College of Charleston Game Thread 11/14/2022

GKiller

Head Coach
Jun 3, 2003
8,771
4,512
113
It has been and continues to be my opinion that Goose starting and playing major starter minutes is not a recipe for a team with legit NCAA aspirations. His offensive game is just too limited and while a really good defender, he isn't Tony Dobbins level, that to me he would need to be to justify him being our starter at the 2.

That said, I do agree with Trap, that until a players comes up and seizes the starting position from him, he will remain our starter. Mooney will need overwhelming evidence to make a switch. To date, neither Dji or Roche has provided him that.

You should put an asterisk every time u say that like...

*except the two seasons Goose has already done it for NCAA teams. Double asterisk 19-20'.

It just reads funny to me otherwise. I think u mean this year only with this specific set of players right? We'll see but I think we end up scoring wise probably quite similar to last year fwiw. But sure come take his minutes. If we had someone who could I'd get behind. I really don't see who can do things better athletically, turnovers, defense, etc. Roche can shoot it a hell of lot better for sure, but I'm not seeing major 25+ mpg for him right now. Little more specialist. Maybe next year. But only 3 games in, still a lot to play out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

brooklyn brownstone

Team Manager
Oct 31, 2007
2,655
535
113
I said this a couple months ago on here and will say it again. Nothing will get a young/unproven/inconsistent guy the hook and glue him to the bench as quickly as live ball turnovers. Nothing.

Many here have watched Moon's entire tenure and we know this to be true. Proven guys like Tyler are afforded the opportunity to stay on the floor because they've earned the right by doing things like scoring 38, but I'm sure Tyler and Moon aren't happy with his 5 TOs either. Nelson and Goose had 1 TO each in 41 and 31 minutes respectively. Roche had zero in 18 minutes. Randolph had zero in his 8 minutes but didn't make any shots and his 2nd half minutes were curbed by the comeback and those other 6 guys deservedly playing once they started the run. Team had 13 assists and 15 turnovers. Once a guy proves that he can play and be productive without turnovers and Moon will trust that guy and he'll get minutes.

So for anyone reading the tea leaves about the rotations of a game where UR was down 21 after 25m of play - no player had any rightful claim to be on the court at that point, for developmental purposes or otherwise. And once they started the huge run, no one but the 6 guys who brought them back had any right to the minutes the last 12 of regulation and the 5 of OT. If Quinn, Bailey or Randolph had been a part of the 6 and integral to the run, I'd have said the same.
 

brooklyn brownstone

Team Manager
Oct 31, 2007
2,655
535
113
And yes, I too am sick of Moon's timeouts after scores, especially when the flow of the game was trending so heavily in the Spiders favor AND when a press is being so effective in continuous game flow situations, not after things like timeouts. Don't give their guards a break and allow them to gameplan the press break and who will get their next shot - keep them scrambling and hope they panic.
 

whampas

Graduate Assistant
Jan 2, 2007
3,927
3,709
113
My point is NOW is the time for TEAM development and Mooney is coaching like the Spiders are in a tournament. A player needs to be pulled, coached, and put back in the game in order to develop to me. Mooney doesn’t have a bunch of all-time great super seniors to rely on this year, but is still coaching with a “tight rotation”. Sure 9 players played, but one fouled out and the minute distribution was lots different than the other 2 games this season.


Are you talking Spiders here? Please elaborate.
Play to win. Mooney needs to learn to coach to win. You earn time in practice, not turning it over with the game on the line just to learn a lesson.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
My point is NOW is the time for TEAM development and Mooney is coaching like the Spiders are in a tournament. A player needs to be pulled, coached, and put back in the game in order to develop to me. Mooney doesn’t have a bunch of all-time great super seniors to rely on this year, but is still coaching with a “tight rotation”. Sure 9 players played, but one fouled out and the minute distribution was lots different than the other 2 games this season.


