Grace officially back
- Thread starter spider23
- Start date
Not if we see 2 years ago Grace from 3 (38.9%). But, I hear you, if Grace ends in the 33-35% range, which might be pretty good for his position, we need a couple guys higher than that.
Last edited:
Every year Grace has done nothing but get better than the year before.
There are some foolish comments being made.
I love Grace is coming backs
There are some foolish comments being made.
I love Grace is coming backs
What you say is almost true, but, even so those numbers are Freshman = 1.2 points & 1 rebounds, Sophomore = 0.9 & 1.3 rebounds, Junior = 3.3 points & 0.8 rebounds, Senior = 4.1 points & 2.4 rebounds.
Based upon the eye test, and increased minutes, it is reasonable to expect significant stat improvement next year. But it is highly unlikely that Grace's production will resemble the glowing optimism of this board.
As
I’m Happ with our gets
Grace will put us to shame! Eat you hearts out fellows
Please check that stat out again? Possibly so many posters going back-and-forth with at the same time was too much for you? I will say Matt has a smooth stroke. Though limited stat line is an excellent FT shooter. And though also limited he has shown us great under pressure. Possibly he can be our "Matty Ice."
We all play our roles here. Glad to help with team motivation in any way I can. You'd think I get at least get a DOBO job out of Mooney after all of my efforts.
or
Mooney: "Matt, you'll have an opportunity to compete for a starting spot next year. I certainly see you as a valuable part of our rotation"
MFG: "I'm good with that"
Don't they basically mean the same thing? If you compete for a starting spot and no one beats you out, you start, right?
Last edited:
maybe not a huge difference, but I don't see Mooney saying the words "you're starting next year" even with a disclaimer. there's no reason to. we know we're hitting the portal. and Matt hasn't earned it unlike Burton.
I doubt Grace said I'm not coming back unless I am starting. He knows Mooney wouldn't go for that. In his mind, he probably has enough confidence in his game to think he has a very good chance to start. Everyone wants to start, but maybe that's not the most important thing to him. I think we would all be shocked if he doesn't get a lot of playing time, whether he starts or not. But, I think he starts, I think Nelson starts, and I think Bigelow, Crabtree, and Dji off the bench give us a solid 8. But, all good if Dji beats out Nelson, and/or someone else beats out Grace. And, if any of the other guys step up, even better, and they very well could. Just because we have not seen them much does not mean they are not good. Shoot, I had Noyes maybe starting next year at one time before we got the transfers in here. We have some real good talent here.
He hit big shots at the end when we needed them the most....confidently
We can debate what it means...
But he was 11 of 32 against D1 and 3 of 4 vs St Mary's, 14 of 36 is 38.9% unless you meant .389% was wrong...
LOL urmite I went by him saying "few years ago" being 2020. Ironically In 2020 Matt did shoot .389%, but was with 2PT shots going by Kenpom. And like you stated I only see 11-32 with 3PT from Kenpom totals not including glorified HS stats from St'Mary's game.
I give credit to 4700 for being able to have his glass hall-filled 100% of the time. Good job 4700, 38.9% or .389% it's all the same. Though if we go by his career including St Mary's (3-4) it's at 31%.
So even seeing Matt only was at 31% from 3 for his career, I do say watching that smooth stroke I easily see him being closer to 39% no questions asked. I take 35% in a heartbeat.
Who would have thought this simple post about Grace would turn into a debate about VT being a glass half full guy. How is this even close to a controversial post? Only on here I guess. It really is comical at times.
Yes, I doubt he going to shoot 75% for a season like against St Mary's, however...
That year against A-10+NIT he shot 45%
So like many of our players the potential for a high three percentage is there, I am just nervous about projecting what any players can shoot consistently.
There’s one thing I have learned over the years of being on this board, don’t bet on anything said here.
Isn't that the truth. Earlier today I was looking back at when Wilson committed and people were raving about how he was our next all-time great PG, highest rated recruit in program history according to 24/7, etc.
Everybody's an all-American during the offseason.
LOL not upset at all! I think the best thing for me not seeing the Spiders win 4 in a row would have been not seeing you posting here for I'm thinking quite awhile.
I will say I had my doubts about Wilson's offense based on his hs/aau highlights. I did think he was a bulldog and he was at times, just never developed enough offensively. And as 97 pointed out, if we are going ro play two smaller guards, we need both to be lights out shooters.
I think we rolled out 2 small guards for way too long. even if both are shooters (and Wilson wasn't) it causes too many problems defensively.
I think Wilson could have worked out but he'd have to be the point and he'd need shooters on the floor with him. there's no way he's a 2. we put him in a no-win situation.
I think Wilson could have worked out but he'd have to be the point and he'd need shooters on the floor with him. there's no way he's a 2. we put him in a no-win situation.
When we have had issues defensively, I don't think it's because of a size issue with our guards. We have had successful seasons defensively with 2 small guards. A lot of other teams have 2 smaller guards out there, so not sure why this would cause a lot of problems. We were 52nd in defensive efficiency with Ced and Kendall, and our 24-7 year with Jacob and Blake, we were 54th defensively.
thanks for that. maybe the issue isn't the size as much as Kendall and Blake were elite scorers at the 2. Wilson was never going to be an elite scorer.
I still don't like small 2's. too easy to shoot over, and they don't usually help much on the boards.
Agree about Wilson and scoring. But, I am fine with 2 small guards, especially, like you said, if they both give me solid offense. I am not worried about them rebounding. Offensively, I want them getting back on defense even if we didn't play a Mooney style of get back on defense, and defensively, they will likely be outside the paint near the other guards, so I wouldn't count on a lot of rebounds there either. And, their quickness could offset the shooting over part. I can see your point with your concerns, and I like what Goose brings at 6'4, but I guess I am just more focused on offense than defense there, so it doesn't bother me if and when we have 2 small guards out there.
I may be looking in the wrong direction, but our long stretch of not dancing seemed to have a lot of 2 small guards playing together. and this year wasn't going great until we scrapped that and went bigger at the 2.
Fair points. But, we went 24-7 with Jacob and Blake, had a good defensive season with Kendall and Ced, and went 13-5 in the A-10 with Khwan and ShawnDre starting. But, I can't say you are wrong here, and, don't get me wrong, if I had my choice, sure, give me the taller guy if all else is equal, and I definitely loved what Goose gave us defensively at 6'4. I will say that before Khwan transferred, I did not like the fit of him and Jacob both starting, because of Khwan's lack of shooting. So, I would agree with you there, but it is more of an offensive thing with me since I liked the Jacob and Blake combo, but didn't like the Jacob and Khwan combo.
he'd still have an important role off the bench.And yet ironically u want to put that person back on the bench
Goose was certainly better than Wilson.
doesn't mean he's the best option next year.
We were also 168th in 20-21 with Jacob and Blake, 304th with Jacob and Khwan in 17-18, and 167th with sdj and khwan in 16-17. So I do think there’s evidence to suggest the small guard lineup has some correlation with moderate to poor defensive efficiency.
It doesn't just come down to two guards, there are five guys playing defense, but I do think length is an issue, particularly when you’re running a matchup zone defense where you’re going to get switched off to players that may be notably larger.
There is that, which was a huge problem before Mooney finally went away from it. How many times I saw K0 getting screened and switching on a 6'9 guy. Not as much of a problem now. Big issue before Goose came back was - even though Wilson was a tenacious defender - off guards and wings could shoot right over him. There is a reason in basketball that you would take a 6'5 guy over a 5'10 guy is skill sets were equal.
yes he did I like his game
Similar threads
