference in a "talented team" and a "team with talented players". A talented team would win more than they lose, not go 12-20. A team with talent could win a lot, but could also go 12-20 if their pieces don't fit. Look no farther than 2020. Replacing Khwan and Buck with Blake and Nate got us from 12-20 to 24-7 because the pieces fit so much better. Nothing against Khwan and Buck. They were good players. If you want to call them talented, that's fine, but both had holes in their games and were far from complete players.

As for going 9-9 in the A-10 in 2018, well, let's look at the A-10 that year. St. Joe's went 10-8 and finished 4th, they were 16-16 overall, and finished 116 with Kenpom. 116???? The 4th best A-10 team was at 116. We tied for 5th at 9-9 with VCU (18-15 overall, 144 Kenpom, St. Louis (17-16 overall, 148 Kenpom, and George Mason (16-17 overall, 220 Kenpom). So, finishing 9-9 in the A-10 that year hurts your argument even more, not helps it.

Was that the year the A10 had 3 bids?

 

[VT4700]

Looking at the Offensive & Defensive 3 point shooting % rank from 2018 to 2022 seems interesting. better, better, worse, worse...

Not sure what you mean. Our best years from 3 both offensively and defensively were with Blake in 2020 and 2021. We were not nearly as good last year, or in 2017 or 2018.

 

[VT4700]

Was that the year the A10 had 3 bids?

What does that have to do with this? So, that means the other 11 teams were good just because 3 teams made the dance? Wow, I know it's all opinion, but good luck trying to convince anyone our 12-20 team was good and the A-10 was good that year. I don't know what else I need to add here, so I will just say we can disagree.

 

[SpiderDad75]

91 days guys until our questions start to be answered ...there will be surprises for sure 😃. 🕷️🏀

 

[urmite]

Not sure what you mean. Our best years from 3 both offensively and defensively were with Blake in 2020 and 2021. We were not nearly as good last year, or in 2017 or 2018.

I mean:
2018 250th shooting, 287th defending
2019 156th, 179th so improving
2020 42nd, 44th again improving
2021 118th, 67th declining
2022 223rd, 226th large decline

 

[VT4700]

I mean:
2018 250th shooting, 287th defending
2019 156th, 179th so improving
2020 42nd, 44th again improving
2021 118th, 67th declining
2022 223rd, 226th large decline

Ok. I read your earlier post like you meant 19 and 20 were good and 21 and 22 worse.

 

[urmite]

Ok. I read your earlier post like you meant 19 and 20 were good and 21 and 22 worse.

Yeah I can see reading it that way but I meant 2018 to 2019 got better, 2019 to 2020 got better, 2020 to 2021 got worse, 2021 to 2022 got worse. Almost back where we started.

Need to find a way to be Top 60 in both to be effective...

 

[VT4700]

91 days guys until our questions start to be answered ...there will be surprises for sure 😃. 🕷️🏀

What surprises do you think there will be? Maybe a surprise starter? Or, maybe a guy we haven't talked much about like Randolph, Dread, Noyes, or Walz getting some time?

 

[GKiller]

What surprises do you think there will be? Maybe a surprise starter? Or, maybe a guy we haven't talked much about like Randolph, Dread, Noyes, or Walz getting some time?

yeah that would be interesting to know. I remember 1 poster said we were sleeping on Noyes. He probably needs to get stronger, tho a guy like Skrocki got away with it fine.

 

[spiderman]

yeah that would be interesting to know. I remember 1 poster said we were sleeping on Noyes. He probably needs to get stronger, tho a guy like Skrocki got away with it fine.

will be interesting to see him. if our strength coach is doing his job, there should be a substantial difference between getting here in summer 2021 and playing in winter 2022.
roster still calls him 190 but I'm hoping that gets updated to 205. a solid "freshman 15".

 

[VT4700]

I mean:
2018 250th shooting, 287th defending
2019 156th, 179th so improving
2020 42nd, 44th again improving
2021 118th, 67th declining
2022 223rd, 226th large decline

Last year shows why we struggled in the regular season. Compare with our 2020 season and the previous 2 tourney seasons:

2020: 45th/48th
2012: 16th/16th
2011: 107th/21st

* It's also interesting looking at the 2015 and 2017 NIT years:

2015: 221st/43rd
2017: 192nd/18th.

We were around 34% from 3 offensively those years. We did go 12-6 and 13-5 in the A-10 those years, so we did a lot of things well, but shoot just a little better from 3 those years, and we probably make the dance.

 

[spiderman]

every stat I see makes it more amazing how we finished last season.
thank you, Jacob.

 

[VT4700]

A long way to go, and I could be off here, but the more I think about it, I am really liking a Nelson, Goose, Bigelow, Burton, and Quinn starting 5. Bigelow over Roche and Grace because he has good size, and he is more versatile and athletic. Allows us to start the game in good shape defensively, and we should have enough shooters out there. Roche will still get plenty of minutes to do his thing from 3, and Grace will see plenty of time both backing up Quinn and playing with Quinn.