Are you talking Spiders here? Please elaborate.
Yes, I am talking about Spiders. Nelson this year. Grant didn't play much his first year because of his injury and seemed fine without "developing". Terry Allen, Brothers, Robbins, D. Williams, Garrett, and Harper. And, this doesn't even factor in all the true freshmen we have played who played well right away without "developing". This is college basketball. When you're ready to play, you play. When you're not, or if a few guys in front of you are better, you don't play.

I just will never understand this development talk. You're asking Mooney to develop players every year instead of putting guys on the floor that give him the best chance to win. So, it will just be a year after year cycle of trying to develop players and never putting the best guys on the court? Teams all over the place are playing six and seven man rotations. We played nine last night. And, that's not enough?

Maybe the easiest way for me to understand what you really are asking is to ask who you wanted out there? Did you want us to play Walz, Dread, and Noyes? So, have a 12 man rotation? Or, did you want more minutes from Randolph and Dji? When? Final 10 minutes? Final 5 minutes? What exactly are you asking Mooney to do when you say he should develop players better? Sorry, but when we played 9 guys last night, I just have a hard time seeing what you want here.
 
Last edited:

plydogg

Team Manager
Mar 2, 2018
2,449
3,033
113
I’m super late to share my thoughts on this one.

We didn’t lose this game because of the refs. And that’s me saying that.

I thought the fight in this team to mount that comeback was incredible. They never gave up and that’s admirable, it was a hell of a game to watch.

I had a lot of thoughts during and after this game but 3 really stood out.

1) We don’t box out. Why? The replays on Flo had some angles that really showed this, but when they missed a shot we watched the ball and then jumped. Nobody was putting a body on their man. Our philosophy seems to be hope the ball bounces to somebody other than me.

2) We bite on every pump fake. If I was drawing up a play against us I wouldn’t even need much, just say throw it to so and so and then pulp. They’ll bite, and then you’ll be wide open. The pump fake absolutely killed us last night (as it did in both other games)

3) We had so many chances to win the game and we didn’t take any of them. I’m not even talking about missing open shots. What I saw over and over in crunch time was our inability to get a defensive rebound, how often we committed unforced turnovers and errors, and committing dumb unnecessary fouls.

Also a 4th bonus thing. We looked so good offensively when we started to speed up in transition in the 2nd half and defensively when we applied the press. So why when we took the lead did we go back to the same offense that didn’t work in the first half? I’m embarrassed to say it but I was screaming at the tv, it was so obvious we were playing to not lose rather than to win down the stretch. Inexcusable for an experienced coach like Mooney to allow that to happen.

On to Wichita State, let’s get to 3-1
 

brooklyn brownstone

Team Manager
Oct 31, 2007
2,655
535
113
as to your bonus point #4, we've seen that show before and someone mentioned it above - it's playing not to lose, not playing to win. Kevin Anderson bailed out / won Moon about 12 games in 2 years by being an end game killer, but guys like KA with ice water veins are few and far between. When a team is amping up the pressure, the Moon motion basically runs 24 seconds off the clock and then resets at 6 seconds on the shot clock. There are no backdoors, no looks that suddenly are wide open bc of the motion offense in the endgame. It's an 18 year itch, unscratched. Nelson will probably take a ton of last second shots in his career but putting him in a spot like that in game 3 rather than maybe running a set play for Tyler (38 points, remember him?) is dumb.
 
Jan 23, 2006
1,485
1,884
113
It has been and continues to be my opinion that Goose starting and playing major starter minutes is not a recipe for a team with legit NCAA aspirations. His offensive game is just too limited and while a really good defender, he isn't Tony Dobbins level, that to me he would need to be to justify him being our starter at the 2.

That said, I do agree with Trap, that until a players comes up and seizes the starting position from him, he will remain our starter. Mooney will need overwhelming evidence to make a switch. To date, neither Dji or Roche has provided him that.
I think this is very, very, very on point. Roche and Dji will have to win the job, and they'll need to do it with small opportunities at first. Job 1: don't turn the ball over. Job 2: guard a guy. Job 3: be a threat offensively. In that order (from Mooney point of view).

