Grace officially back
- Thread starter spider23
- Start date
Shoot, I thought we just landed Quinn. Guess not. I guess TJ and Grant don't count either. And, might as well not include Grace. So, I guess if you don't count them.....
We have had a few good big guys but they are usually all alone. They can’t play defense because we don’t have a back up. Maybe we will this year.
we're all riding a high still. Matt made some big plays at the end of the year. I was more positive about Matt than most over his years, feeling he was a very serviceable backup the past 2 seasons.
but if we landed Matt in the grad transfer portal today, would anyone here be calling for him to be a starter?
he played 15 mpg averaging 4.1 ppg and 2.4 rpg. he shot 28.4% from 3. in our 6 game postseason run he scored over 4 points once. he had 3 rebounds in our last 3 games in 52 minutes.
Matt absolutely was an important guy for us and I'm glad he's back. we obviously need depth in the frontcourt. but let's not act like he would have had P5 starting offers. this is the best place for him to play at. if he's playing starters minutes next year then either he got a lot better or we didn't succeed in the portal.
Or, the guys he was backing up for 4 years are gone, which opened up a starting spot for him.
you're a glass half full guy, VT. I'll certainly give you that.
I don't want a guy to be handed a starting spot just because better players graduated. he hasn't shown starter stuff yet. it's not like he didn't get meaningful minutes. to me he's in the rotation but hopefully as a backup. and I hope he proves me wrong and shoots 40% from 3 next year.
I think we've seen enough from Grace to suggest that he can give us 25 solid minutes a game and score in double digits in that time. I'll take that.
not sure what you've seen to suggest that, but I hope you're being conservative.
Well when he played more than a handful of minutes, both this year and in the NIT last year, he produced on par with those numbers.
I think spiderman is practicing for his debate team. Too many came over to the GOAT MFG side of the argument, so he flipped to the Grace is a back up next year team 
.
I do think Grace will be a huge contributor next season - and will play many more minutes. I do agree with sman that we NEED to pick up another big in the portal. We need one more piece in there. I don't mind Burton being a "4" at times, but rather he play wing and not burn fouls guarding a 6'8 player inside.
.I do think Grace will be a huge contributor next season - and will play many more minutes. I do agree with sman that we NEED to pick up another big in the portal. We need one more piece in there. I don't mind Burton being a "4" at times, but rather he play wing and not burn fouls guarding a 6'8 player inside.
His fouling has improved. We should be able to keep him in there for 20-25 min.
Well VT I guess I have to explain my post to you. If Matt had not come back, what would have been the glaring weakness on the upcoming roster? Sure the staff landed Quinn, but if they lost Grace then it would have been a net of no change. When it comes to recruiting, UR lands many more guards it targets than it does inside players. Facts are facts.
Well, duh. So does every other team out there. How many guards are out there, and how many bigs are out there? Do you think it is even close to comparable?
Can we go ahead and put MFG on the back of his jersey?
Mooney: "Matt, you're starting next year until/unless someone beats you out"
MFG: "I'm good with that"
You just named 3 guys who have played over what will be a nine year stretch, and one guy who has never played a minute for UR. That’s not a deep pool, especially when you consider there should probably be two bigs per year.
Ive got no issue saying these guys are all good or are likely to be but recruiting bigs is definitely not a strength of our staff.
I was thinking back to when TJ was a senior, and Grant backed him up, but if you want to go back 9 years, you need to add Nelson-Ododa to the list. Bottom line is we had TJ and Nelson-Ododa together. Then, Nelson-Ododa transferred, but a year later, we landed Grant, and Grant backed TJ up. Then, we had Grant starting, and Grace backed him up. Now, we have Quinn and Grace. And, let's not forget Walz. Geez, how many bigs do you want this year? Certainly looks like 2 bigs per year to me.
So, we can just disagree, but I'm not sure I see much of a "big" problem there. Actually, just the opposite when you look at guys like TJ and Grant. Everyone wants all of this big guy depth, as if there are so many bigs out there, and as if these bigs who are really good are supposed to come here and be content playing very little as back ups. Or, some want to go back 10+ years and bring the power forward position back when it pretty much doesn't exist anymore. There are 3 and 4 guard lineups all over the place in college basketball. The game has changed. Give me guards and shooters all day long instead of a 3rd or 4th big for depth purposes. Remember Andre Weir? He transferred and did nothing for Florida Gulf Coast last year. Now, you tell me who you would rather have? Weir, for big guy depth, or the guards and wings we have now?
