ADVERTISEMENT

Khwan Fore Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
S. Jersey, thanks for the updates, keep them coming. Great to see Khwan doing so well. In retrospect, he may have done us a favor by further exposing MoonDogg. If Khwan and Buck were still here, they would be covering up MD's deficincies a little bit and that would be bad. Certainly Hardt has plenty of evidence to judge moon on now.
 
Let's just start now - look at that blue floor. Get used to it

 
Cards 66 Pitt 51
Another good performance from KF! Scored all 8 of his points in 16 minutes of 1st half play. Khawn was team's leading scorer until Nwora made 2 FTs at the 10:00 mark of the 2nd half. :D That's how off Louisville was offensively down 33-29 at HT.

When KF exited in 2nd half Cards started to pull away and Mack of course for defense put him back in with about 6 minutes to play. KF ended 3-7 shooting (2-3 3PT shots) with 2 assists, 2 rebounds, and 1 steal in 29 minutes.
grrr.gif


#UnitedinRed
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarolinaSpider
Wow. Big difference on how some here feel about Khwan and how the Louisville board feels about Khwan. Glad he’s there and not here.
 
But we are much better with Khwan and Buck. We play better team ball. Having 5 shooters on the floor has really helped us shooting the 3 ball. Right? Roll Spide. We good. Look at all this talent coming in next year. Mooney's recruiting certainly has turned the corner.

Did I catch all of the truther statement's there?
 
97spiderfan said:
But we are much better with Khwan and Buck. We play better team ball. Having 5 shooters on the floor has really helped us shooting the 3 ball. Right? Roll Spide. We good. Look at all this talent coming in next year. Mooney's recruiting certainly has turned the corner.

Did I catch all of the truther statement's there?
Click to expand...
How can we not be better replacing two non shooters with 2 shooters?
The pieces did not fit (despite our late season push).
 
spider23 said:
How can we not be better replacing two non shooters with 2 shooters?
The pieces did not fit (despite our late season push).
Click to expand...
I am sure I'm going to get killed for this but...

Anyone remember Bryson Spinner on the football team? He was too good to turn down, but also built for a different style than we were playing at the time. All the other players were built for the style we had chosen.

i did see some of that with Buck & Khwan. So I thought with losing them we had a chance to be more in sync, and a chance that could mean improvement. But was so uncertain of it that I never mentioned it.
 
Last edited:
urmite said:
I am sure I'm going to get killed for this but...

Anyone remember Bryson Spinner on the football team? He was too good to turn down, but also built for a different style than we were playing at the time. All the other players were built for the style we had chosen.

i did see some of that with Buck & Khwan. So I thought with losing them we had a chance to be more in sync, and a chance that could mean improvement. But was so uncertain that I never mentioned.
Click to expand...
Not that I care to defend VT4700, but there's decent evidence to suggest that KF is not the prototypical/preferable guy for us to play shooting guard, and similar evidence to suggest that DMB's role as a starter would be to continue to play as a vastly undersized forward. So I get the argument.

It's unfortunately riddled with problems, not least of which is if you don't have an alternative that's better than the guys you're losing. Herein is the importance of theory versus practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19 and gospidersgo
yeah, my thought was with Khwan and Buck coming back we'd start our best 5 which was the same 5 and I still don't think that would work. I thought we needed Nathan out there ... without even knowing he'd be this good.

and while I think Khwan is a very good basketball player, if he stayed I still don't think we'd be a meaningfully better team once Nick went down. Nathan and Khwan together means 2 non-threats from the perimeter. I like what Woj can add. we just expected too much from him too early. maybe in a lesser role with Nick healthy he'd have thrived.

anyway, what exactly is the argument here? it's not like we had a choice, keep him or lose him. Khwan left. I would have thought by now we'd all be over that. he did what was best for himself and it's working out great for him.
 
