ADVERTISEMENT

@ George Mason Patriots - Noon Saturday

How many seasons have we had a spell where the starters are 'tired', 'lost their legs' etc. You can't play the starters that much then don't like it when they wear down. Sure there are chances in subbing, but the players were recruited and expected to contribute.

Not to mention losing contributors like Wojcik because of lack of playing time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTSpider
??? Ones that aren't part of the rotation? How's Henry Coleman doing at Duke?
Great comeback. He gets as many minutes as our freshman bench guys, and oh by the way, all of the other freshman at Duke are getting substantial minutes. PS, Coleman made a poor choice picking Duke.
 
How many seasons have we had a spell where the starters are 'tired', 'lost their legs' etc. You can't play the starters that much then don't like it when they wear down. Sure there are chances in subbing, but the players were recruited and expected to contribute.

Not to mention losing contributors like Wojcik because of lack of playing time.

Tired? You think we should we have rested Jacob and Blake more to get ready for the next game? I take it you're only talking about them because no other starter plays 32 or more minutes a game. The next game is a week away, and you were worried about resting them? When they are so important offensively and defensively? They had a combined 9 steals last game. I want them on the floor. Those guys have proved they do fine without a lot of rest. They were on the floor a lot last year and we won 9 of our last 10, so that ruins any kind of they will be tired down the stretch argument. And, we played 5 less out of conference games this year. Wear down? With four TV timeouts a half, halftime, and an occasional break where they do sit down thrown in? Not them. Keep them out there as much as possible.

As for Wojcik, he left because he was behind a lot of guys in the rotation. I was hoping he would stay and redshirt, but your program is in good shape going into the season if a pretty good player like that is behind so many others.
 
Great comeback. He gets as many minutes as our freshman bench guys, and oh by the way, all of the other freshman at Duke are getting substantial minutes. PS, Coleman made a poor choice picking Duke.
Funny that you have to compare us to a one and done program that has done nothing but recruit one and dones and play freshman the last several years.

And, no, Coleman has not gotten as many minutes as Wilson. He got 8 minutes against Bellarmine, LOL, and got 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, and 0 in their other games.
 
Tired? You think we should we have rested Jacob and Blake more to get ready for the next game? I take it you're only talking about them because no other starter plays 32 or more minutes a game. The next game is a week away, and you were worried about resting them? When they are so important offensively and defensively? They had a combined 9 steals last game. I want them on the floor. Those guys have proved they do fine without a lot of rest. They were on the floor a lot last year and we won 9 of our last 10, so that ruins any kind of they will be tired down the stretch argument. And, we played 5 less out of conference games this year. Wear down? With four TV timeouts a half, halftime, and an occasional break where they do sit down thrown in? Not them. Keep them out there as much as possible.

As for Wojcik, he left because he was behind a lot of guys in the rotation. I was hoping he would stay and redshirt, but your program is in good shape going into the season if a pretty good player like that is behind so many others.
We wear down every season and have for years. We need to develop a deeper bench but it doesn't seem to fit Mooney's style. If you can't get your deeper bench some time in a 20 point win when can you.
 
I can’t speak for 23, but I’m not saying Mooney is a bad coach because he didn’t play Wilson for 2 more minutes. I’m just reviewing the tape/game and seeing things we could have done differently and things we could have improved on. Even in a win there are always things to improve on.

I’m simply saying next time we’re up 16-20 late against a bad team I’d like to see us bring in someone like Wilson for 4-5 minutes to close out and see how he looks. If he looks completely outmatched for 3-4 possessions then bring him back out. Who knows, he could be an X-factor for us down the stretch if he’s able to get a few more minutes and teams don’t really have tape on him. I’m under the impression him and Dji are improving every single day in practice and are sponges that are soaking up all the knowledge they can.
 
Funny that you have to compare us to a one and done program that has done nothing but recruit one and dones and play freshman the last several years.