It's a hard way to win a job, but it's reality.
 

plydogg

Team Manager
Mar 2, 2018
2,449
3,033
113
The FloSports announcer calling him Andre Gusovich all game was driving me absolutely crazy.
 

RichmondNative

Starter
Dec 16, 2018
949
1,073
93
Play to win. Mooney needs to learn to coach to win. You earn time in practice, not turning it over with the game on the line just to learn a lesson.
Play to win....of course you play to win. The Spiders were down 21 points. I am sure you and 4700 KNEW that the Spiders were going to come back. Herculean efforts were made by Bigelow and Burton and a good contribution by Grace. I don't think it would have mattered who else was in the game just like the other games this year where the minutes were spread out more. You and 4700 are acting like this is a well seasoned team in conference play. News flash - it isn't. This is the type of game that you use to coach and develop players, you aren't winning them all and this isn't conference play either. I like Goose and the contributions he has made, but keeping him in this game didn't help at all. Agree to disagree.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Play to win....of course you play to win. The Spiders were down 21 points. I am sure you and 4700 KNEW that the Spiders were going to come back. Herculean efforts were made by Bigelow and Burton and a good contribution by Grace. I don't think it would have mattered who else was in the game just like the other games this year where the minutes were spread out more. You and 4700 are acting like this is a well seasoned team in conference play. News flash - it isn't. This is the type of game that you use to coach and develop players, you aren't winning them all and this isn't conference play either. I like Goose and the contributions he has made, but keeping him in this game didn't help at all. Agree to disagree.
You seem to be contradicting yourself. If this isn't a well seasoned team, don't you want your main guys, your top 6 or 7, getting most of the minutes, so they can get better seasoned? So, you want to waste time developing other players when our top 5,6, or 7 have never played together? This makes no sense.

And, you don't think it matters who was out there with Tyler, Grace, and Bigelow? Who did you want out there? Dread, Noyes, or Walz? The only other 2 would be Dji or Randolph, and they both got minutes. They have in all 3 games. Isn't that the "developing" you are looking for? We played 9 guys!!! So, what exactly did you want? More minutes for Dji and Randolph? I noticed you didn't mention Nelson with the 3 guys, so you wanted to sit Nelson? For who? Sit Nelson, who had 1 turnover in 41 minutes, for a guy that had 3 turnovers in 6 minutes? And, being that Nelson is a freshman, how are you not fine with "developing" him? And, what happens next year if and when Trevor Smith beats out some guys and starts with Nelson? Do we still worry about "developing" guys who are in their 3rd and 4th years? Wow. Okay. Like I said earlier, I guess you want an endless yearly cycle of developing guys instead of playing the best guys. Yes, definitely agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:

whampas

Graduate Assistant
Jan 2, 2007
3,927
3,709
113
Play to win....of course you play to win. The Spiders were down 21 points. I am sure you and 4700 KNEW that the Spiders were going to come back. Herculean efforts were made by Bigelow and Burton and a good contribution by Grace. I don't think it would have mattered who else was in the game just like the other games this year where the minutes were spread out more. You and 4700 are acting like this is a well seasoned team in conference play. News flash - it isn't. This is the type of game that you use to coach and develop players, you aren't winning them all and this isn't conference play either. I like Goose and the contributions he has made, but keeping him in this game didn't help at all. Agree to disagree.
Actually I didn't give them a snowballs chance of getting back into the game. Noone was more surprised than me when they did. I also wasn't surprised when Mooney coached his way out of a win at the end either. We are who we are.
 

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
14,101
7,687
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
Also, nothing like the first taste of adversity to see which rats jump off the ship first.
I have been paddling around the outside of the canoe looking for little pieces of cheese.


But seriously, I do think it is going to take some time to find out our identity and the rotations, and in another month Nelson will have that much more experience. Hoping Roche, Dji, Randolph can start winning those bigger roles.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
I have been paddling around the outside of the canoe looking for little pieces of cheese.


