2025 Portal Tracker

[spiderman]

I just don't know that we've improved a ton. Delonnie and Dusan were pretty good players. we replaced them with Johnston and Daughtry ... who look like good players. not sure it's a huge upgrade though.

I think if we're going to make a jump, it'll be more due to improvement from Walz, AP, Tyne and Tanner ... or a freshman who impresses.

but I dont see us as definitively better than anyone. well hopefully Fordham. we were really bad last year. other teams are adding good players too.

 

[spiderstudent17]

I just don't know that we've improved a ton. Delonnie and Dusan were pretty good players. we replaced them with Johnston and Daughtry ... who look like good players. not sure it's a huge upgrade though.

I think if we're going to make a jump, it'll be more due to improvement from Walz, AP, Tyne and Tanner ... or a freshman who impresses.

but I dont see us as definitively better than anyone. well hopefully Fordham. we were really bad last year. other teams are adding good players too.

That’s fair and you make good points. I will say that we probably aren’t going to be getting the kinds of player every year who we know will make an immediate impact, so the best we can hope for is getting guys who produced well at a lower level and hope that translates at the next level and adapt to Mooney’s system well. So far we’ve done that with 2 of our 3 transfers. If we can do that with our last spot, then hopefully that shows some promise. But like you said other teams are also adding good players so maybe we do improve as a team but all the other teams improved more so we are still a bottom 4 team.

 

[fan2011]

I just don't know that we've improved a ton. Delonnie and Dusan were pretty good players. we replaced them with Johnston and Daughtry ... who look like good players. not sure it's a huge upgrade though.

I think if we're going to make a jump, it'll be more due to improvement from Walz, AP, Tyne and Tanner ... or a freshman who impresses.

but I dont see us as definitively better than anyone. well hopefully Fordham. we were really bad last year. other teams are adding good players too.

Last year was by far the worst Mooney team since maybe his first or second year. There is no way we aren't significantly better next year, just from a regression-to-the-mean perspective.

If we aren't significantly better...

 

[spiderman]

Last year was by far the worst Mooney team since maybe his first or second year. There is no way we aren't significantly better next year, just from a regression-to-the-mean perspective.

If we aren't significantly better...

that's my hope ... that our returning players are significantly better than the year they just had.
because if that's who they are, then adding Daughtry, Johnston and Thomas probably isn't enough.

 

[VT4700]

I just don't know that we've improved a ton. Delonnie and Dusan were pretty good players. we replaced them with Johnston and Daughtry ... who look like good players. not sure it's a huge upgrade though.

I think if we're going to make a jump, it'll be more due to improvement from Walz, AP, Tyne and Tanner ... or a freshman who impresses.

but I dont see us as definitively better than anyone. well hopefully Fordham. we were really bad last year. other teams are adding good players too.

You can't say Delonnie and Dusan. DLo was hurt, so it would be White and Dusan. I think Johnston is a huge upgrade over White, and Daughtry is just a much better all around fit than Dusan. I liked Dusan, but we needed to add some athleticism and versatility and Daughtry brings that. And, I do think Thomas can be a better fit than Tyne. If Tyne continues to shoot poorly and have more turnovers than assists, Thomas' size alone makes him a better fit.

No question, we need another piece. But, I find it very funny that the same guy who does not want us to add an impact guard because we have enough guards says we are not better than anyone in the A-10 right now.

 

[SFspidur]

We were terrible both with and without Hunt.

But yeah, seeing some nice pieces so far but no blockbuster that will help vault us up a few tiers. (Though I'm not sure we predicted it from King...he looked good, but POY good? Not a chance.)

As it stands now, I think a .500 record in A-10 play would be an achievement. Not that that's acceptable.

 

[8legs1dream]

No question, we need another piece. But, I find it very funny that the same guy who does not want us to add an impact guard because we have enough guards says we are not better than anyone in the A-10 right now.

Yeah, we all find it funny that you think the entire team should have entered the portal and been replaced but the coach can do no wrong.

We also find it funny that you are only brave enough to poke your head out in the offseason when nothing is on the line and then run off to the bunker when the going gets tough.

