Don't sleep on Roche

GKiller

Head Coach
Jun 3, 2003
8,557
4,221
113
So, the guy who would have blown away our all time 3 point record last year, is a guy who is gonna come off the bench this year and maybe get up to 20 minutes a game by the end of the year. Yeah, ok.

I like Goose as much as the next guy and he was perfect for team last year, but lets also remember who he replaced, Wilson who averaged a bit over 2 points a game and is now at Winthrop and Sherod, who played like he was 45 years old (no offense, two ACL's). So, yeah, our team was going to look better with Goose out there.

Goose's defense was also critical on a team that collectively was not great at defense but had ample scoring option, so a defensive first shooting guard worked. I don't see the fit as well this year. Goose may start to start the season, cause Mooney is as loyal, and an old blind hound dog, but Roche is a better player. Not a knock on Goose, who is a good player, Roche is better though.

Roche is a better shooter which is important no doubt but I can’t say he’s a better player. What else is he better at? Could be hope so but without seeing him besides watching game highlights that’s a leap imo. I expect a big role for Roche we do need that designated 3 pt specialist & if he shoots like at Citadel he’ll get plenty of time. I don’t expect the same volume here this season. So I could see him at 20 mins or low 20s & more if lights out.

I don’t think it’s goose vs. Roche at SG anyway. Sure to some extent they compete as do other players but those 2 not as much directly as made out on this board imo.

if goose is at 30 mins as example I can see him at 10/10/10 for positions 1-3 if u want to label those spots. Bc he has that versatility. Think him & Roche will play decent amount together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

Ferrum Spider

Team Manager
Feb 17, 2010
2,411
2,134
113
So, the guy who would have blown away our all time 3 point record last year, is a guy who is gonna come off the bench this year and maybe get up to 20 minutes a game by the end of the year. Yeah, ok.

I like Goose as much as the next guy and he was perfect for team last year, but lets also remember who he replaced, Wilson who averaged a bit over 2 points a game and is now at Winthrop and Sherod, who played like he was 45 years old (no offense, two ACL's). So, yeah, our team was going to look better with Goose out there.

Goose's defense was also critical on a team that collectively was not great at defense but had ample scoring option, so a defensive first shooting guard worked. I don't see the fit as well this year. Goose may start to start the season, cause Mooney is as loyal, and an old blind hound dog, but Roche is a better player. Not a knock on Goose, who is a good player, Roche is better though.
I like Roche but don't think he's going to demand starter minutes early on a la TJC when he transferred in until later on in his first season. I could see him by the end of the season playing 20+ MPG though. Think he needs to bulk up that lower body to keep those legs strong in the more physical A10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,718
5,966
113
I'm hopeful with Roche because I fear the lineups I continue to see posted here will struggle to score. and I doubt they're so good defensively to overcome that.
Goose is ideal when surrounded by the offensive likes of Golden, Gilyard, Burton and Cayo.
 
Oct 19, 2015
219
211
43
Very solid post Native! I would like to add to the overall convo is the ones…the guys who have been in the 1st group since summer started would surprise some people on this board. I’ll leave it at that 😀. Of course nothing is set in stone but some may find it surprising. 🕷🏀
I hope it will be a pleasant surprise. Like Bailey or Crabtree fully healthy and outplaying the guys ahead of them into the starting lineup.

I guess an unpleasant surprise for me would be only 1 incoming transfer starting.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,718
5,966
113
I hope it will be a pleasant surprise. Like Bailey or Crabtree fully healthy and outplaying the guys ahead of them into the starting lineup.

I guess an unpleasant surprise for me would be only 1 incoming transfer starting.
if it means a returning guy is better, I'm all for it.
best players play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

SpiderTrap

Graduate Assistant
Nov 6, 2007
5,395
1,470
113
So, the guy who would have blown away our all time 3 point record last year, is a guy who is gonna come off the bench this year and maybe get up to 20 minutes a game by the end of the year. Yeah, ok.

I like Goose as much as the next guy and he was perfect for team last year, but lets also remember who he replaced, Wilson who averaged a bit over 2 points a game and is now at Winthrop and Sherod, who played like he was 45 years old (no offense, two ACL's). So, yeah, our team was going to look better with Goose out there.

Goose's defense was also critical on a team that collectively was not great at defense but had ample scoring option, so a defensive first shooting guard worked. I don't see the fit as well this year. Goose may start to start the season, cause Mooney is as loyal, and an old blind hound dog, but Roche is a better player. Not a knock on Goose, who is a good player, Roche is better though.
There were 29 guys last year in NCAA who made more than 94 three pointers for the season. Let me throw some names out at you -
Darius McGhee - Liberty
Kamdyn Curfman - VMI
Dru Kuxhausen - Northern Colorado
Adrian Delph - App State
George Papas - Monmouth
Chase Johnston - Stetson

Point being - just because you made a lot of 3's doesn't mean your the better overall player. Roche made 110 on 277 attempts. Goose made 16 on 52 attempts. At that rate - if Goose got 277 attempts, he would have made about 85 3's. So 25 behind Roche. A good number behind, but again - we have to look at whole package. And trust me - I like Roche. Our bench last season was terrible for most of the season. We would have games where they provided no scoring and had little to no effect on the game. So even if Roche comes off the bench - I think he plays a key role in that we need that guy who can come off the bench and scare teams that he could get hot and go off for like 15 points in a hurry. We have not had that and we may need that this year with all the scoring we lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
Only 3 players in college basketball made as many 3s as Roche made and shot a better percentage than him. 3. And one of those was Gillespie from Villanova. But, I want and expect Goose to start and play a lot, and see no reason why Goose and Roche can't play together out there. If Roche is hitting 3s again this year, he will see plenty of time. And, if Goose is taking the opponent's best scorer out of the game like he did numerous times last year, he will see plenty of time also.
 

SpiderDad75

Starter
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
999
2,406
93
Roche hit the portal and got offers from Missouri, K State and Pitt. that's a huge get for us. he hit 40% of 3's on heavy volume. I don't know why it's hard to believe he's probably our best SG.
Volume and percentage wise absolutely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
if it means a returning guy is better, I'm all for it.
best players play.
I agree best players need to play, but I see Mountain's point, especially with Quinn. We know what Grace brings, and I like his game a lot, always have, but if Quinn doesn't start, it would make me wonder about his game a little. If a 7 footer like Quinn has the talent I I think and hope he does, I would expect him to start.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
Roche hit the portal and got offers from Missouri, K State and Pitt. that's a huge get for us. he hit 40% of 3's on heavy volume. I don't know why it's hard to believe he's probably our best SG.
Because we have a guy in Goose that numerous times took the other team's top scorer out of the game last year. That matters. Also, he has a good handle and helped bring the ball up at times. That matters also. I want my guards being able to handle the ball and help with bringing it up the court, especially if we get pressed, or the defense keeps the ball away from our PG, or if we just get full court defense played against us. I haven't seen Roche enough to know he would be fine bringing it up if he is the only option besides our PG. Maybe he would be fine with that, and that is great if he has that part of his game also. But, it doesn't have to be one or the other. No reason why both Goose and Roche can't play together.
 
Last edited:

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,818
13,492
113
Roche would have to be egregiously awful on defense to surrender more points than he appears likely to score (or to have a worse plus/minus than whoever might play instead of him). I haven’t seen him play defense, but it would seem that he’s going to be a net positive when he’s in the game.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
Roche would have to be egregiously awful on defense to surrender more points than he appears likely to score (or to have a worse plus/minus than whoever might play instead of him). I haven’t seen him play defense, but it would seem that he’s going to be a net positive when he’s in the game.
I am very excited about Roche, how could I not be as important as I think the 3 ball is, but how many PPG do you think he is likely to score? To me it's not about Roche not playing defense, it's that we have one of the best defenders we have had here in Goose. But, yes, Roche needs plenty of minutes, which is why I keep asking why wouldn't we want out best defender and best 3 point shooter out there together at times?
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,718
5,966
113
But, yes, Roche needs plenty of minutes, which is why I keep asking why wouldn't we want out best defender and best 3 point shooter out there together at times?
put PG and C aside for a minute. we have the follwing main options for the other 3 starting spots.
1) Goose, Burton, Grace
2) Goose, Burton, Bigelow
3) Roche, Goose, Burton
4) Roche, Burton, Bigelow
5) Roche, Burton, Grace

and that's not even contemplating Crabtree, nor Bailey possibly playing off the point.

a lot comes down to Bigelow to me. I don't love Grace at forward. I don't see what we gain there. he's not a plus defender and to date hasn't been a plus shooter or ball handler on the perimeter. I like him backing up Quinn.

as I want Roche's shooting out there, my preferences are options #3 and #4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrTbone

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
Roche hit the portal and got offers from Missouri, K State and Pitt. that's a huge get for us. he hit 40% of 3's on heavy volume. I don't know why it's hard to believe he's probably our best SG.
My question would be why do we have to call him a SG, meaning a "2" and a "2" only? Why be so worried about old school 1-5 positions that it limits your options?
 

SpiderTrap

Graduate Assistant
Nov 6, 2007
5,395
1,470
113
put PG and C aside for a minute. we have the follwing main options for the other 3 starting spots.
1) Goose, Burton, Grace
2) Goose, Burton, Bigelow
3) Roche, Goose, Burton
4) Roche, Burton, Bigelow
5) Roche, Burton, Grace

and that's not even contemplating Crabtree, nor Bailey possibly playing off the point.

a lot comes down to Bigelow to me. I don't love Grace at forward. I don't see what we gain there. he's not a plus defender and to date hasn't been a plus shooter or ball handler on the perimeter. I like him backing up Quinn.

as I want Roche's shooting out there, my preferences are options #3 and #4.
I like 2 - I think Bigelow and Burton on the wings give us some good athleticism and we keep good defense, which we need with Goose out there.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
put PG and C aside for a minute. we have the follwing main options for the other 3 starting spots.
1) Goose, Burton, Grace
2) Goose, Burton, Bigelow
3) Roche, Goose, Burton
4) Roche, Burton, Bigelow
5) Roche, Burton, Grace

and that's not even contemplating Crabtree, nor Bailey possibly playing off the point.

a lot comes down to Bigelow to me. I don't love Grace at forward. I don't see what we gain there. he's not a plus defender and to date hasn't been a plus shooter or ball handler on the perimeter. I like him backing up Quinn.

as I want Roche's shooting out there, my preferences are options #3 and #4.
I agree with putting PG and our big aside. Those are important positions that we always need out there. And, I like all 5 of those lineups you put out there, and see no reason why they all would not work at times. I thought you had been saying Roche over Goose, but not both together. Sorry if I misread the together part from you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,024
8,467
113
Roche hit the portal and got offers from Missouri, K State and Pitt. that's a huge get for us. he hit 40% of 3's on heavy volume. I don't know why it's hard to believe he's probably our best SG.
Would Goose have gotten similar offers if he had transferred? I'm asking, I don't know, but I doubt it.

There are so many unknowns on here. For instance, we question Roche who has already shown us what he can do on a college court, but Nelson, a guy who has never played in a D-1 game we are penciling in for starting from day 1 and playing probably 30 minutes.

I know Mooney has intimated that is the plan for Nelson, I hope it is, because it means he is the stud, we think he is, but he has yet to step foot on a college court.
 