And, no, Coleman has not gotten as many minutes as Wilson. He got 8 minutes against Bellarmine, LOL, and got 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, and 0 in their other games.
Just when I think I know the answers, you change the questions.
 
I know what you are thinking 4700. All of the seniors including Sherod are coming back next year right?
 
I’m under the impression him and Dji are improving every single day in practice and are sponges that are soaking up all the knowledge they can.
that's what I believe too, ply. real game playing time can help shake some nerves if you are put in situation where you succeed, but I was always taught and I believe that 95% of development/improvement happens in practice. Games are just where you get to show that improvement.
 
Great comeback. He gets as many minutes as our freshman bench guys, and oh by the way, all of the other freshman at Duke are getting substantial minutes. PS, Coleman made a poor choice picking Duke.
I don't know that Coleman made a bad choice. time will tell. he's practicing against some great players and getting great coaching. this might make him the best player he can be. he may develop into a starter at Duke and an NBA prospect. but for now, it's not his time.
 
I can’t speak for 23, but I’m not saying Mooney is a bad coach because he didn’t play Wilson for 2 more minutes. I’m just reviewing the tape/game and seeing things we could have done differently and things we could have improved on. Even in a win there are always things to improve on.

I’m simply saying next time we’re up 16-20 late against a bad team I’d like to see us bring in someone like Wilson for 4-5 minutes to close out and see how he looks. If he looks completely outmatched for 3-4 possessions then bring him back out. Who knows, he could be an X-factor for us down the stretch if he’s able to get a few more minutes and teams don’t really have tape on him. I’m under the impression him and Dji are improving every single day in practice and are sponges that are soaking up all the knowledge they can.
So, you are asking for less minutes from either Jacob, Blake, and Tyler, all so we can see how Wilson looks and have him as an X-factor? That just doesn't make sense to me. And, what about Bailey? I mean, what's the difference? If you want to see Wilson out there, you should want to see Bailey too, right? So, now we need to sit two of our starters more?
 
I don't believe the two stances have to be separate. The goal should always be to win, but a Coach trying to build a program must keep in mind you have these players for a limited time and you have to constantly recruit and constantly develop players. My only experience was at a much lower level, but my method to handle this conundrum was to work the younger players in during the first half. You could work in one or more at a time and even if they gave up points you still had time to recover. The more comfortable they got the better they got.
 
So, you are asking for less minutes from either Jacob, Blake, and Tyler, all so we can see how Wilson looks and have him as an X-factor? That just doesn't make sense to me. And, what about Bailey? I mean, what's the difference? If you want to see Wilson out there, you should want to see Bailey too, right? So, now we need to sit two of our starters more?

I didn’t make any of these arguments. I didn’t say any of these things. I’m not really sure what to say here, but no those are not what I think. What I said in my post is what I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli
I didn’t make any of these arguments. I didn’t say any of these things. I’m not really sure what to say here, but no those are not what I think. What I said in my post is what I think.
Okay. Fine, then if you don't want to sit Jacob, Blake, or Tyler a little more by playing Wilson more, then I guess you want to sit Nate or Grant a little more. You want Wilson playing the final 4-5 minutes when we are up 16 late (your words), so who are you sitting? You want Wilson to get a few more minutes and be an X factor down the stretch (your words), then who are you sitting?
 
re: Wilson....Francis basically handed him the ball for a shot from the c
We wear down every season and have for years. We need to develop a deeper bench but it doesn't seem to fit Mooney's style. If you can't get your deeper bench some time in a 20 point win when can you.

except for last season when we only last once after Feb 1, "have for years" LOL

now you're going to point to 2018-19, but we just weren't very good the entire season.
 
yet Jacob and Nick and others manage to be ready for quality starters minutes as true freshmen without getting college minutes the year before.

it is pretty simple. they were good enough. they were fast-tracked in the offseason practices and when they got the opportunity, they played well.
Again, part of the reason that Jacob and Nick got the minutes they did as freshmen is that there were poor options in front of them. We had no serviceable forwards so our off guard (Buck) played more of a forward, which meant Khwan moved to 2G and Jacob to PG. similar situation for Nick the year before.

this is not to take away from either of those two cases, they’re great players, but holding these guys out as examples of freshman readiness tends to ignore what the roster composition at the time looked like.
 