It is also very funny to us that you thought Bennett should be fired but Mooney should be extended.

Should I go on, comedian?

 

[SFspidur]

Duncan Powell to Providence...maybe.

 

[spiderman]

You can't say Delonnie and Dusan. DLo was hurt, so it would be White and Dusan. I think Johnston is a huge upgrade over White, and Daughtry is just a much better all around fit than Dusan. I liked Dusan, but we needed to add some athleticism and versatility and Daughtry brings that. And, I do think Thomas can be a better fit than Tyne. If Tyne continues to shoot poorly and have more turnovers than assists, Thomas' size alone makes him a better fit.

No question, we need another piece. But, I find it very funny that the same guy who does not want us to add an impact guard because we have enough guards says we are not better than anyone in the A-10 right now.

I said Delonnie because he was out starter and played our 1st 16 games and we weren't good but correct, we're replacing both Delonnie and B Artis. like you, I hope Johnston will be a big upgrade. looks like a comparable shooter to B Artis. hopefully he defends like DeLo.

no idea if Daughtry is a better all around fit than Dusan. Dusan was a good career shooter who didn't shoot well for us. Daughtry is a non-shooter from the perimeter. he looks tough inside though and we need that.

as for guard ... when we land an impact 3rd guard in the portal I'll happily admit I was wrong. impact meaning starter. guard meaning not a 3. don't say ah ha if it's a forward type who calls himself a guard like e.g. Tanner or Anquan Boldin Jr.

 

[VT4700]

We were terrible both with and without Hunt.

But yeah, seeing some nice pieces so far but no blockbuster that will help vault us up a few tiers. (Though I'm not sure we predicted it from King...he looked good, but POY good? Not a chance.)

As it stands now, I think a .500 record in A-10 play would be an achievement. Not that that's acceptable.

Agree. I see about .500 now, but wouldn't call that an achievement in an average A-10. I do think we have elevated one tier, but we definitely need another piece to get higher.

 

[VT4700]

I said Delonnie because he was out starter and played our 1st 16 games and we weren't good but correct, we're replacing both Delonnie and B Artis. like you, I hope Johnston will be a big upgrade. looks like a comparable shooter to B Artis. hopefully he defends like DeLo.

no idea if Daughtry is a better all around fit than Dusan. Dusan was a good career shooter who didn't shoot well for us. Daughtry is a non-shooter from the perimeter. he looks tough inside though and we need that.

as for guard ... when we land an impact 3rd guard in the portal I'll happily admit I was wrong. impact meaning starter. guard meaning not a 3. don't say ah ha if it's a forward type who calls himself a guard like e.g. Tanner or Anquan Boldin Jr.

I just want a shooter who can make an impact. Adding another starter, either at guard or wing, would be great. My whole point is our roster is not good enough right now to just stop recruiting guards. And, thankfully, we have still been recruiting them. So, even though we are still recruiting guards and you yourself said our roster was better than no one right now, and you just finished saying if we land an impact 3rd guard who can start you will admit you were wrong, you can't admit you were maybe wrong and now say we should keep recruiting guards? So, we could add an impact starting guard, but you wouldn't want us to recruit him?

 

[Eight Legger]

Unless Mooney's entire offensive scheme is changing after 20 years, we need a lot of shooters to be successful. I agree, we should sign another one.

 

[spiderman]

So, even though we are still recruiting guards ...

are we though? since we got commitments from Johnston and Thomas, have we been mentioned with a guard? I've lost track. I know Boldin is visiting, but again he doesn't scream impact guard to me.

 

[SFspidur]

are we though? since we got commitments from Johnston and Thomas, have we been mentioned with a guard? I've lost track. I know Boldin is visiting, but again he doesn't scream impact guard to me.

Yeah, not sure. We've been mentioned in interest lists from a couple of guards recently, but I don't know whether those were representative of current interest or not. Boldin could play alongside a couple of other guards. Tanner Thomas supposedly visited last week (though things have been quiet with him since then), but he's a forward. Kuljuhovic is obviously a big.

 

[VT4700]

are we though? since we got commitments from Johnston and Thomas, have we been mentioned with a guard? I've lost track. I know Boldin is visiting, but again he doesn't scream impact guard to me.