But seriously, I do think it is going to take some time to find out our identity and the rotations, and in another month Nelson will have that much more experience. Hoping Roche, Dji, Randolph can start winning those bigger roles.
But, are the minutes there for them all to get bigger roles? It wouldn't surprise me to see Dji only get minutes backing up Nelson, like I felt would happen this year. Maybe 5-8 or so. I just think Goose, Roche, and Randolph are better options playing with Nelson, and Nelson has clearly established himself where we want him on the floor a lot. Might even be better for Dji if he can just focus on running things at PG, and maybe we would see less turnovers this way.
 

RichmondNative

Starter
Dec 16, 2018
949
1,073
93
Flosports was actually a much smoother experience and better production than our ESPN+ games have been. I was expecting a very bad experience based on comments before the game.
ESPN+ in many cases has gone the wrong way. Not sure what the agreements are, but ESPN needs to figure out how to standardize a quality product. Glad Flosports was better for you. They set a REALLY low bar last year though.
 

plydogg

Team Manager
Mar 2, 2018
2,449
3,033
113
Flosports was actually a much smoother experience and better production than our ESPN+ games have been. I was expecting a very bad experience based on comments before the game.
I thought the same thing and was thoroughly shocked. The price point is awful but I thought everything was seamless. Tons of replays and highlights of plays which we don’t really see much on ESPN+

Also watching it hours later when I came home from work was a breeze. As a west coast Spider that’s a big deal to me since I can’t wait any weekday games live
 
  • Like
Reactions: gcarter52

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
18,235
14,448
113
I have no problem throwing Roche out there long enough to let him shoot eight threes a game. That might take five minutes some nights or it might take 20, just depends. He's a volume shooter who has demonstrated over an entire season that he will make a high percentage of them. His threes put UNI away the other night and can quickly change the course of a game.
 

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,244
9,020
113
You should put an asterisk every time u say that like...

*except the two seasons Goose has already done it for NCAA teams. Double asterisk 19-20'.

It just reads funny to me otherwise. I think u mean this year only with this specific set of players right? We'll see but I think we end up scoring wise probably quite similar to last year fwiw. But sure come take his minutes. If we had someone who could I'd get behind. I really don't see who can do things better athletically, turnovers, defense, etc. Roche can shoot it a hell of lot better for sure, but I'm not seeing major 25+ mpg for him right now. Little more specialist. Maybe next year. But only 3 games in, still a lot to play out.
*I think I have explained this before but will again. Yes, Goose starting on the team last year when we had 4 other guys who really adept at putting the ball in the basket made sense, especially because that team was lacking defensively. This year, outside of Burton, we really don't have another player, you can point to and say well that guy is going to get us 15 points per night. We know Goose is not that guy.

So far this year, Goose is averaging 26 minutes a game and averaging 4 points, 3 rebounds and less than 1 assist per game, as our starting 2 guard. I hear how great he is defensively, but that doesn't really bear out yet in both stats or to the eye test.

Lastly, if Goose is our defensive stopper as some contend, I need better defense than fouling on a 3 pointer when we need a stop as we did last game. If that is your specialty, the thing you are uniquely good at, it needs to show up in crunch time, especially when you are already feeding the established narrative from the past 4 years as not being able to do much of anything on offense. . You might have had Roche out there if that is what is going to happen, he couldn't have done worse, and at least he can give us some better offensive looks on the other side of the ball.

I think Goose is a guy that Mooney likes because he doesn't make mistakes, but on the flip side, he isn't out there really making many big plays either. So, I'm willing to give another guy some run to see if he can make plays. Maybe Dji or Roche won't and then Goose is our best option, but when Dji gets 6 minutes is he really given the chance.
 