IMHO all the comments about how Kwan (and/or Buck) wouldn't fit are totally missing what I think are the points of this whole thread. 1. Mooney couldn't figure out how to adapt in a way that would allow a player who is good enough to start (despite being brand new to the system) for a Top 20 team to be able to fit at UR! 2. Mooney couldn't generate enough achievement, confidence, loyalty etc. that the kid didn't feel like he had to go somewhere else (taking real risk he'd play little if any) to accomplish what he wanted out of his college basketball career. In other words, Mooney failed the team and the player because he couldn't figure out how to put the kid in a position to be more successful. And he had 4 years to do it and Mack did it in a few months! And this continues today with other players. This is the problem. Even when he gets talent, he can't make the most of it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger
guys transfer, Philly. every coach that's had a player transfer didn't fail the player. Khwan did very well here. and he graduated.
Khwan's in the right situation now. if we had enough strong players where he could come off the bench here and be a defensive specialist, that would have been ideal. but he was a top 5 guy here. so yes, that's on Mooney.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700
Khwan likely was out the door regardless. We had zero shot at making the tournament and I suspect that was part of the motivation, aside from generally hoping to be somewhere on a big stage which UR really isn't.

To Philly's point, there is a recurring theme with CM that he struggles to adapt. Some people have very strong belief in what they are doing and want to stay the course, feeling ultimately that their way will prove to be correct. Others are overly reactive and the discordance in their changes makes it difficult to not only improve but gauge if the changes are having a positive effect. Both styles have their problems. I wish I'd see more adaptation and adjustment, the alternative is we stick with things that don't seem to be working and haven't in quite some time.
 
Agree, guys transfer and not always a coach failure. But my point is that this one was! Its on Mooney that he had a guy with a top level talent (note I said "a" top level talent (i.e. defense) not that he is overall a top level talent) that was one of our better and most talented players and the coach was unable to figure out how to better take advantage of what he had in that player. Further, we know its because Mooney basically either REFUSES to adjust or adapt what we do in any way to who we have as players or is incapable of doing so. This applies not only to adjusting to what players you have skill wise, but adjusting your system when your team is super young etc. We do what we do and if it doesn't work, we trot out the excuses (or blame the players) instead of changing what we do and finding something that works. Plain and simple.
 
ok, but not sure where to adapt to make Khwan more than what he is offensively. he's a small guard that doesn't shoot well.

and while he's an excellent defender probably best suited for man to man, you don't adjust your entire defense for one player.
 
Khwan: 33% career 3 pg FG percentage
Woj: 33% career 3 pg FG percentage

I was never good at math but they look pretty much, hmmm, I don't know. Identical.

Khwan also was pretty damn lethal with the long 2 and could take his man off the dribble and get to the rack with the best of them. Woj's only offensive tool is the 3 point shot, he actually shoots a lower percentage from 2, and I can't recall him ever taking his man off the dribble.

Yet, somehow, Woj is a much better fit for our team offensively that Khwan, who is "not a good shooter". Y'all crack me up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kneepadmckinney and GKiller
Khwan would actually be shooting better than Wojcik. Khwans career 3 pt percentage is essentially the exact same as Jake's. But Jake is getting regular looks at 3 with frequency, they are often good looks and not off the dribble. That makes a difference. Khwan shoots them infrequently & Khwan's strength is not his 3 ball but if he got those shots and that role his 3 shooting percentage would be higher I'm quite confident. Again they're the same without all that.

And Khwan 2 pt shooting is very good. Jake's is very bad. 80-90% of his shots are 3s anyway.

This not a shot at Jake. He's being asked to do too much imo. It will probably serve him well in future, let's hope. Whoever is in that role just needs to be making a higher %.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWeaver and urfan1
97spiderfan said:
Khwan: 33% career 3 pg FG percentage
Woj: 33% career 3 pg FG percentage

I was never good at math but they look pretty much, hmmm, I don't know. Identical.

Khwan also was pretty damn lethal with the long 2 and could take his man off the dribble and get to the rack with the best of them. Woj's only offensive tool is the 3 point shot, he actually shoots a lower percentage from 2, and I can't recall him ever taking his man off the dribble.