Why shouldn't we be? We have Johnston as a starter. We see so many 3 guard lineups out there. Guards dominate college basketball every game. You can't win without really good guards. Who's even our 2nd best guard right now?

Thomas? Who averaged 4 ppg last year, shot 26.8% from 3, and had as many turnovers as assists?
Tyne? Who is maybe 5'10, shot 27.1% from 3, and had more turnovers than assists last year?

Or 3 true freshmen?

That is our guards. You just finished saying our roster is better than no one's. Yet, you seriously think we should not try to keep recruiting guards? Maybe we land a wing, maybe we land a guard. But, to stop recruiting guards and give us no chance at all to improve ourselves in the backcourt makes no sense at all.

 

[spiderman]

Why shouldn't we be?

I asked "are we". as SF pointed out, I don't think it's clear that we are.

we got commitments from 2 guards and a big forward. 3 guys we totally wanted or we wouldn't have offered. I expect all 3 to play.

complain about Tyne all day, but he's going to play a lot. there's a lot of potential there.

I think we use the last spot to sign someone who fits my definition of a 3. he'll compete mostly with Tanner and AP and maybe the freshmen.

if that guy ends up being a bigger guard that fits your "3 guard lineup", then we're on the same page. but that 3rd guard has to be able to defend a 3. it won't be a Kendall Anthony guard despite our need for shooting.

 

[VT4700]

I asked "are we". as SF pointed out, I don't think it's clear that we are.

we got commitments from 2 guards and a big forward. 3 guys we totally wanted or we wouldn't have offered. I expect all 3 to play.

complain about Tyne all day, but he's going to play a lot. there's a lot of potential there.

I think we use the last spot to sign someone who fits my definition of a 3. he'll compete mostly with Tanner and AP and maybe the freshmen.

if that guy ends up being a bigger guard that fits your "3 guard lineup", then we're on the same page. but that 3rd guard has to be able to defend a 3. it won't be a Kendall Anthony guard despite our need for shooting.

I hear u and I would love to add a solid 3 who can shoot and defend, but it would be foolish to not consider a shooting guard with our last spot because we automatically have to give 5'10 Tyne some minutes. Just makes no sense to not even try to improve ourselves there.

 

[VT4700]

Also, I hope our main focus on the final spot we have is not someone who can guard a 3. Defense is important, but we need a shooter. And, with 3 guard lineups all over college basketball, how often will we be facing a team who has a stud 3 anyway? Just seems like bad strategy to limit yourselves, to not recruit guards, and only go after a 3 type who can defend when we desperately need shooting.

 

[urmite]

Also, I hope our main focus on the final spot we have is not someone who can guard a 3. Defense is important, but we need a shooter. And, with 3 guard lineups all over college basketball, how often will we be facing a team who has a stud 3 anyway? Just seems like bad strategy to limit yourselves, to not recruit guards, and only go after a 3 type who can defend when we desperately need shooting.

Spider-Man may have indicated differently in other posts but I read his “are we?” Post as, is there evidence we are, not a question as to whether we should…

 

[VT4700]

Spider-Man may have indicated differently in other posts but I read his “are we?” Post as, is there evidence we are, not a question as to whether we should…

Well, 6'4 Boldin was scheduled for a visit, but only sman is calling him a F.

 

[AnnapSpider]

If you can't stand the heat. get out of the kitchen.

There’s no heat, just disappointment in some of the posters,
and the support that his continued posting of the billboard
seems to get.

 

[spiderman]

Well, 6'4 Boldin was scheduled for a visit, but only sman is calling him a F.

what about his game screams "guard"?
in 31 games Boldin hit 13 threes. and had 33 assists.
his highlights show him mostly attacking the rim. he shot 63% from 2 and 22% from 3. that's not very guard-like.
he's as much a guard as Tanner.

 

[gcarter52]

There’s no heat, just disappointment in some of the posters,
and the support that his continued posting of the billboard
seems to get.

I’m disappointed in some of our posters!

 

[VT4700]

what about his game screams "guard"?
in 31 games Boldin hit 13 threes. and had 33 assists.
his highlights show him mostly attacking the rim. he shot 63% from 2 and 22% from 3. that's not very guard-like.
he's as much a guard as Tanner.

Fair poimt, and I don't want to add him with our last spot. But, if we are looking at him, shouldn't we at least consider a 6'2 or 6'3 guard who cam shoot? And, u said we wouldn’t recruit over our guards, but how is recruiting over Tanner and AP different than recruiting over Tyne and Thomas?

 

[8legs1dream]

I’m disappointed in some of our posters!

We are all disappointed in our men's basketball team.

 

[kneepadmckinney]

Also, I hope our main focus on the final spot we have is not someone who can guard a 3. Defense is important, but we need a shooter. And, with 3 guard lineups all over college basketball, how often will we be facing a team who has a stud 3 anyway? Just seems like bad strategy to limit yourselves, to not recruit guards, and only go after a 3 type who can defend when we desperately need shooting.

Defense travels. I just think your vision of the world sounds a lot like Fran McCaffery teams, or maybe Paul Westhead.

I think we were really good 2 years ago because DeLonnie, Dji, Bigelow, Harris, and Quinn were somewhere between good and great defensively, and allowed Jordan King to just be an offensive force. While Bigelow turned himself into a reasonable threat from 3, and Dji, DeLonnie, and Harris could make the occasional three, we won because we could shut the other team down.

I think it's folly to keep looking for Dusan types, and worse to look for Dusan types that are under 6 feet tall. In my view, it's not a recipe for success.

 

[Eight Legger]

Mooney's teams are only really good when they have an exceptional point guard. Unless Tyne gets significantly better this summer or we pull a great PG from the portal, we don't have a ton to look forward to.

 

[GKiller]

Mooney's teams are only really good when they have an exceptional point guard. Unless Tyne gets significantly better this summer or we pull a great PG from the portal, we don't have a ton to look forward to.

Johnston is a PG. He’ll probably play a lot with Tyne. But I don’t think we’re in the market for another pg.

 

[spiderman]

Johnston is a PG. He’ll probably play a lot with Tyne. But I don’t think we’re in the market for another pg.

Thomas too, or at least they're both combo guards.
on Thomas' highlight video they call him a "ball guard". new term I guess.

 

[spiderman]

Fair poimt, and I don't want to add him with our last spot. But, if we are looking at him, shouldn't we at least consider a 6'2 or 6'3 guard who cam shoot? And, u said we wouldn’t recruit over our guards, but how is recruiting over Tanner and AP different than recruiting over Tyne and Thomas?

"recruiting over" to me has nothing to do with guys already on the roster.
no player expects you to never again recruit at their position once they sign. of course you have to. as players leave, you fill their place on the roster with a similar type player. in my experience, you always have 3 guys who CAN play the point. maybe not all true PGs, but they can. same with the post. the other spots are more fungible, though you'd rarely confuse a 2 with a 4.

what you don't often see though is recruiting over a guy with another guy at the same position in the same recruiting period. Thomas and Johnston are similar but they repace DeLo and B Artis. we're still replacing Roche who I consider a 3, but I guess you could argue Roche was a shooting guard and we need to replace that. maybe he's a 2/3 combo.

it's a little different this year with the newly expanded rosters. I'm not even taking into consideration the freshman class. they really get screwed with this expansion. by going to 15, the transfer additions are likely considered ahead of the freshman at their position or why bother bringing in the transfer. like you've said about this last spot, we're not looking for a 15th man. we should be shooting high.

 

[Eight Legger]

Johnston is a PG. He’ll probably play a lot with Tyne. But I don’t think we’re in the market for another pg.

I guess so, I just didn't get the sense that we were bringing him here to run the point. I think he's a shooter and Tyne will run the point, but hopefully you are right.

 

[8legs1dream]

Yeah Johnston averaged 3 assists per game last season which isn't nothing but I view him as a gunner coming in here.

 

[fan2011]

Yeah Johnston averaged 3 assists per game last season which isn't nothing but I view him as a gunner coming in here.

