ADVERTISEMENT

Long Lineup Thoughts

spiderman

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
19,662
9,810
113
Can we talk players and not coach for a minute here?

Last year's starters, player by player, were a seriously talented group. Literally all 5 guys projected to be 1,000 point scorers. But playing our best 5 together didn't work. We were too small. Our defensive mismatches weren't offset by what we hoped were offensive mismatches in our favor. We lost 20 games and in my opinion it was the lineup and not the scheme.

Until the recent GS Warriors teams, the best ever was the Bulls in the Jordan era. Granted Jordan was special but it wasn't an all star scoring team. It was a couple of great players and a bunch of guys who played roles.

I think moving someone (Khwan) to a 6th man role, despite him clearly being a top 5 player, could have done wonders. We just didn't have a big forward to go to. Thought we did in Solly but that didn't work. And Nathan wasn't ready for that role. Plus we probably didn't have the guts to bring a guy as good as Khwan off the bench. It's easier to do in retrospect after losing 20 to make that adjustment.

We lose a TON of talent in Fore and Buckingham. Saying otherwise is foolish. But it wasn't working playing that group together and I don't think it would have worked much differently next year if we went about it the same way. The loss of talent is huge, but the impact won't be.

Offensively ... not a problem. We'll get the same number of shots up and shoot about the same percentage. Won't be Buck of Khwan getting shots, but someone will. Most of those lost shots will go to Gilyard, Sherod and Golden. That's a good thing. We want that group getting more shots. Defensively? Listen, I think Fore and Buckingham were two of our better individual defenders ... but it wasn't working as a group. We were AWFUL defensively. Blame scheme if you want but the scheme has worked. I think we'd have been horrible defensively in a straight zone or a man defense too last year for the same reasons we were horrible in the matchup. Adding size will help.

Next year we are forced into a more traditional lineup. We still have our 3 stars starting. Julius and a freshman will fill in fine at the 2, playing a supporting role to the big 3. Also in support at the 4 will be Nathan, Sal and other appropriately sized big forwards. Bench? Who knows what we really have there. Time will tell. But it isn't crazy to believe we'll get more production from it than last year. That's a low bar.

We'll be less talented without Khwan and Buck ... but we're going to be better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulla1
Personally, I think logic should dictate that we will not be better. That does not mean that it's a certainty of course. And I could find a way to rationalize what you are saying about the losses of Khwan and Buck actually helping our production. I definitely agree that playing our most talented players led us to a smaller lineup that hurt us drastically on the defensive end.

I believe we will start the season with a starting lineup of our only non-freshmen, non-transfers (Gilyard, Johnson, Sherod, Cayo, Golden). How it shakes down after that is all uncertainty. Over the years I have learned my lesson about incoming freshmen no matter what anyone tells me after seeing practice. That goes both ways - players being better or worse than expected. I worry about the redshirt freshmen. I may be forgetting a name, but not many of our freshmen that have redshirted without injury have gone on to a lot of success. At least within recent memory. The two freshmen I feel might be best suited for higher playing time are Sal and Wojcik. Just a feeling about them. The other freshmen are complete unknowns.

12 wins is not a high bar to surpass, but I do not get a strong feeling from what we will have next season that we will easily top that. Each year is different though. There are always changes that alter the makeup and chemistry of a team. I will be hoping that these guys come together as a group and have the right mix to very easily pass that 12 win bar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1, gospidersgo, Not-A-Homer and 1 other person
spiderman said:
Can we talk players and not coach for a minute here?

Last year's starters, player by player, were a seriously talented group. Literally all 5 guys projected to be 1,000 point scorers. But playing our best 5 together didn't work. We were too small. Our defensive mismatches weren't offset by what we hoped were offensive mismatches in our favor. We lost 20 games and in my opinion it was the lineup and not the scheme.

Until the recent GS Warriors teams, the best ever was the Bulls in the Jordan era. Granted Jordan was special but it wasn't an all star scoring team. It was a couple of great players and a bunch of guys who played roles.

I think moving someone (Khwan) to a 6th man role, despite him clearly being a top 5 player, could have done wonders. We just didn't have a big forward to go to. Thought we did in Solly but that didn't work. And Nathan wasn't ready for that role. Plus we probably didn't have the guts to bring a guy as good as Khwan off the bench. It's easier to do in retrospect after losing 20 to make that adjustment.

We lose a TON of talent in Fore and Buckingham. Saying otherwise is foolish. But it wasn't working playing that group together and I don't think it would have worked much differently next year if we went about it the same way. The loss of talent is huge, but the impact won't be.