CarolinaSpider

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Nov 27, 2006
4,947
1,633
113
Very solid post Native! I would like to add to the overall convo is the ones…the guys who have been in the 1st group since summer started would surprise some people on this board. I’ll leave it at that 😀. Of course nothing is set in stone but some may find it surprising. 🕷🏀
Yes inquiring minds want to know!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,266
1,924
113
I think if we had Roche last year, looking back on so many games where we struggled from 3, we would have had him in there for Nate a lot, and seen a Jacob, Goose, Roche, Tyler, and Grant lineup out there. Don't get me wrong, I loved Nate, but when we needed better shooting, this would have been a solid lineup. Which I why I think we could see a Nelson, Goose, Roche, Tyler, Quinn lineup a lot, maybe even starting? Having a versatile guy like Bigelow off the bench could be key as well.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,718
5,966
113
I agree with putting PG and our big aside. Those are important positions that we always need out there. And, I like all 5 of those lineups you put out there, and see no reason why they all would not work at times. I thought you had been saying Roche over Goose, but not both together. Sorry if I misread the together part from you.
if I'm starting Roche it's either for Goose at SG or next to him sliding Burton to the bigger forward spot ... meaning I've got Bigelow and Grace on the bench.

as coach I'd be watching Bigelow closely all offseason. if he's a guy I decide I want on the floor 25-30 mpg, then I start with that and work backwards.
 
Oct 19, 2015
219
211
43
I think if we had Roche last year, looking back on so many games where we struggled from 3, we would have had him in there for Nate a lot, and seen a Jacob, Goose, Roche, Tyler, and Grant lineup out there. Don't get me wrong, I loved Nate, but when we needed better shooting, this would have been a solid lineup. Which I why I think we could see a Nelson, Goose, Roche, Tyler, Quinn lineup a lot, maybe even starting? Having a versatile guy like Bigelow off the bench could be key as well.
That is the lineup I favor as well, and the debate on it has only hardened my position. Everything points to Quinn as center -- Mooney's comments, SpiderDad's comments, his past performance, etc. Burton has to start. Mooney likes Goose, he is a returning starter on a team that lost 3 starters, and is the best defensive player we have. Maybe a healthy Bailey surprises us and becomes the PG, but for now I'll stick with Nelson there. What is this lineup missing? A healthy Nick Sherod or Jason Roche is the PERFECT fit for that last spot. The lineup just doesn't work as well without that sharpshooter in it.
 

CarolinaSpider

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Nov 27, 2006
4,947
1,633
113
I think if we had Roche last year, looking back on so many games where we struggled from 3, we would have had him in there for Nate a lot, and seen a Jacob, Goose, Roche, Tyler, and Grant lineup out there. Don't get me wrong, I loved Nate, but when we needed better shooting, this would have been a solid lineup. Which I why I think we could see a Nelson, Goose, Roche, Tyler, Quinn lineup a lot, maybe even starting? Having a versatile guy like Bigelow off the bench could be key as well.
At times Nate was our only inside presence and usually with his quickness and driving ability created matchup issues
for the opposing team. Agreed between foul shooting and outside 4 feet, he was not a good option. But hope someone like Bigelow will be a dual threat, inside and out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderman

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,024
8,467
113
I think if we had Roche last year, looking back on so many games where we struggled from 3, we would have had him in there for Nate a lot, and seen a Jacob, Goose, Roche, Tyler, and Grant lineup out there. Don't get me wrong, I loved Nate, but when we needed better shooting, this would have been a solid lineup. Which I why I think we could see a Nelson, Goose, Roche, Tyler, Quinn lineup a lot, maybe even starting? Having a versatile guy like Bigelow off the bench could be key as well.
Agreed. I like this line-up. I don't see Roche playing the 3, but certainly I could see Goose sliding over to play the 3. Offensively, his game is very similar to many of Mooney's past 3's (FCM, Butler, Deion), which are guys that aren't great shooters, can slash, and give you great defense and intangibles. Goose has the size/length to play the 3, albeit a bit undersized.