Better than our guards last season, or any player actually. Johnston is actually has excellent assist numbers.

 

[97spiderfan]

Mooney's teams are only really good when they have an exceptional point guard. Unless Tyne gets significantly better this summer or we pull a great PG from the portal, we don't have a ton to look forward to.

100%. Compare Tyne to Mooney's other PG's during his tenure. KA, Ced, Kendal Anthony, SDJ, Gilly, King. Tyne is not nearly as good as any of those guys. And all of them (except King who only was a 1 year player) showed significant game and even further upside promise as sophomores.

We are at best a .500 team at this point with the roster assembled.

 

[GKiller]

I guess so, I just didn't get the sense that we were bringing him here to run the point. I think he's a shooter and Tyne will run the point, but hopefully you are right.

He played PG at LMU. As fan2011 noted better assist numbers there than what we've seen at UR. But I view him as scoring PG in the King mold...not saying he's anywhere as good as King. I think we will use him as scorer/shooter so Tyne may end up with more ball handling responsibilities. But we've run the 2 ball handler backcourt a lot. I expect Johnston to have ball in his hands a lot, whether we call him the 1 or 2 when he's playing with Tyne I don't think matters. Right now I see a Johnston Tyne starting backcourt. We've invested a lot in Tyne too, Moon has talked about that. Tyne play wasn't nearly good enough for most of year but hopeful there's at least a little higher level he can get to. So with those 2 (& then Argabright is a PG too tho idk if u can really count him - possible redshirt like all 3 frosh) I don't see Moon in market for another PG, maybe a 2-3 type idk we'll see.

 

[SFspidur]

Rodney Rice to USC.

 

[VT4700]

Defense travels. I just think your vision of the world sounds a lot like Fran McCaffery teams, or maybe Paul Westhead.

I think we were really good 2 years ago because DeLonnie, Dji, Bigelow, Harris, and Quinn were somewhere between good and great defensively, and allowed Jordan King to just be an offensive force. While Bigelow turned himself into a reasonable threat from 3, and Dji, DeLonnie, and Harris could make the occasional three, we won because we could shut the other team down.

I think it's folly to keep looking for Dusan types, and worse to look for Dusan types that are under 6 feet tall. In my view, it's not a recipe for success.

Never said that was the type of player I wanted. Never said I wanted a guy under 6 feet tall. A big majority of the players in the portal, and in all of college basketball. are taller than 6 feet and shorter than Dusan. I want to add a guy who can shoot and make an impact, preferably start because he is better than who we have now.

Yes, I also want him to be able to play D. Of course, D is hugely important, but I don't want to use our last guy on a D only guy., especially a guy we would land only to "guard the 3". We have to add shooting, unless you are fine with being 315th in the country in 3 pt% like we were last year.

 

[SFspidur]

And Rice is apparently getting over $3 million from the Trojans.

 

[VT4700]

Better than our guards last season, or any player actually. Johnston is actually has excellent assist numbers.

Yep..we haven’t had a guard average over 3 assists per game since Jacob, and Quinn is our only player to do that since Jacob.

 

[MrTbone]

"recruiting over" to me has nothing to do with guys already on the roster.
no player expects you to never again recruit at their position once they sign. of course you have to. as players leave, you fill their place on the roster with a similar type player. in my experience, you always have 3 guys who CAN play the point. maybe not all true PGs, but they can. same with the post. the other spots are more fungible, though you'd rarely confuse a 2 with a 4.

what you don't often see though is recruiting over a guy with another guy at the same position in the same recruiting period. Thomas and Johnston are similar but they repace DeLo and B Artis. we're still replacing Roche who I consider a 3, but I guess you could argue Roche was a shooting guard and we need to replace that. maybe he's a 2/3 combo.

it's a little different this year with the newly expanded rosters. I'm not even taking into consideration the freshman class. they really get screwed with this expansion. by going to 15, the transfer additions are likely considered ahead of the freshman at their position or why bother bringing in the transfer. like you've said about this last spot, we're not looking for a 15th man. we should be shooting high.

And I think to your point, Richardson is mostly referred to as a PG or CG, so yet another guy we have who can run point if needed.