Offensively ... not a problem. We'll get the same number of shots up and shoot about the same percentage. Won't be Buck of Khwan getting shots, but someone will. Most of those lost shots will go to Gilyard, Sherod and Golden. That's a good thing. We want that group getting more shots. Defensively? Listen, I think Fore and Buckingham were two of our better individual defenders ... but it wasn't working as a group. We were AWFUL defensively. Blame scheme if you want but the scheme has worked. I think we'd have been horrible defensively in a straight zone or a man defense too last year for the same reasons we were horrible in the matchup. Adding size will help.

Next year we are forced into a more traditional lineup. We still have our 3 stars starting. Julius and a freshman will fill in fine at the 2, playing a supporting role to the big 3. Also in support at the 4 will be Nathan, Sal and other appropriately sized big forwards. Bench? Who knows what we really have there. Time will tell. But it isn't crazy to believe we'll get more production from it than last year. That's a low bar.

We'll be less talented without Khwan and Buck ... but we're going to be better.
Click to expand...
You make a strong case here and I do think that your argument COULD have some merit. I definitely like the idea of the big 3 getting more shots. Offensively, I don't think there will be much of a problem UNLESS one of the big three is hurt or in foul trouble. If one of them goes down (or even when they are out of the lineup) I foresee big trouble.

This team is unlikely to be able to outscore opponents regularly enough to win big. I am pretty confident that the inside game will just not be up to par. Without defense and rebounding, they are going to come up on the short end of the score more often than not. Is someone (or a group) ready to fill the gap, maybe, but it is unlikely based upon what we have seen and what we know to this point. I suspect that opponents with strong inside games will give them fits. Unless the defensive contribution(s) are very significant, I see this team going .500 or less.

Another point related to the above to keep our eye on this season is winning/losing close games. This has never been a strong suit for Mooney teams, but I predict it will be a bigger issue next year. The reason is that the lack of size, bulk, and rebounding will make it likely that opponents will continuously pound the ball down low during crunch time. Fouls (even fouling out), higher percentage shots, put backs, etc (that the Spiders will likely struggle to contain) will be the result. If you don't win the close games then you don't have a winning season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1 and spider23
mcspider said:
Personally, I think logic should dictate that we will not be better. That does not mean that it's a certainty of course. And I could find a way to rationalize what you are saying about the losses of Khwan and Buck actually helping our production. I definitely agree that playing our most talented players led us to a smaller lineup that hurt us drastically on the defensive end.

I believe we will start the season with a starting lineup of our only non-freshmen, non-transfers (Gilyard, Johnson, Sherod, Cayo, Golden). How it shakes down after that is all uncertainty. Over the years I have learned my lesson about incoming freshmen no matter what anyone tells me after seeing practice. That goes both ways - players being better or worse than expected. I worry about the redshirt freshmen. I may be forgetting a name, but not many of our freshmen that have redshirted without injury have gone on to a lot of success. At least within recent memory. The two freshmen I feel might be best suited for higher playing time are Sal and Wojcik. Just a feeling about them. The other freshmen are complete unknowns.

12 wins is not a high bar to surpass, but I do not get a strong feeling from what we will have next season that we will easily top that. Each year is different though. There are always changes that alter the makeup and chemistry of a team. I will be hoping that these guys come together as a group and have the right mix to very easily pass that 12 win bar.
Click to expand...
What this guy said...
 
One other thought on this. I think we really have to reconsider using a “new” base defense. In spite of it being productive in the past, the scheme does in fact have serious flaws even when played with the right personnel. I am untrained in this but believe it’s not simply an experiential issue, I think it’s just a brittle system.

I think it was PhillySpider who did a good analysis on this last fall and my takeaway was essentially that our D causes our guys to work way harder than is necessary and requires more thinking than just reacting.

That D can work but we really ought to have a system that doesn’t fall apart so easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19
The challenge is going to be defense. Because we are going to lack foot speed. I don't see much size difference other than Sal. I think we are overlooking the scoring challenge. If we score 15 points from three players where does the rest of the production come from? I understand that Julius can score but can he score on a consistent basis. Way too many questions to start this season. Seems like the same version as last year. We have one more player with size. Basically the same lack of experience. We have 7 freshmen coming in. We are young and inexperienced so Mooney uses the same pitch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not-A-Homer
For anyone who subscribes (or borrows) SI, there was a terrific article in today's new edition about Houston's coach and his offensive philosophy. I would recommend that our staff read the article, and see if the "template" would not perfectly fit our personnel, but that might be too optimistic. In a nutshell, the Houston coach has a tried-and-true offensive approach that isolates players so that 2-3 players consistently set up by the 3-point line while others do pick-and-roll routines. If the pick-and-roll fails, they pass to the guys open at the 3-point line and their 3-point "specialists" take the open 3-point shots. It seems to be working very well, in part because they have "recruited" players who fit this offensive scheme. They have some excellent 3-point guys who are terrible at crating their own shot, but great at canning 3s when they are open. We will likely have three new guards (two arriving this season and one arriving next season) who can hit open 3-point shots. So, the question is: Can we find ways to get them open shots?