 

[LongTimeSpiderFan]

A long way to go, and I could be off here, but the more I think about it, I am really liking a Nelson, Goose, Bigelow, Burton, and Quinn starting 5. Bigelow over Roche and Grace because he has good size, and he is more versatile and athletic. Allows us to start the game in good shape defensively, and we should have enough shooters out there. Roche will still get plenty of minutes to do his thing from 3, and Grace will see plenty of time both backing up Quinn and playing with Quinn.

... taking a few of sdads posts I'm thinking
Nelson, Goose, Dji, Burton and Quinn...and a quick sub into that lineup for Roche who will probably end up with more minutes than Goose or Dji.
That lineup may have trouble scoring but I think Dji will post up a little like Sherrod used to do - establish some interior scoring with a nice defensive unit - then open it up with Roche a little. Has that particular lineup already been discussed??

 

[VT4700]

... taking a few of sdads posts I'm thinking
Nelson, Goose, Dji, Burton and Quinn...and a quick sub into that lineup for Roche who will probably end up with more minutes than Goose or Dji.
That lineup may have trouble scoring but I think Dji will post up a little like Sherrod used to do - establish some interior scoring with a nice defensive unit - then open it up with Roche a little. Has that particular lineup already been discussed??

Nick was 6'4, 230. Not sure what he is now, but Dji was listed at 6'5, 175 last year. Who do you think he will be posting up? Anyway, if I am defending that lineup, I double Tyler, and pack everyone else in. I think I have commented on versions of that lineup enough, so I will just say I don't like it and leave it at that.

 

[LongTimeSpiderFan]

Nick was 6'4, 230. Not sure what he is now, but Dji was listed at 6'5, 175 last year. Who do you think he will be posting up? Anyway, if I am defending that lineup, I double Tyler, and pack everyone else in. I think I have commented on versions of that lineup enough, so I will just say I don't like it and leave it at that.

That's not my lineup for sure...just think that has CM written all over it.
I'm liking Nelson, Dji, Roche Burton Quinn.
And Dji will post a lot of smaller guards...hes got some unique skills I think

 

[SpiderDad75]

Nick was 6'4, 230. Not sure what he is now, but Dji was listed at 6'5, 175 last year. Who do you think he will be posting up? Anyway, if I am defending that lineup, I double Tyler, and pack everyone else in. I think I have commented on versions of that lineup enough, so I will just say I don't like it and leave it at that.

6’6 185-90ish right now. And what guard couldn’t he post up? To name a few…Dayton -Malachi smith 6’ Kobe Elvis 6’2 SLU - yuri Collins 6’ their others are his size, VCU - Ace 6’1 Davidson - Foster 6’1… not sure your point as to why he couldn’t esp when he’s being allowed to do it over the summer and working on it.

 

[VT4700]

6’6 185-90ish right now. And what guard couldn’t he post up? To name a few…Dayton -Malachi smith 6’ Kobe Elvis 6’2 SLU - yuri Collins 6’ their others are his size, VCU - Ace 6’1 Davidson - Foster 6’1… not sure your point as to why he couldn’t esp when he’s being allowed to do it over the summer and working on it.

Sounds good. I think this is the first I've heard you mention it when talking about his game. I was just thinking of Nick's game and didn't see many similarities. If an occasional post up move is there, cool, but I guess I just don't see a lot of guards being posted up in college basketball these days. Seems easy to defend with some help defense. Teams didn't even post Jacob up much at all during his career, and we didn't even have a shot blocker waiting down there. Unless he's got moves like Nate did late in his career, I'd rather have a look from 3, or a shot from Tyler or Quinn than a contested 2 by a guard in traffic down low. And, before anyone thinks I'm being too critical here, I don't want Goose or Roche posting anyone up either.

 

[SpiderDad75]

Sounds good. I think this is the first I've heard you mention it when talking about his game. I was just thinking of Nick's game and didn't see many similarities. If an occasional post up move is there, cool, but I guess I just don't see a lot of guards being posted up in college basketball these days. Seems easy to defend with some help defense. Teams didn't even post Jacob up much at all during his career, and we didn't even have a shot blocker waiting down there. Unless he's got moves like Nate did late in his career, I'd rather have a look from 3, or a shot from Tyler or Quinn than a contested 2 by a guard in traffic down low. And, before anyone thinks I'm being too critical here, I don't want Goose or Roche posting anyone up either.

My response was to you insinuating that he wasn’t able too. Also didn’t say he would do this regularly, just that he’s worked on it and is something he can do. Why not take advantage of a big guard who can present mismatches? He’s nothing like Nick at least the Nick that I saw. Didn’t see the old Nick pre injury. I think we all know you would rather every one take the 3 and guess what…if Dji get someone posted and they bring help…there is a kick out for….a 3 😀. The one thing I will always stick to is Dji will always make the right basketball play even to his own detriment, count on it. JayNel and Dji getting paint touches and are playmaking, our 3pt opportunities will certainly be there.