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
*I think I have explained this before but will again. Yes, Goose starting on the team last year when we had 4 other guys who really adept at putting the ball in the basket made sense, especially because that team was lacking defensively. This year, outside of Burton, we really don't have another player, you can point to and say well that guy is going to get us 15 points per night. We know Goose is not that guy."

So far this year, Goose is averaging 26 minutes a game and averaging 4 points, 3 rebounds and less than 1 assist per game, as our starting 2 guard. I hear how great he is defensively, but that doesn't really bear out yet in both stats or to the eye test.

Lastly, if Goose is our defensive stopper as some contend, I need better defense than fouling on a 3 pointer when we need a stop as we did last game. If that is your specialty, the thing you are uniquely good at, it needs to show up in crunch time, especially when you are already feeding the established narrative from the past 4 years as not being able to do much of anything on offense. . You might have had Roche out there if that is what is going to happen, he couldn't have done worse, and at least he can give us some better offensive looks on the other side of the ball.

I think Goose is a guy that Mooney likes because he doesn't make mistakes, but on the flip side, he isn't out there really making many big plays either. So, I'm willing to give another guy some run to see if he can make plays. Maybe Dji or Roche won't and then Goose is our best option, but when Dji gets 6 minutes is he really given the chance.
"I think Goose is a guy that Mooney likes because he doesn't make mistakes, but on the flip side, he isn't out there really making many big plays either. So, I'm willing to give another guy some run to see if he can make plays. Maybe Dji or Roche won't and then Goose is our best option, but when Dji gets 6 minutes is he really given the chance."

Agree 97, and (not on topic) for the record Dji only had 2 TOs for the game not 3 as they listed. If someone can tell me the third I would be happy to know...The charge and the pass in the 2nd that slipped out his hands, the one where coach pulled him. If I somehow missed the other(as I have watched the film multiple time now) let me know, it's possible. But on topic, Goose doesn't make many mistakes has a longer leash, that is just a fact, and he's a known quantity. He had some mistakes and a off night defensively but who doesn't. We are just 3 games in. No player on this team is perfect and a team that is still figuring out its identity. One game doesn't define a player or a team. Although there are a couple on here that like to try. 97 I agree, do you really have a shot with 1:02 played in 2nd half? 1st half I get bc he collected two fouls. We also went on that run in the 2nd and why mess with the hot guys so I kinda understand. But all guys still need to be given a shot and play through their mistakes. I don't care what others think about play to win and not developing, to me thats nonsense. You play guys that you know can help win no matter the role or the minutes or class. That in turn helps player growth. Between Dji, Roche, Randolph, and even Crab I think we will have nights where some of these guys will have their good games(they have too for us to be successful) and yes we want someone else to be able to step up and be more offensive/complete player. Who that will be?? I think the jury is still out and again could be any one of those guys.
 

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,244
9,020
113
Dad, go back and look at some of the Deion Taylor threads from a few years back (I'm joking, don't do that). Similar situation, offensively limited player, who Mooney loved on for his intangibles/defense, and to me his lack of mistakes on the court.

If Dji is going to get more time with Mooney, he is going to both cut down on TO's AND make plays. That is tough row to hoe because difficult to both make plays in your limited time and try to not make mistakes. Starters get more leeway in this regards, which is a bit unfair, but it is what it is.

But much as I said Dji and Roche are not making enough plays to justify eating into Goose's starter minutes at this point, Goose is similarly not making enough plays for him to feel that his minutes and starters role are not threatened. The opportunity is there.
 

SFspidur

Spider's Club
Gold Member
May 5, 2003
15,814
10,306
113
To be fair, we weren't exactly overflowing with options other than Deion...those were the years we weren't using our full allotment of scholarships and/or signing guys like Smithen, Pistokache, Dominaus, Friendshuh.

Can certainly make an argument that Wood should have been starter over Deion in Deion's final year, but aside from a few flashes of brilliance, Wood didn't exactly light things up either. And regardless of who started, they played a similar number of minutes (Wood actually a few more).