Last edited:
I agree with your logic about the relative value. However, it would be great to add a back-up that can put in some solid minutes, primarily on defense/rebounding, when we need to take out Quinn or Grace. I’m not sure if Walz is that player or not.
Well duh, I am not talking about totals. I am talking about targets. I am much more confident in the staff”s ability to target and sign a quality guard than a post player. So it was great that Matt came back because if he didn’t I thought the likelihood of the Spiders getting a quality replacement for him was low.
I hear you, but that guy would have to be okay with coming here knowing we already have Quinn, Grace, and Walz. If I were a transfer and only had a year or two left, I would go to a place that had a better guarantee for playing time. It's easy to say go add depth, but the transfer has to be okay with that as well. As for who we have now, I just think the game has changed so much that we will be fine when we don't have both Quinn and Grace on the floor together.
Same with targets. The numbers don't lie. Teams usually have about 25 guards they are after, and maybe 5 bigs? And, then when you get a big, it's that much harder to get another big because most teams only play 1 big. Most guards and wings, except maybe a true PG, don't need to worry as much about who is in front of them because so many teams play 3 or even 4 guards together right now. You say you have no confidence in us signing bigs right after we just got a solid 7 footer via transfer, and months after we signed a 6'11 guy. Interesting thoughts there.
Let’s give Waltz a chance to develop, from the last write up, he wants to get better. I’m satisfied.
Look at Villanova success as they have length and rarely have a true center. But they play fundamentally
very strong. Kansas was a tough matchup due their greater length and two true centers. Both teams got to the
final four using very successful systems. At UR I don’t care who scores just as long as we have players on the
court who can score and players who are willing to play defense.
very strong. Kansas was a tough matchup due their greater length and two true centers. Both teams got to the
final four using very successful systems. At UR I don’t care who scores just as long as we have players on the
court who can score and players who are willing to play defense.
You’re changing your argument but I understand why, because it’s impossible to defend our record recruiting big forwards.
I know you beat the drum that the modern game has no room for traditional PF types but you only need to look around the NCAA to find plenty of examples Where they exist and are highly effective.
CM and staff have generally whiffed on the 6’8”
Guys for many years now. I mean who have they actually landed at that spot in the last 8+ years? Cayo is the best but he wasn’t even a forward type coming out of high school. I’m not sure this is even remotely debatable.
C'mon, T. So, now you change it to "big forward" when all you originally said was "bigs" and then say I am the one changing the argument? Well, maybe Mooney is like 300+ other coaches out there and does not focus too much recruiting on a PF or "4" position that does not really exist much anymore. And, geez, the few really good, athletic, versatile 6'8 guys are likely going to power schools. How many really solid "big forwards" do you think are even out there? The average 6'8 guys? Well, there just are not that many out there either, and the ones out there that are not power conference bound are usually in between positions and lack something like an outside shot. These kids now all play AAU, and they are either bigs or they are guards/wings. There are no PF or 4 types anymore. No one is going to try to get a college scholarship by being a PF or a 4 guy. You better do a lot more than that. I would rather have a Burton than a so called "big forward" type. You can say you want both, but we can just disagree about that. Also, you mentioned Cayo, so let me ask you since we had Cayo and Grant out there, did you really want a 6'8 PF type beside them? No worries. You can live in the past and have your 1-5 positions. I will be more current. There is no way we will agree on this because I am not concerned about a "PF" or "4" type player and you are. I don't care if our coach does not go after a bunch of those types, and you do. So, fine. We can just disagree. All good.
Last edited:
Might be a great question for Mooney. Does he have value for a traditional PF for his standard lineup?
I never changed my argument, go back and reread my original post. Your reading comprehension is once again subpar.
We do disagree on the value of bigs which would by necessity include both a “center” type and a “forward” type. I’m not stuck in some time warp where all these guys do is bang around in the paint, but I do care about guys who can play defense and rebound against other bigs. Both of these things are glaring weaknesses in our style of play, even though we have a guy like Cayo doing that.
So I’m not really sure why you’re insistent that our style of play is to have a capable outside shooting forward/4th guard when we haven’t played that way in 5 years if not longer.