His point wasn't who was in front of them. His point was Jacob and Nick are two of many many examples of college players who did not need a few minutes here and there as freshmen to get ready for the following season. They were ready right away, and there's no reason why Wilson and Bailey can't be ready next year. In other words, Wilson and Bailey can be really good players for us next year, whether they get a lot of time this year or not.
 
next year's freshmen will have a better opportunity for early time than this year's freshmen due to our roster turnover (assuming seniors don't come back). that's not ideal but it's reality. still ... best guys play. you figure out the top 8 or 9 in the rotation and the others will just have to develop in practice. looking at the roster, I'd assume maybe 2 of the 4 freshmen (so far) don't play much. but then again maybe they beat out more experienced guys. either way, that's life. this isn't rec ball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700
that's what I believe too, ply. real game playing time can help shake some nerves if you are put in situation where you succeed, but I was always taught and I believe that 95% of development/improvement happens in practice. Games are just where you get to show that improvement.
This idea is way off the mark. Game conditions and practice conditions are almost entirely different. Any who have played the game competitively know this to be true.

Certainly a player can improve their skill level by practice, that is a given. BUT, team practice is MOSTLY made up of drills. These drills are mostly individualistic. You will also find a fair amount of conceptional thinking (strategy), and theory (this is what we want to do) in practice.

Games comprise NO DRILLS, and no theory. Game conditions are fast, competitive, and fluid. Team performance is the focus. In-game, players are in situations where they are required to react quickly, and make solid, nearly instantaneous decisions. In games, players are testing themselves against competition that is trying to defeat them.

I could go on with the analysis (comparison) between game and practice, but I won't, the point is made. Totally opposite conditions.

If you want a player to get better re: game performance, then you have to expose them to significant game conditions.
 
Last edited:
This idea is way off the mark. Game conditions and practice conditions are almost entirely different. Any who have played the game competitively know this to be true.

Certainly a player can improve their skill level by practice, that is a given. BUT, team practice is MOSTLY made up of drills. These drills are mostly individualistic. You will also find a fair amount of conceptional thinking (strategy), and theory (this is what we want to do) in practice.

Games comprise NO DRILLS, and no theory. Game conditions are fast, competitive, and fluid. Team performance is the focus. In-game, players are in situations where they are required to react quickly, and make solid, nearly instantaneous decisions. In games, players are testing themselves against competition that is trying to defeat them.

I could go on with the analysis (comparison) between game and practice, but I won't, the point is made. Totally opposite conditions.

If you want a player to get better re: game performance, then you have to expose them to significant game conditions.
Do you really think teams don't practice game conditions during practice? Yes, I've played the game competitively, and even that many years ago, I always practiced game conditions during practice. Same with coaching. All the coaches and players I know have practiced game conditions during practice. And, hasn't a guy like Wilson experienced game conditions for a long time? With AAU included, he has probably played well over 100 games the past few years. It's not like he just picked up a basketball and has only practiced his whole life. This goes back to sman talking about guys like Jacob and Nick, just to name a few, who have stepped onto the court and played well since the first game of their freshman year. Did they need "game conditions" to do that?
 
Last edited:
This idea is way off the mark. Game conditions and practice conditions are almost entirely different. Any who have played the game competitively know this to be true.
choosing Richmond ended my career, lol. that's way too high a level. but I was planning on playing D3 until that late acceptance letter came.