/tangent
 

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
🏀Dad, go back and look at some of the Deion Taylor threads from a few years back (I'm joking, don't do that). Similar situation, offensively limited player, who Mooney loved on for his intangibles/defense, and to me his lack of mistakes on the court.

If Dji is going to get more time with Mooney, he is going to both cut down on TO's AND make plays. That is tough row to hoe because difficult to both make plays in your limited time and try to not make mistakes. Starters get more leeway in this regards, which is a bit unfair, but it is what it is.

But much as I said Dji and Roche are not making enough plays to justify eating into Goose's starter minutes at this point, Goose is similarly not making enough plays for him to feel that his minutes and starters role are not threatened. The opportunity is there.
Nail meet hammer 😁 Def agree with the TOs and make plays. The ball is valuable and must be protected at all cost. We had a great convo last night about this very thing. ✊ 🕷️🏀
 

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,244
9,020
113
To be fair, we weren't exactly overflowing with options other than Deion...those were the years we weren't using our full allotment of scholarships and/or signing guys like Smithen, Pistokache, Dominaus, Friendshuh.

Can certainly make an argument that Wood should have been starter over Deion in Deion's final year, but aside from a few flashes of brilliance, Wood didn't exactly light things up either. And regardless of who started, they played a similar number of minutes (Wood actually a few more).

/tangent
That was my argument. Yes, Wood had his limitations as well for sure. Our roster back then was really devoid of depth. Much different situation now, I think.

Deion came in with a fairly good offensive skill set but then injuries changed what he could do and ultimately broke his shot and I think his confidence. Goose never had a great or great potential with his offensive skill set (which befuddles me why some thought all of a sudden that would appear this year), so he plays with confidence, he isn't broken, he just is more limited on the offensive end of things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
Deion seemed really stiff after the back injury. shame, because he was quite an athlete before.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Why are some of you acting like we only play 5 guys, and no one else plays? In 3 games so far, Roche has 58 minutes, Dji 37, and Randolph 32.

Roche is going to give us 3s, and win some games for us with his shooting. Some games he will out there for more than 20 minutes, so I could see him taking a few minutes from Goose and from others.

I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose. Just not enough offense and too careless with the ball to justify this. I feel like he has had a lot of chances, and, kind of like I felt with Sal, he is who he is. I have said from the beginning I don't like Nelson and Dji playing together, and I stand by that. Time will tell how much this happens.

Randolph provides energy, moves well without the ball, and looks like he can make the 3. I could see a few more minutes for him, but right now, my order for time would be Goose, Roche, and Randolph. Career assists/turnovers:

Goose 116/85
Roche 21/32 (Acceptable because he can win games with the 3)
Dji 6/19
Randolph 1/5

This matters. It just does.

Dji has 228 career minutes, is 1-12 from 3, and has 19 turnovers.
Randolph has 60 career minutes, is 3-8 from 3, and has 5 turnovers.

Both need to cut down the turnovers, but I feel Randolph is the better option after Goose and Roche. And, this isn't just a dig at Dji because if we are talking backing up Nelson, even though Randolph has shown he can handle the ball, I think Dji is the better option there. But, he needs to take care of the ball when doing that.
 

GKiller

Head Coach
Jun 3, 2003
8,771
4,512
113
*I think I have explained this before but will again. Yes, Goose starting on the team last year when we had 4 other guys who really adept at putting the ball in the basket made sense, especially because that team was lacking defensively. This year, outside of Burton, we really don't have another player, you can point to and say well that guy is going to get us 15 points per night. We know Goose is not that guy.

So far this year, Goose is averaging 26 minutes a game and averaging 4 points, 3 rebounds and less than 1 assist per game, as our starting 2 guard. I hear how great he is defensively, but that doesn't really bear out yet in both stats or to the eye test.

Right & when he's played major minutes for arguably 2 NCAA teams already, it's still just funny to read regardless. Keep the asterisk, thx.

