After Charleston and before Wichita we need to have a much better idea of what we are doing.
2022-2023 Season outlook
- Thread starter SpiderDad75
- Start date
I expect that - but we better have something solid by the time we take on Syracuse. And lets not forget - Norther Iowa and away at Charleston will probably be close games. Then we get Wichita State. No guarantee we walk into NYC with a 3-1 or 4-0 record. I expect games to be close and a couple points or possessions could be the different between 3-1 and 1-3.
You don’t expect us to beat VMI by 16, UNI by 6, Charleston by 5, Wichita by 3, before losing to Syracuse by 5?
25.25% chance at 4-0? Preseason is always right, lol.
What do you mean by something solid? I think we have enough depth, and versatile options where we might see guys play 20+ minutes some nights and 10-15 other nights, with several different lineups throughout the year. So, I don't see us with any set combos at any point really.
It wouldn't surprise me to see several combos throughout the year. Why limit ourselves to a set rotation with pre set lineups when we have a bunch of versatile, talented guys on the roster?
but you don't change rotations willy-nilly. you have a plan on day one. you've been working towards that plan all offseason. so that's having a pretty set rotation in mind.
if things aren't working you make changes. or foul trouble forces changes. or injuries. or matchups. or poor play.
but if Roche proves to be a 40% shooter again, I don't want to see him limited to 10 minutes some game just because he missed his 1st 2 shots. just like I'm not going to sit Goose just because his man scored 2 baskets in a row.
Mooney should know from working with these guys what each is currently capable of and play them accordingly. as players prove differently in games and in practive ... then we make changes.
if things aren't working you make changes. or foul trouble forces changes. or injuries. or matchups. or poor play.
but if Roche proves to be a 40% shooter again, I don't want to see him limited to 10 minutes some game just because he missed his 1st 2 shots. just like I'm not going to sit Goose just because his man scored 2 baskets in a row.
Mooney should know from working with these guys what each is currently capable of and play them accordingly. as players prove differently in games and in practive ... then we make changes.
While I am going to play each of the 1287 "5 man" combinations for .53 seconds every game.
This makes no sense. You can't go into a game and say "this guy will get this many minutes, and this guy will get this many minutes". Look at the last 10 games of our our guys in 2020, when we finished 9-1 to end the season 24-7. This is the end of the year when some of you think we should have minutes figured out.
Tyler's minutes the last 10 games that year were 17,15,18,12,11,23,9,17,14,4. So, his 2 highs were 23 and 18, and his 2 lows were 4 and 9.
Goose's last 10 games, his minutes were 31,18,16,9,23,7,18,14,7,20. 2 highs were 31 and 23, and 2 lows were 7 and 9.
Wojcik's were 22,8,19,7,3,2,3,21,14,5. 2 highs were 22 and 21, and 2 lows were 2 and 3.
Our starters played big minutes, as most starters should, but looking at these bench minutes, it is obvious we had all kinds of different lineups on the floor down the stretch with minutes fluctuating like crazy for these guys. This should be the case when you play at least 8 guys, and it would have been foolish that year to say what minutes Tyler, Goose, and Wojcik should get going into the games.
Last edited:
Well, unless we plan on being perfect every game and going 31-0, I think it is safe to assume some games we will have foul trouble, or actually face different match ups throughout a game (how could we not?), or someone out of our 8 or whatever man rotation will play poorly at times. As for injuries, hopefully we can stay injury free, but hard to assume injuries won't happen at some point.
I am all for making changes based on fouls or pace of the game or adjustments to the other team. What I mean by have something solid by Syracuse - if we are trying out 3-4 different starting lineups in the first 5 games - I don't take that as a good sign. Plus - at some point, guys need to know what their role is and what is expected. To have a guy start one night, then off the bench the next, then start again or maybe play less than 10 minutes - that is too much. Guys need to settle into roles and definitions.
I hear you, and I agree about the starters. The starting 5 should not be a revolving door. If a reserve starts playing so well that it makes sense to make a change in the starting lineup, fine, but I agree we don't want a bunch of different starting lineups throughout the year.