Yet, somehow, Woj is a much better fit for our team offensively that Khwan, who is "not a good shooter". Y'all crack me up.
Click to expand...

Damn 97, do I have to erase my own post now? Same exact thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan
GK, Khwan is a terrific athlete who plays D and can get to the rim. if he was a shooter he'd shoot more than one 3 per game. heck, he's 62% from the foul line.

Jake hasn't shot as well as expected this year. but he has a reputation as a shooter. hopefully he'll eventually regress to the mean, assuming his mean is higher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700
spiderman said:
GK, Khwan is a terrific athlete who plays D and can get to the rim. if he was a shooter he'd shoot more than one 3 per game. heck, he's 62% from the foul line.

Jake hasn't shot as well as expected this year. but he has a reputation as a shooter. hopefully he'll eventually regress to the mean, assuming his mean is higher.
Click to expand...

That's fair. I think Khwan's a gamer and he shoots a little better than his rep. Excluding FT's. I realize he wasn't exactly a threat for us at 3 but historically he's shot as well as we're getting from Jake. I don't know what kind of 3s he gets at UL but with us it seemed to be a lot of late ones at end of shot clock and many he had to manufacture. He wasn't getting the spot up jumpers typically like Wojcik. If you shoot 33% with infrequent attempts and lower percentage shots, you would expect a higher percentage when you get regular rhythm attempts. That's what Jake gets. I do agree Jake's mean is likely higher, or we're in trouble.
 
Let's do a small sample size with 7 game A10 frosh comparison ..... and let's not forget that the anti-Khwan group stressed how much more offense Jake would produce.

Khawn
47 pts.
Jake
41 pts.

Khawn
15-25 2PT
Jake
0-4 2PT

Khawn
2-6 3PT
Jake
13-45 3PT

Khawn
11-16 FT
Jake
2-2 FT

And Khawn had only played 135 minutes compared to Jake's 205.
 
Last edited:
Hard to compare because of sample size (and our quality of competition this year) but

Woj 5 of 20 games 4 or more
5-9 Kenpom 323
6-11 94
5-9 234
4-7 124
4-9 274
Total 24-45 Avg 210

Khwan 7 of 119 with more than 1
2-3 89
2-5 198
2-2 41
2-2 140
2-2 220
2-3 108
2-3 64
Total 14-21 Avg 123


I did get my expectations up for Woj after our game against St. Francis (2nd in NEC but Kenpom 239) - 8 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists, 5 steals ...:(
 
Last edited:
again, Khwan's a very good basketball player.
and Jake hasn't shot as well as I hoped yet.
but with our offense, and with a non-perimeter scorer at the 4, I think we need a shooting threat at the 2.
Jake ... or Andre ... or JJ ... or whoever will need to knock down open shots though.

we aren't shooting well enough to win. we get good looks. but we don't make enough of them, especially late.
 
Look, I think Jake does appear to have a sweet stroke and hopefully it gets better. And of course a team would like to have a SG who can shoot from deep. Though bottom line for me is points produced, any way you can get them, the more the better.

And early small 7 game A10 facts show a player who can shoot producing less than the non-shooter. And playing plenty more minutes. And playing in an A10 with a Kenny rating of +0.88 while in 2016 that league came in at +5.48.

I will say one thing for Jake is even though KF was considered a frosh in 2016, I believe having that year under his belt even if only practicing gives him a big advantage only true frosh Jake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
spiderman said:
and while he's an excellent defender probably best suited for man to man, you don't adjust your entire defense for one player.
Click to expand...
This presumes the other four players are confident and capable in the defense. Our guys are neither for the most part.
 