Well, here is your original post. I can read just fine, thank you. So cute of you to say my reading comprehension is subpar when it was YOU who must not have read what YOU actually wrote. LOL. You mentioned "bigs" twice. You never said anything about "big forwards" until you changed your wording in the very next post. Hilarious. Reminds of me of something......."don't believe what you see".
In your lexicon apparently “bigs” only applies to “centers”.
We clearly also want guys who are 6’8”+ but aren’t centers, go look at the list of guys we’ve not landed. Hunger, Schiefflein are recent examples but there’s a history of misses there. So the staff want these guys but we don’t generally land them. Again, I don’t know that this is debatable.
I get that there are fewer big guys than guards, but you’re pretending that we’re not in search of a competent big forward when clearly we have been for many recruiting cycles without much success.
We clearly also want guys who are 6’8”+ but aren’t centers, go look at the list of guys we’ve not landed. Hunger, Schiefflein are recent examples but there’s a history of misses there. So the staff want these guys but we don’t generally land them. Again, I don’t know that this is debatable.
I get that there are fewer big guys than guards, but you’re pretending that we’re not in search of a competent big forward when clearly we have been for many recruiting cycles without much success.
Well, yes, there will be "misses", or guys that don't come here. Whatever you want to call them. When you get 13 scholarships, and recruit about 50 guys, guess what? You won't land them all. And, Hunger is 6'10, and if we get Hunger, we don't get Walz. If we somehow talk them both to coming here (why would they in the same class?), we definitely don't get Quinn. I look at this and say, wow, how awesome to get Walz and Quinn in here. You look at it and say, we just can't land that 6'8 athletic power forward guy. But, again, we are way apart here so we can just disagree.
Last edited:
I don't want a guy to be handed a starting spot just because better players graduated. he hasn't shown starter stuff yet. Alot on here talk about coach’s loyalty to older guys/returners…not saying it’s you but now some of us say Matt starts we get a different message. I do agree with you don’t just hand a spot bc he came back but based off of the consensus on here by that logic he starts. I think he starts partly bc of that but also because he could give us the best lineup. I’m not buying who will sub if both bigs play, bc as someone else mentioned we could be in same situation w/guards mainly pg and to me that’s not big issue. The game today is about matchups if Matt isn’t the best matchup then let’s go different. I know…some will then say Coach doesn’t do that.
Why the negative waves dude? We just made the NCAA, are having the best results in the A10 involving the transfer portal and might have one of the the top front courts in the A10 with Quinn, Burton and Grace backed up by Walz (potential to be a very strong player) and Bigelow. If you are are not happy now, you are probably never going to be happy.
I think it's pretty amazing that the last 2 years, we have seen Jacob, Grant, Nate, Nick, Grace, and Goose all come back when they could have either been done playing and pursued a professional career, or transferred elsewhere. Thousands of guys out there either were done and didn't take the extra covid year, or transferred elsewhere. Ours did neither and stayed here. This is just unheard of this day and age, and then we land 2 solid transfers this year as well. It's obvious our coach is a player's coach. He never throws them under the bus. Keeps things positive. I know many on here want him to sometimes get on guys, bench guys, and be more vocal in post games interviews, but I think he knows exactly what he is doing there. I totally get the "I need to play him more" talk. This style of coaching does wonders for confidence and team chemistry, which is so important. Our chemistry has been off the charts good lately. It is fine to disagree, but I like this kind of coaching, maybe because that is the way I do it as well.
All of that is great and I applaud his success with retention, chemistry and the safety of cell phones but at the end of the day "just win, baby."
I am glad Matt is back simply for fact he has improved each of the last two years. In some instances
he has been a go to guy like in the last minute of the Davidson game. Not a great athlete but has improved his
rebounding and next year may be our best 3 pt shooter. Whether he starts or is our 6th man, Grace will be an
integral part to our success. I am just glad i get to watch him another year.
he has been a go to guy like in the last minute of the Davidson game. Not a great athlete but has improved his
rebounding and next year may be our best 3 pt shooter. Whether he starts or is our 6th man, Grace will be an
integral part to our success. I am just glad i get to watch him another year.
We are screwed next year if Matt Grace is our best 3 point shooter.
Similar threads