But not sure this year will be all that different scoring wise anyway. Think end up quite similar. Disagree that we don't have other guys that can score. what do u think we'll average? I didn't see all this scoring last year that u contend we had.

So if we have guys that can score & Goose is still 4th/5th option, why not also be very good defensively. I don't think taking our best defender out of game helps as you expect, especially if we can score fine. Granted we are 3 games in, perhaps u r forecasting we'll struggle much more. Maybe if Grace, the guy u hated, is out it will affect that a bit too. & Goose could add just a little more O but correct that hasn't borne out & may not

Also his foul was a weak call, but still on him & not his best game. Roche gave up the & 1 in OT. But Dji Randolph Roche etc. (maybe Noyes?) will have more opportunities outside of CofC. The PT distribution isn't locked in, could be game to game for a while.

lastly forgive me for not relying on the "eye test". If we did we'd have Dji & Nelson splitting 20/20 mins at PG. That was amusingly half the board this summer. Tho it would probably be 100% denials today lol. Or maybe it wasn't the eye test and it was slurping up the "running with the 1s" talk. idk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
Why are some of you acting like we only play 5 guys, and no one else plays? In 3 games so far, Roche has 58 minutes, Dji 37, and Randolph 32.

Roche is going to give us 3s, and win some games for us with his shooting. Some games he will out there for more than 20 minutes, so I could see him taking a few minutes from Goose and from others.

I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose. Just not enough offense and too careless with the ball to justify this. I feel like he has had a lot of chances, and, kind of like I felt with Sal, he is who he is. I have said from the beginning I don't like Nelson and Dji playing together, and I stand by that. Time will tell how much this happens.

Randolph provides energy, moves well without the ball, and looks like he can make the 3. I could see a few more minutes for him, but right now, my order for time would be Goose, Roche, and Randolph. Career assists/turnovers:

Goose 116/85
Roche 21/32 (Acceptable because he can win games with the 3)
Dji 6/19
Randolph 1/5

This matters. It just does.

Dji has 228 career minutes, is 1-12 from 3, and has 19 turnovers.
Randolph has 60 career minutes, is 3-8 from 3, and has 5 turnovers.

Both need to cut down the turnovers, but I feel Randolph is the better option after Goose and Roche. And, this isn't just a dig at Dji because if we are talking backing up Nelson, even though Randolph has shown he can handle the ball, I think Dji is the better option there. But, he needs to take care of the ball when doing that.
"I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose."

Ok, I'll bite...and I'm going to tell you what I tell my students...We don't pay you to think. He will see time in that spot and a couple others. Your basic stats are great but there are more analytics that the staff go by since you are google stats guy...Per 40 to name just one and the leader of that is...oh never mind. The one thing you are correct about is turnovers however, they def need to come down. But let's not act like he's a turnover machine and this is only game 3...no one on this staff is counting how many times the ball was turned over in the very limited minutes his 1st 2 years they care about this season. I feel confident that will come down. If it escalates then you look at sitting.
 

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
Right & when he's played major minutes for arguably 2 NCAA teams already, it's still just funny to read regardless. Keep the asterisk, thx.

But not sure this year will be all that different scoring wise anyway. Think end up quite similar. Disagree that we don't have other guys that can score. what do u think we'll average? I didn't see all this scoring last year that u contend we had.

So if we have guys that can score & Goose is still 4th/5th option, why not also be very good defensively. I don't think taking our best defender out of game helps as you expect, especially if we can score fine. Granted we are 3 games in, perhaps u r forecasting we'll struggle much more. Maybe if Grace, the guy u hated, is out it will affect that a bit too. & Goose could add just a little more O but correct that hasn't borne out & may not

Also his foul was a weak call, but still on him & not his best game. Roche gave up the & 1 in OT. But Dji Randolph Roche etc. (maybe Noyes?) will have more opportunities outside of CofC. The PT distribution isn't locked in, could be game to game for a while.

lastly forgive me for not relying on the "eye test". If we did we'd have Dji & Nelson splitting 20/20 mins at PG. That was amusingly half the board this summer. Tho it would probably be 100% denials today lol. Or maybe it wasn't the eye test and it was slurping up the "running with the 1s" talk. idk.
"Or maybe it wasn't the eye test and it was slurping up the "running with the 1s" talk. idk."