Hyzaar q
CM has always settled on a 7 or 8 man rotation. Like Goose's shot, why would anyone reasonably expect anything different?
Surprise, the “senior”, most experienced lineup. Granted this doesn’t mean that this will be the starting 5 at the end of the season and I expect more rotations/combinations to see the floor -especially at the beginning of the season.
The one difference is in recent history he only had 7-8 “go to” guys at most. Seems like the Spiders have more quality options this year. CM isn’t going to play platoons, but he may have enough skilled players to do it.
maybe we aren't disagreeing that much. of course situations will change the rotations. but you go in with a plan. not that the plan is "Roche will get 22 minutes tonight". but you still know how you want it to go before the tip. you're not just winging it.
and from your minutes example, of course Goose and Woj got more minutes when Blake got hurt. of course the entire bench got more time when we were kicking the crap out of LaSalle. I don't remember why Golden only played 22 in a 17 point win over Davidson, but there was a reason (and he was playing well with 15 points).
Glad to see some focus on making the game experience at Robins as good as possible ... hopefully the beverage lines will be less insane this year when the crowds are large ..
Agree 100%. Every single year on this board we talk about how good the newcomers are and the impact they will make, and then talk about how deep this team is. But reality is - Mooney is a guy who plays 7-8 guys 10+ minutes a night, and his best teams usually have 2-3 guys who dominate minutes playing upwards of 32+ a night and usually our PG for as long as Mooney has been here has played significant time. I don't have a problem with this - I think it is the way his system works. So I would expect Burton to be around 35 minutes, Goose around 30-32, and possibly Nelson nearing 30 minutes a night. I think those 3 have the best chance to dominate time on the floor. Then think of 4-5 players - like Quinn, Grace, Roche, Bigelow, Crabtree and then possibly DJI and Noyes on the outside fighting for minutes.
Last year we played 37 games. We had 6 guys play in all 37 and then Goose was injured and Crabtree missed 2 games, I think cause of injury/illness. So those are the 8 guys from last year.
DJI played in 16 games and Wilson (no longer a spider) played in 33, so I think Nelson takes his spot. I could see a similar fate for Bailey - playing in about half the games. And Noyes - I just don't see enough time out there for him, especially if Goose and Burton dominate minutes as I expect. He maybe plays at the 4 - but then again - he is up against Grace and Bigelow. We will see. Its good that we have competition and options, but fact of the matter is - we are not like VCU and unlikely we will play 10 guys on a consistent basis. And I don't really care how many play - as long as we win.
"We have a deep team" and "Mooney will settle on 7 or 8 guys" are not mutually exclusive statements.
I believe the below is correct:
Year/6th man minutes/9th/10th
2008/19/9/8
2009/20/4
2010/15/5
2011/17/6
2012/25/6
2020/19/7/7
So I doubt our 6th man will average under 5 minutes a game this season...
Now our 9th or 10th...
Agree 100%. If guys 9-13 don't see a lot of time, it doesn't mean they are not talented and you don't have depth. Most teams like us will settle on a top 7 or 8 guys. This still allows you to sub often and give your starters plenty of rest. If guys 9 or 10 are just as good as the top 8, maybe they see some time, but the best guys need to play. I feel great about our depth, and I think guys 9-13 could all step in and help if they needed to. But, that doesn't mean I think we should play them. I like 7 or 8 guys getting nearly all the minutes because I want my most talented players on the court.
I guess it depends on your definition.
If our 9th man has 170 minutes for the season, is that playing "7 or 8"?
If he has 110, I am more likely to say yes. If 300, I would say no.
Again, I guess "How many minutes does it take to be meaningful minutes?" is the other question.
If our 9th man has 170 minutes for the season, is that playing "7 or 8"?
If he has 110, I am more likely to say yes. If 300, I would say no.
Again, I guess "How many minutes does it take to be meaningful minutes?" is the other question.
Wait a minute - many on this board have been saying all pre-season, the best players will play and or if they are good enough, they will be on the floor. Now your saying that even if guys 9-13 are talented, they might not play much and that still makes us a deep team? I don't agree with that. If your a deep team - your 8-9th guy are getting over 10 minutes a night, and on some teams, even the 10th guy might sneak into that. And the reason some teams play that way is either because of style - like VCU, where they want to keep guys fresh and play at a high pace, or because teams have good players and want to spread the minutes. And some nights - guys will play more than others either because the game dictates (fouls, matchups) or maybe a guy gets hot and the coach rides him a bit longer.