PhillySpider said:
IMHO all the comments about how Kwan (and/or Buck) wouldn't fit are totally missing what I think are the points of this whole thread. 1. Mooney couldn't figure out how to adapt in a way that would allow a player who is good enough to start (despite being brand new to the system) for a Top 20 team to be able to fit at UR! 2. Mooney couldn't generate enough achievement, confidence, loyalty etc. that the kid didn't feel like he had to go somewhere else (taking real risk he'd play little if any) to accomplish what he wanted out of his college basketball career. In other words, Mooney failed the team and the player because he couldn't figure out how to put the kid in a position to be more successful. And he had 4 years to do it and Mack did it in a few months! And this continues today with other players. This is the problem. Even when he gets talent, he can't make the most of it!
Click to expand...

I don't get your #1 at all. Why do you think Mooney couldn't figure out how to make Khwan fit here? Are you saying if Khwan were averaging the 3.8 ppg, 1.4 reb, and 1.4 assists this year for us that he is for Louisville we would be winning more? How exactly did Mooney not make him fit? I think Mooney got everything he could have out of Khwan. Not sure what more anyone could have expected. He is playing good defense and is 9th on their team in scoring. Good for him. I mean that. Good for him, but why do some continue to act like he is the ACC player of the year?
 
urmite said:
I am sure I'm going to get killed for this but...

Anyone remember Bryson Spinner on the football team? He was too good to turn down, but also built for a different style than we were playing at the time. All the other players were built for the style we had chosen.

i did see some of that with Buck & Khwan. So I thought with losing them we had a chance to be more in sync, and a chance that could mean improvement. But was so uncertain of it that I never mentioned it.
Click to expand...

I agree and I mentioned it. Still feel that way, even though I expected several more wins this year. In fairness, some of the younger guys might have "fit" better so far had Nick not gotten hurt. But, the bottom line is we went 12-20 with them and Nick last year. How well could we have really done with them and no Nick this year?
 
VT4700 said:
I agree and I mentioned it. Still feel that way, even though I expected several more wins this year. In fairness, some of the younger guys might have "fit" better so far had Nick not gotten hurt. But, the bottom line is we went 12-20 with them and Nick last year. How well could we have really done with them and no Nick this year?
Click to expand...
Gilyard, Fore, Buckingham, Cayo and Golden would have done quite a bit better.
 
BuckinghamPalace said:
Gilyard, Fore, Buckingham, Cayo and Golden would have done quite a bit better.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. We will never know. Where are the shooters in this lineup? What we do know is these same 5 were part of a 12-20 team last year that included Nick, who carried us in A-10 play. We don't even win 10 games without Nick last year. And what we also know is our new starting 5 is struggling along at 7-13 this year. I see the same issues with both teams: consistently getting out shot from 3 and out rebounded.
 
VT4700 said:
Maybe, maybe not. We will never know. Where are the shooters in this lineup? What we do know is these same 5 were part of a 12-20 team last year that included Nick, who carried us in A-10 play. We don't even win 10 games without Nick last year. And what we also know is our new starting 5 is struggling along at 7-13 this year. I see the same issues with both teams: consistently getting out shot from 3 and out rebounded.
Click to expand...

It is almost like a coaching change to someone who emphasizes these things would make a difference
 
  • Like
Reactions: spider23, MolivaManiac, Eight Legger and 1 other person
VT4700 said:
I agree and I mentioned it. Still feel that way, even though I expected several more wins this year. In fairness, some of the younger guys might have "fit" better so far had Nick not gotten hurt. But, the bottom line is we went 12-20 with them and Nick last year. How well could we have really done with them and no Nick this year?
Click to expand...
Better than we have done. But I’d admit, not much better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

spiderman

Last year vs this year stats

Replies
10
Views
1K
UR Basketball Board
whampas
W
Section9.RowD

'24-'25 Spiders Friends and Family

Replies
134
Views
9K
UR Basketball Board
MrTbone
MrTbone
mojo-spider

2024 Richmond Spiders Football - Prologue - Hampton

Replies
4
Views
1K
UR Football Board
ncspiderfan
N
spider23

Mikkel Tyne - Player Eval

Replies
6
Views
3K
UR Basketball Board
brooklyn brownstone
B
spider23

Mike Walz - Player Eval

Replies
86
Views
8K
UR Basketball Board
urmite
urmite
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back