I said what I said because it was happening. Your shade throwing is cool for a 15 year old, but please continue...or just watch more basketball, that actually helps.
 

SpiderTrap

Graduate Assistant
Nov 6, 2007
5,593
1,663
113
Still early - so this could change, but I think with Nelson having the good game vs. UNI, and then he plays 41 out of 45 minutes in an OT game, with DJI only get 6 minutes - I think the writing is on the wall right now for DJI - he is likely not going to play too much unless injury or foul trouble occurs to Nelson or Goose. And with Goose - Roche might get more of those minutes if his shots are falling.

Mooney likes to play his PG in his system long minutes and have a guy that create - I think Nelson will be up and down this year, but will provide that. That limits DJI opportunities a lot, especially since I also see Goose out there around 30 minutes a night - possibly more if he can provide some offense.

DJI is trending into the "find him minutes" conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
Still early - so this could change, but I think with Nelson having the good game vs. UNI, and then he plays 41 out of 45 minutes in an OT game, with DJI only get 6 minutes - I think the writing is on the wall right now for DJI - he is likely not going to play too much unless injury or foul trouble occurs to Nelson or Goose. And with Goose - Roche might get more of those minutes if his shots are falling.

Mooney likes to play his PG in his system long minutes and have a guy that create - I think Nelson will be up and down this year, but will provide that. That limits DJI opportunities a lot, especially since I also see Goose out there around 30 minutes a night - possibly more if he can provide some offense.

DJI is trending into the "find him minutes" conversation.
I hear you...I'll take that bet 😁
 

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,244
9,020
113
"I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose."
I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose. Just not enough offense and too careless with the ball to justify this.

I found the second part of that sentence to be even more outstanding. So, you think Dji is too careless with the ball BUT you want him to be our back up PG, the position that does the bulk of the ballhanding. Hmm, ok.

Dji can play some point, but lets be real, Nelson is really good and he fits Mooney's PG style to a T. Dji does not. We have never had a tall lanky PG with Mooney. Maybe he gets some back-up minutes there, what little there will be cause Nelson is gonna get a lot of minutes. Dji's playing style and athletic stature makes him for of a natural 2 or 3 in our system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
"I still think Dji is best suited to back up Nelson, and should not even be part of any discussion to take time from Goose."

Ok, I'll bite...and I'm going to tell you what I tell my students...We don't pay you to think. He will see time in that spot and a couple others. Your basic stats are great but there are more analytics that the staff go by since you are google stats guy...Per 40 to name just one and the leader of that is...oh never mind. The one thing you are correct about is turnovers however, they def need to come down. But let's not act like he's a turnover machine and this is only game 3...no one on this staff is counting how many times the ball was turned over in the very limited minutes his 1st 2 years they care about this season. I feel confident that will come down. If it escalates then you look at sitting.
Well, should we pay you to think? You said the PG spot was wide open, with no obvious starter, and we were probably looking at a 20/20 split. You said we would see Nelson and Dji on the floor a lot together. You said Dji was running with the 1s a lot. It is what it is. And, being a D1 back up PG is pretty impressive, so I am not criticizing, only responding to the "should get more time" talk, which I continue to disagree with. People on here wanted more time for Sal, until they didn't. The only difference was Sal's dad wasn't on the board influencing opinions.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
"Or maybe it wasn't the eye test and it was slurping up the "running with the 1s" talk. idk."

I said what I said because it was happening. Your shade throwing is cool for a 15 year old, but please continue...or just watch more basketball, that actually helps.
Why is the guy who was wrong all pre season telling the guy who got it right to watch more basketball?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GKiller

Latest posts