I also think if Goose moves to the 3, Tyler moves to the 4, which I think is a better fit for him as well (Tyler is not a very good perimeter defender, but excellent rebounder) and he will get a bit less perimeter defense and a bit more rebounding position. Bigelow gets bench minutes for Tyler but also some for Goose, Grace does the same for Quinn and Burton.

Lastly, Goose at the 3, helps loosen up our log jam of players at the 2.

So, I don't know about you all but I think we just solved this problem for Mooney.
 

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,818
13,492
113
I am very excited about Roche, how could I not be as important as I think the 3 ball is, but how many PPG do you think he is likely to score? To me it's not about Roche not playing defense, it's that we have one of the best defenders we have had here in Goose. But, yes, Roche needs plenty of minutes, which is why I keep asking why wouldn't we want out best defender and best 3 point shooter out there together at times?
If he plays 25-30 minutes a game, I think he averages 10-12 ppg.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

urmite

Head Coach
Gold Member
Dec 2, 2004
9,958
3,155
113
If he plays 25-30 minutes a game, I think he averages 10-12 ppg.
Sorry, but I have already slotted him in for only 9 minutes per game.
During which time over 31 games, he will be 217 of 279 from three.
(Taking 1 per minute, making 77.7778%)
So that should help with the scoring...
 

SpiderTrap

Graduate Assistant
Nov 6, 2007
5,395
1,470
113
If we need a shooter - are we sleeping on Bigelow. Before his ACL injury - he shot 38% from 3. After the knee injury he dipped to 30% - but I think the capability is there for him to be a good shooter. Pair that with Burton - who shot 36% from deep and Grace I think is just as good as Golden right around 30% maybe better.

The biggest unknown right now with Roche is that if we all agree he is our best shooter, and he probably his - we have no idea what else he brings to the table. Its hard to gauge his defense at this point, and we don't know how well he can handle the ball or pass the ball. At the Citadel - he only had 21 assists all season, but is that because he just shoots when he gets it or he is not a good passer? We also don't know - as has been outlined here, what Roche do we get. Did he hit Frosh wall last season and that hurt his shooting? Or did teams focus on him and then he became a 30% shooter. Yes he had good games vs. Pitt and Chattanooga, but he also was 2-7, 2-6, 2-9, 1-6, 3-7, 2-8 vs teams like Chattanooga, Furman, Mercer, Samford, etc. And I think we all agree - we expect the competition to be better in the A10, especially from the guard position.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,718
5,966
113
Goose and Roche aren't assists guys. Goose only had 31 himself. Goose will drive more. Roche rarely drives or shoots from 2. he made 14 2's all year playing 36 mpg in 31 games. neither rebounds particularly well.

interestingly, Bigelow had more assists than either Roche or Goose with 42 in minutes comparable to Goose's. obvioulsly he's a substantially better rebounder. like Roche, maybe Bigelow hit a late season wall too. he only hit 4 of his last 22 from 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
17,818
13,492
113
All shooters will have bad games. The bottom line is that Roche shot a ton of threes and made a ton of them – and a very high percentage of them.

As for Bigelow, I think at his best he could give us something like the best of Cayo and Sherod – a guy who can play inside and score there but who can also step out and drain threes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1

SpiderTrap

Graduate Assistant
Nov 6, 2007
5,395
1,470
113
All shooters will have bad games. The bottom line is that Roche shot a ton of threes and made a ton of them – and a very high percentage of them.

As for Bigelow, I think at his best he could give us something like the best of Cayo and Sherod – a guy who can play inside and score there but who can also step out and drain threes.
Based on the film we have seen - Bigelow looks like a guy who can shoot, but also provide that score inside and he seems to bring an intensity to the floor. Not to mention - I have to imagine he is hungry. Coming off injury and now looking to play big minutes and get to the NCAA - I expect him to be a guy fighting for rebounds, diving for loose balls, and just giving full effort all the time.
 

Latest posts