VCU had 10 guys play 10 minutes or more basically on a nightly basis - and even their 11th guy played 7.5 minutes most games. That is depth - which is mostly dictated by their style. I think it also helps them when guys go down because of injury as guys are used to playing - but it eventually catches up to them because of their style of play. I don't think what UR does is bad - I think it is what Mooney is comfortable with given his style of play. Where it hurts us I think is player development down the road - there is value in that 9th and 10th guy playing 10 minutes and come next season, the learning curve is not as steep to step up into a bigger role and also if injuries occur during the season - I like leaning on a guy who has played 8-10 minutes most games and bumping him up to 15-20 minutes, rather than someone who has not played much at all during the season and all of a sudden now is thrown into the rotation. The downside is - finding those minutes and taking them away from someone else - so YES, you need depth to play 9-10 guys because the drop off from guy 6 to guy 9 can't be so great, you decide not play guy 9 at all.
Both are acceptable ways to win with pros and cons on each, but to say we play 7-8 guys and have depth does not make sense to me.
having depth and playing depth are two different things. I think we're saying we HAVE depth ... meaning we have good players at the end of the bench. no, Mooney's not going to run 13 guys out there. but we have really good depth.
as for playing "7 or 8" ... there's no way we play only 7. I think we easily play 9 regularly this season with #9 getting 10 mpg ... barring injury. the 9 are easy to see. the question is whether #10 or #11 passes #9 for time.
as for playing "7 or 8" ... there's no way we play only 7. I think we easily play 9 regularly this season with #9 getting 10 mpg ... barring injury. the 9 are easy to see. the question is whether #10 or #11 passes #9 for time.
I was agreeing with VT…My opinion is based off the experience with our last two seasons as that’s all I’ve been apart of. I don’t disagree about playing more guys, maybe I should have elaborated but playing 9-13 consistently 10min+ does not fit at least the last 2 yrs. Could this yr be different? Sure, I think teams are better when they play 9 maybe 10 if they have the talent.
I assume you do not agree with the VCU poster that our 6th most minutes will be under 5 minutes a game? 🤣
With Nelson and Dji at PG, I think it has to be at least 8 every game, right?
Think u misunderstood that post. Didn't he say the 6th man would not average 15+ mins? Nobody would say under 5.
Easily? 9 is aggressive for 10+ min. There is always a first time but I don't think Mooney has ever done that. 8 sure. Really hard imo to find that many minutes for 9th guy unless you are a VCU style.
Well, we can just disagree. Depth to me means talent. If you have depth at QB, the #2 QB might be very talented but never see the field.
Seems like you are bringing up VCU like they are the norm. They are in the very minority playing 10+. Remember the final four last year? It is funny reading on here that Mooney only plays 7-8 guys, as if he is different from other coaches, when he is in line with 300+ other coaches.
Cool. I didn't think we would see him elsewhere, but obviously you know more than I here, so I take your word for it.
Only time will tell, he’s been at point more than anything, 17 days can’t get here fast enough. I’m excited to hear how they do Sun at Va Tech.
I think you misunderstood.
He is from VCU and trolling so is saying that after the first 3 games only 5 players would have played over 15 minutes total.
Because all our starters for the last 10 seasons have played all 40 minutes.
Or so they would say...
9 guys in 2013–14, though it comes with a caveat:
Lindsay 34.6
Anthony 31.2
Davis 29.3
Ododa 26.8
Allen 24.2
Taylor 22.1
Williams 20.6
Sparrow 18.7
SDJ 13.6
Lindsay appeared in 21 games (season-ending knee injury against VCU on 2/1), Williams in 22 ("left program" after 2/1 VCU game), SDJ in 30. All of the others played in all 33.
SDJ was averaging 7.1 mpg until Lindsay went out, and then averaged 25.1 mpg the rest of the way.
Similar threads