Certainly a player can improve their skill level by practice, that is a given. BUT, team practice is MOSTLY made up of drills. These drills are mostly individualistic. You will also find a fair amount of conceptional thinking (strategy), and theory (this is what we want to do) in practice.
that's not my understanding ... but I don't know specifics at Richmond. offseason work is almost entirely drills and skill development, plus pickup games. once October 15 comes around, it's mostly about team. and the 5 starters aren't scrimmaging against themselves. you get better in the offseason and then by practicing with the team for a bunch of hours each week for 5 months. not as much from the 100 minutes of playing time over a season you're looking for from our bench.

not saying playing in games doesn't help. it does. but I wouldn't give it out for development purposes. if you earn a spot in the rotation by your play in practice, you play. if not and we're beating teams comfortably, you might get in.
 
Do you really think teams don't practice game conditions during practice? Yes, I've played the game competitively, and even that many years ago, I always practiced game conditions during practice. Same with coaching. All the coaches and players I know have practiced game conditions during practice. And, hasn't a guy like Wilson experienced game conditions for a long time? With AAU included, he has probably played well over 100 games the past few years. It's not like he just picked up a basketball and has only practiced his whole life. This goes back to sman talking about guys like Jacob and Nick, just to name a few, who have stepped onto the court and played well since the first game of their freshman year. Did they need "game conditions" to do that?
As you demonstrate daily, you are really good at twisting words and thoughts. If you could read what someone said without the need to argue and (in your mind) dominate a conversation by showing your brilliance, it would be a breath of fresh air.

Practice conditions are not at all like game conditions. People reading the post are free to decide whether they agree or disagree.
 
choosing Richmond ended my career, lol. that's way too high a level. but I was planning on playing D3 until that late acceptance letter came.


that's not my understanding ... but I don't know specifics at Richmond. offseason work is almost entirely drills and skill development, plus pickup games. once October 15 comes around, it's mostly about team. and the 5 starters aren't scrimmaging against themselves. you get better in the offseason and then by practicing with the team for a bunch of hours each week for 5 months. not as much from the 100 minutes of playing time over a season you're looking for from our bench.

not saying playing in games doesn't help. it does. but I wouldn't give it out for development purposes. if you earn a spot in the rotation by your play in practice, you play. if not and we're beating teams comfortably, you might get in.
Practice conditions are not like game conditions. People reading the post are free to decide for themselves whether they agree or disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spider23
As you demonstrate daily, you are really good at twisting words and thoughts. If you could read what someone said without the need to argue and (in your mind) dominate a conversation by showing your brilliance, it would be a breath of fresh air.

Practice conditions are not at all like game conditions. People reading the post are free to decide whether they agree or disagree.
Lol. Spoken from someone who started the post I replied to with "This idea is way off the mark". Then, used the "any who have played the game" ....talk. Then, put NO DRILLS in caps. Your whole post was not only wrong (which I know for a fact), but incredibly full of arrogance. But, yes, of course, it is my replies that are the problem. LOL.
 
Practice conditions are not like game conditions. People reading the post are free to decide for themselves whether they agree or disagree.
I'm not arguing that practice conditions are the same as game conditions. but they're still head to head. they're still competitive and intense. and you're still put in game situations.

I'm guessing you played at a high level based on some statements you made. if so, I'm just surprised you believe you develop more in limited real game play than in the extensive daily game play you get in practice.
 
I'm just surprised you believe you develop more in limited real game play than in the extensive daily game play you get in practice.
Believe the opposing point is you need both. Hope you agree. Can't have kids starting that are feeling their stomach crawl up their spine for the first time in a college game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
I remember maybe two or three games ago that Mooney said when Wilson came off the floor to the bench after being in his hands were ice cold and it was clear he was overcome with nerves.

I’m very familiar with that one from my time competing in sports, nerves always got the best of me at a new higher level for the first few games out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8legs1dream
Lol. Spoken from someone who started the post I replied to with "This idea is way off the mark". Then, used the "any who have played the game" ....talk. Then, put NO DRILLS in caps. Your whole post was not only wrong (which I know for a fact), but incredibly full of arrogance. But, yes, of course, it is my replies that are the problem. LOL.
This is a fair point, I wish that I had just voiced the opinion without the extras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT