How good are our starting 5

[UR80sfan]

For the few of us that still have a ray of hope, last night loss was disappointing. However, when you look at the box, our starting five all played pretty well offensively. Nick continues to show signs of greatness, Golden 8-10 for 16 points, Buckingham 10 rebounds and Gilyard and Fore were solid. As a team we out rebounded them and out scored them in the paint. What the box score does not show is how good are these guys on defense/ all around players. Putting the quality of coaching and the bench aside. How good are our starting five as all around players and does anyone have good statistics to show it?

 

[SpiderK]

They are obviously as good as all but two of the teams in our league. However, that is not saying much.

 

[fan2011]

They are not as good as many on the board are making them out to be. They are very young and that may change as time goes on, but right now they are a pretty average bunch in a very weak A10. They have very serious defensive problems and are susceptible to stretches of offensive struggles as well.

 

[spider fan]

Exhaustion plays a role in most games as it did last night. In the last 5 minutes several of the starters would be bent over with hands on knees to catch their breath whenever they could. They would be better if we had a deeper bench with subs who played enough meaningful time in order to become effective and spell the starters.

 

[SpiderK]

Exhaustion plays a role in most games as it did last night. In the last 5 minutes several of the starters would be bent over with hands on knees to catch their breath whenever they could. They would be better if we had a deeper bench with subs who played enough meaningful time in order to become effective and spell the starters.

Excellent point.

 

[ur2K]

They are good individual players but are severely undersized and not the best fit for the systems our coach tries to run. They are also expected to log huge minutes because we have no bench

 

[SpiderK]

Seems to me that on offense our guys can only concentrate on one scorer at a time. Mooney features Grant for a while and then Jacob or Fore for awhile and then Sherod later on. We don’t alternate our scorers every time down the floor to keep the defense guessing. Since all 5 can score 20 points, it would be very effective.
We all know the real problem is the total lack of defense, inside and out. If Mooney can’t teach a zone, then he should hire an assistant that can or step down.

 

[LongTimeSpiderFan]

There is a HUGE difference between being good and a being talented. I feel as if this is the most talented team (at least the top 4 players or so) that we have ever put on the floor at UR since i started following them in 1980. But we all know that they're just not that good yet.
We've NEVER had a player with GG's size and skillset (someone in another post said that GG was a "prototypical" Richmond big man. No he is not. Id like to discuss that in another thread)
NS is just a sophomore and ypu can see his ability to score from anywhere on the floor.
Gilyard is the quickest player i have ever seen at UR and My Main Buck is the consummate glue guy - a guy who does nothing great but everything very well.
These guys are freshman and sophomores. If CM would have done his job better, we may not have known this because they'd be on the bench learning from older more experienced players. But I think you can see it now.
Recruiting the last 2 years has been excellent, but it must be consistent.
Should CM be let go? Maybe. He is responsible for the obvious and major gap in recruiting, but to say this is the same thing we've heard before (I. E. "wait 'til next year") isn't exactly so either because we've never had this talented a team.
One more year with the same team plus incoming player Sal (yes, I am discounting the red shirts... Not a believer in any of them until they show me otherwise ) will make a big difference.

 

[ur2K]

We’ve thrown 4 guards out there every night and it hasn’t worked terribly well this season. We run a defense that obviously doesn’t work with this group, we have a team that would be great running and pressing but we can’t do that b/c of no depth, and we run an offense that rewards good three point shooting but we aren’t a good shooting team.

Mooney’s not a good in game coach but he’s a terrible GM based on roster construction since 2011.

 

[AnnapSpider]

They are not as good as many on the board are making them out to be. They are very young and that may change as time goes on, but right now they are a pretty average bunch in a very weak A10. They have very serious defensive problems and are susceptible to stretches of offensive struggles as well.

Fan, with all due respect, I find the notion that they are "young" is not valid. In fact, I'm not sure it is valid
In most cases around the country.
These kids play basketball 12 months of the year and most play AAU ball. By the time they get to college
they have already played more ball than freshmen did 10 years ago. And the fact that it is the end of the season, not the beginning, they are no longer young.
Lack of depth and coaching has been the biggest problem.

 

[fan2011]

Fan, with all due respect, I find the notion that they are "young" is not valid. In fact, I'm not sure it is valid
In most cases around the country.
These kids play basketball 12 months of the year and most play AAU ball. By the time they get to college
they have already played more ball than freshmen did 10 years ago. And the fact that it is the end of the season, not the beginning, they are no longer young.
Lack of depth and coaching has been the biggest problem.

Not sure what your argument is, we play more freshmen and sophomore minutes than all but 10 other teams in the country. Our players are much younger on average, and have much less D1 development time, than virtually all other D1 teams. Our starters are not good as a team right now, but as they get more experience they may become better. Our players did not get any more experience in high school than any other D1 players, and all other D1 teams have gained experience over the course of the season just as ours had, so I am really confused about why you think those things have any impact on the relative youth of the team.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

Gilyard is the quickest player i have ever seen at UR

Not only that but his "anticipation" of what will happen is off the charts. Combining quickness/anticipation and I would not feel going out on the limb saying he's the best in the country. Amazing!

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

They are very young and that may change as time goes on

Well, I certainly hope so.

 

[AnnapSpider]

Not sure what your argument is, we play more freshmen and sophomore minutes than all but 10 other teams in the country. Our players are much younger on average, and have much less D1 development time, than virtually all other D1 teams. Our starters are not good as a team right now, but as they get more experience they may become better. Our players did not get any more experience in high school than any other D1 players, and all other D1 teams have gained experience over the course of the season just as ours had, so I am really confused about why you think those things have any impact on the relative youth of the team.

Didn't want it to come across as an argument. It's just my opinion that at this point in the season using
"Youth" as an excuse is not valid.
I accept where you are coming from, but I feel that with better coaching and more depth the players
ages would be a non-factor.

 

[fan2011]

Didn't want it to come across as an argument. It's just my opinion that at this point in the season using
"Youth" as an excuse is not valid.
I accept where you are coming from, but I feel that with better coaching and more depth the players
ages would be a non-factor.

There is a reason we are in the top 10 youngest teams. It is because unless you are picking up a bunch of one-and-dones younger players are generally not as good as players who have been in college for years. If age didn't matter there would be a ton of teams playing freshmen and sophomores like we do. With this team I doubt we would be an NCAA team with even the best coach, probably not NIT, maybe borderline top 100. Of course, we wouldn't be in a situation of needing to play a bunch of sophomores and freshmen with a better coach.

People tend to believe we are as good as our best performances and nowhere near as bad as our worst performances. In reality we are somewhere in the middle, which is ~200th in the country.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

I see AnnapS's point of view. Considering how much time these guys have seen the court, thought the team would be further along at this point of the season. Might on paper showing as a very young team, but if we're talking age, UR has 1 frosh playing with 3 sophs and 1 senior.

GG didn't play last season but sure doesn't have a frosh body. Fore has been with program 4 years. And frosh Buck averaged 30 minutes per game while Nick got 20. And JG has played the 5th most minutes of A10 players. I believe the talent of this 5 should have produced more wins so far this season regardless of the thin bench. And I believe CM is the culprit for the 9-19 record.

 

[97spiderfan]

Our starting 5 have got to be both physically and mentally gassed by now. I think they are good but as others have said, collectively as a unit, they are not all that great (see our record).

They don't play good team defense at all and for being a small guard oriented team, they don't shoot all that well, instead relying upon drives to the hoop to scores against much bigger men.

They all are good enough to start on most A-10 teams but collectively they are too small (except Grant) to all be starting as a unit together. Our guards are undersized in comparison to other teams guards, our forwards are not even forwards and having to play against players significantly better than them.

I watched our Sweet 16 games the other day and it is almost laughable the difference in the team we are fielding now versus in 2011. Main difference is position depth at every position. We had 2 Centers Geriot and Garrett, 3 big forwards in Smith, Martel, and Harp. 5 guys with legitimate size who could all make majory contributions. We got one guy with size this year.

 

[Eight Legger]

Talentwise, this is one of the most talented groups in the past 20 years of Spider basketball. But this is a chicken-and-egg conversation. They have only 9 wins, so does that mean they are bad – or do they have only 9 wins because they haven't been coached properly, aren't being put in the best positions to succeed or aren't being utilized efficiently enough? I tend toward the latter of the two, but there's no way to really know for sure.

 

[LongTimeSpiderFan]

Talentwise, this is one of the most talented groups in the past 20 years of Spider basketball. But this is a chicken-and-egg conversation. They have only 9 wins, so does that mean they are bad – or do they have only 9 wins because they haven't been coached properly, aren't being put in the best positions to succeed or aren't being utilized efficiently enough? I tend toward the latter of the two, but there's no way to really know for sure.

Are the only two options "bad" and not "coached properly" ? Really?

 

[Eight Legger]

You tell me. We have 9 wins and we've played 28 games. Not a lot of room for other options, is there? "Hugely talented AND coached amazingly" doesn't seem to apply.

 

[Octapod]

Indivually, they are talented. As a team, not really. Looking at the players that play, you have GG and PF. (occasionally) Cayo is a SG/SF and the rest are all guards meant to play 2 positions, period. So you have GG. Pick your PG, JG or Fore. Pick your 2G, Buck or NS. Pick your SG/SF. It could/should have been SS, but that didn't work out. Could have been SS and Cayo on the floor at the same time. Now find you a 4 to put out there. That is what you need. What you don't need is the 4 starters not named GG on the floor at the same time. That unit is too small to play the defense Mooney wants to play. Not a unit that can sustain the grind of a season, either.

 

[spider fan]

Can't teach height and that is a major deficit. Speed and quickness can alleviate that to some degree but combine that with lack of depth and inability to adjust defense and the result is opponents taking advantage of lack of height and defensive mismatches.

 

[Eight Legger]

Indivually, they are talented. As a team, not really. Looking at the players that play, you have GG and PF. (occasionally) Cayo is a SG/SF and the rest are all guards meant to play 2 positions, period. So you have GG. Pick your PG, JG or Fore. Pick your 2G, Buck or NS. Pick your SG/SF. It could/should have been SS, but that didn't work out. Could have been SS and Cayo on the floor at the same time. Now find you a 4 to put out there. That is what you need. What you don't need is the 4 starters not named GG on the floor at the same time. That unit is too small to play the defense Mooney wants to play. Not a unit that can sustain the grind of a season, either.

Pretty good assessment. If this were a professional league, we'd be looking to deal a guard and SF for a power forward.

 

[spider fan]

Pretty good assessment. If this were a professional league, we'd be looking to deal a guard and SF for a power forward.

Yes need weight and height - Golden can't be the only option in that category.

 

[fan2011]

I agree with what Octapod said.

Fore, Gilyard, Sherod and Buck make a top tier A10 back court. Golden is an above average A10 center, and has potential to be great. If we had similar quality players for the 3 and 4 instead of playing guards everywhere then we could potentially be a good team. The starting 5 may be good players individually, and I think they all could be big contributors on a good team, but they do not make a complete team. There is not a coach in the world that could make them a complete team. We need to actually recruit enough forward and wing talent to have a balanced team if we want to have sustained success, and we have not been able to do that since the sweet 16 run.

We were an unbalanced team last year too, but TJ and SDJ were truly remarkable, much much better than GG and Gilyard are right now, and they were able to make us into an NIT level team. Maybe GG and Gilyard will get there by their senior years but they aren't close right now.

 

[SpiderGuy]

I agree with what Octapod said.

Fore, Gilyard, Sherod and Buck make a top tier A10 back court. Golden is an above average A10 center, and has potential to be great. If we had similar quality players for the 3 and 4 instead of playing guards everywhere then we could potentially be a good team. The starting 5 may be good players individually, and I think they all could be big contributors on a good team, but they do not make a complete team. There is not a coach in the world that could make them a complete team. We need to actually recruit enough forward and wing talent to have a balanced team if we want to have sustained success, and we have not been able to do that since the sweet 16 run.

We were an unbalanced team last year too, but TJ and SDJ were truly remarkable, much much better than GG and Gilyard are right now, and they were able to make us into an NIT level team. Maybe GG and Gilyard will get there by their senior years but they aren't close right now.

Pretty much agree with what you said.

I do believe that in their Jr or Sr years that GG & JG = or pretty darn close to TJ & SDJ.

The unbalanced team you referenced is spot on. This goes to recruiting misses and / or blunders. We desperately need a true 4 to go along with GG.

 

[I-M-UR]

With most of the minutes going to 2 6’4” fowards and 2 6’0” guards isn’t going to get us an NCAA bid.

 

[spiderman]

you guys have covered this all very well. it's an interesting question.

all 5 of our starters will end up 1,000 point scorers ... some much higher. but we're clearly not a good team.

we've always said we want 5 scorers on the floor but never really had it. this year we're seeing the effect of having 5 offensive players on the floor. we're really, really bad defensively. none of our starters prioritize defense, seeing themselves as defense first. I think all of our good teams had guys that did.

it can't all be coaching or scheme. he's won before with less talented players than this. good defensive players can play ANY defense. and it's not all lack of depth/exhaustion unless you're telling me they were already exhausted in November and December because our defense stunk then too.

as for guys playing out of position, I don't see Nick as a guard. he's a true SF, though maybe an inch or two shorter than ideal. Buck's a 2/3. neither is a big forward, but we have a clear top 5 so we're forced to play one there. perfect world, Sal starts from day 1 next year at the 4 and is a defensive presence. Nick, Buck and Khwan rotate at the 2 and 3 spots. Khwan gets some time at the 1 as well. not easy ego-wise to make one of them the 6th man, but it's what the team needs.

and actually ... even though Nathan isn't a top 5 player right now, the team would likely be doing better with him starting and playing more. still have 4 offensive guys out there but longer, better defensively, and helps the bench.

 

[Eight Legger]

It's just amazing that a coach who has been here this long and who seemingly would know what type of lineup he needs to have year in and year out would be consistently unable to recruit the right mix of players to form it. Maybe that is the only underlying issue here, but it's a program-stifling issue if so and somewhat unconscionable that it hasn't been fixed at this point.

 

[spider23]

Some good points on this thread, I posted this somewhere else too. A lot of guys that are really suited to play the same position. Where are all the 6'7 to 6'9 athletic guys. I know, a lot of them are in the ACC/BE/B12 etc. But we can't seem to get that type of recruit. I was really hoping on Solly, but that didn't turn out like I was hoping.

 

[spiderman]

23, you answered your own question. 6'7" to 6'9" athletic guys who also have skills ... they go wherever they want. no idea how we got lucky with GG. I hope Sal is of the same mold.

 

[Octapod]

Some good points on this thread, I posted this somewhere else too. A lot of guys that are really suited to play the same position. Where are all the 6'7 to 6'9 athletic guys. I know, a lot of them are in the ACC/BE/B12 etc. But we can't seem to get that type of recruit. I was really hoping on Solly, but that didn't turn out like I was hoping.

I think Mooney is wanting too much from the players at those positions. Size, athleticism, and all around skills. Players that can do it all. Those kind of players go to the Power conferences. So, he signs the all around players he can get and tries to play them in those positions anyway. (DB, NS) The rest are here for a year or 2 then transfer somewhere else. Then the cycle repeats itself.

 

[keefusb]

We have had some good players at the 4 in the past, think Harper, Terry Allen, even Martel and Butler (who were probably better suited as 3's, but more like 4's in CM's "system"). In reality, TJC was actually a natural 4 forced to play 5.

From a recruiting standpoint, we have just not been able to come up with a viable option at 4 since TA left. Like others, I had high hopes for Solly, but he was as big a bust as we have ever had if you ask me.

For a guy who is supposed to know what types of players he needs for his "system", CM sure seems to have his head up his backside when it comes to actually recruiting and signing those types of players.

 

[spiderman]

nah, TJ was a perfect 5 in our system at least offensively. if he was also a shot blocking athlete he'd have been P6 and in the NBA.

we currently just need a 4 to step up next year. hopefully we have a couple of good ones between Nathan, Sal, Phoenix and Tomas.

 

[MrTbone]

23, you answered your own question. 6'7" to 6'9" athletic guys who also have skills ... they go wherever they want. no idea how we got lucky with GG. I hope Sal is of the same mold.

We really only need some 6'5"-6'8" guys. There are more of those out there than we have. If any of the redshirt guys this year can play, then we'd be ok, but the fact they didn't make playing time this year is a concern.

 

[kneepadmckinney]

you guys have covered this all very well. it's an interesting question.

all 5 of our starters will end up 1,000 point scorers ... some much higher. but we're clearly not a good team.

we've always said we want 5 scorers on the floor but never really had it. this year we're seeing the effect of having 5 offensive players on the floor. we're really, really bad defensively. none of our starters prioritize defense, seeing themselves as defense first. I think all of our good teams had guys that did.

it can't all be coaching or scheme. he's won before with less talented players than this. good defensive players can play ANY defense. and it's not all lack of depth/exhaustion unless you're telling me they were already exhausted in November and December because our defense stunk then too.

as for guys playing out of position, I don't see Nick as a guard. he's a true SF, though maybe an inch or two shorter than ideal. Buck's a 2/3. neither is a big forward, but we have a clear top 5 so we're forced to play one there. perfect world, Sal starts from day 1 next year at the 4 and is a defensive presence. Nick, Buck and Khwan rotate at the 2 and 3 spots. Khwan gets some time at the 1 as well. not easy ego-wise to make one of them the 6th man, but it's what the team needs.

and actually ... even though Nathan isn't a top 5 player right now, the team would likely be doing better with him starting and playing more. still have 4 offensive guys out there but longer, better defensively, and helps the bench.

I agree with Nathan for Fore substitution into starting lineup. We need Nathan's length and defensive ability, and I think Fore would be a good offensive jolt of energy off the bench.

 

[Ferrum Spider]

I think you can get away with having small lineup like this but you need a lot more depth and a defensive enforcer (think Draymond Green) in the middle. GG will be a great player but he’s a different type of talent then that. So it goes back to finding some wing players to compliment him and this lineup.

 

[I-M-UR]

Even a Jonathan Collins type, rebounding and defense primary, but with a little more offensive skills would help.

 

[Ferrum Spider]

Even a Jonathan Collins type, rebounding and defense primary, but with a little more offensive skills would help.

Man I forgot about Jonathan “JC BLOCKED YOU” Collins. Dude was a human fly swatter.

 

[LongTimeSpiderFan]

Even a Jonathan Collins type, rebounding and defense primary, but with a little more offensive skills would help.

Depth cures many ills. Having quality players of almost-any-size on the bench is key.