Of course Houston's offense is not the only one that could work for us, but we do have the point guard (Chris Paul/Gilliard), the Center (Capella/Golden), and the third guy who can hit open 3s (Harden/Nick). And, we will soon be adding the two guys who can hit stand-alone 3s (Houston's forwards and our new guards). We might have the personnel to play Houston's offense, if we could only teach it. .

UVA's offense or Michigan's offense might also be nice role-models, but Houston's NBA style offense could be a great one to learn from. Will we? Probably not, but it was fun to have fantasies about it. Maybe we should just watch the Rockets and, the Warriors (not to mention the Celtics), and get our "fix" of great offensive systems from them.
 
Spideroldie said:
For anyone who subscribes (or borrows) SI, there was a terrific article in today's new edition about Houston's coach and his offensive philosophy. I would recommend that our staff read the article, and see if the "template" would not perfectly fit our personnel, but that might be too optimistic. In a nutshell, the Houston coach has a tried-and-true offensive approach that isolates players so that 2-3 players consistently set up by the 3-point line while others do pick-and-roll routines. If the pick-and-roll fails, they pass to the guys open at the 3-point line and their 3-point "specialists" take the open 3-point shots. It seems to be working very well, in part because they have "recruited" players who fit this offensive scheme. They have some excellent 3-point guys who are terrible at crating their own shot, but great at canning 3s when they are open. We will likely have three new guards (two arriving this season and one arriving next season) who can hit open 3-point shots. So, the question is: Can we find ways to get them open shots?

Of course Houston's offense is not the only one that could work for us, but we do have the point guard (Chris Paul/Gilliard), the Center (Capella/Golden), and the third guy who can hit open 3s (Harden/Nick). And, we will soon be adding the two guys who can hit stand-alone 3s (Houston's forwards and our new guards). We might have the personnel to play Houston's offense, if we could only teach it. .

UVA's offense or Michigan's offense might also be nice role-models, but Houston's NBA style offense could be a great one to learn from. Will we? Probably not, but it was fun to have fantasies about it. Maybe we should just watch the Rockets and, the Warriors (not to mention the Celtics), and get our "fix" of great offensive systems from them.
Click to expand...
Oldie, doesn’t this resemble our current offense? What’s the difference?
 
Ulla1 said:
Oldie, doesn’t this resemble our current offense? What’s the difference?
Click to expand...

The difference is our "shooters" don't take the open shot. JG and Nick being the exceptions with Nick coming on strong as the year went along last year.
 
Ulla1 said:
Oldie, doesn’t this resemble our current offense? What’s the difference?
Click to expand...
The difference is that UR has NOT had a plethora of great shooters on the floor recently. These type of offensive schemes are most effective when you have a multitude of real quality shooters.

Example from last year; Fore was not a good shooter at all, Buckingham (though effective on the move in free play) was not a high quality shooter. Golden was effective in the mid-range game, and occasionally made three pointers, but he isn't a great shooter either. Gilyard is a good shooter, BUT, his height dictates that game circumstances (and match-ups) have to be just right for him be able to make a lot of outside shots. Sherod of course is a good shooter, but we have not seen anything that would make me classify him as a great shooter.

A small team must be loaded with really good shooters if they want to win consistently. They need to beat the other team down the floor, make steals, and score off of defensive pressure. This is the main reason why last year's team only won 12 games. Personnel are not suited to that type of game.

Don't see much difference in this coming season. Last year Cayo displayed almost no shooting talent, and Johnson is so wildly inconsistent that he will have to prove it to us. None of the redshirts are great shooters (or they would have played last year). Wocjik is reportedly a shooter but he will be a freshman.
 
By the way, Spiders men lax just won the championship and is going to the tournament after losing 13 seniors last year, which included the entire defense and goalie (2 of whom were all-american). Youth is not an excuse for a team that is well-coached and can recruit talented players
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli, spider23, whampas and 1 other person
ur2K said:
Nods head. We run systems that we don’t necessarily recruit for.
Click to expand...

Our recruiting right now is mostly just take the best we can get, our coaching staff don't have the luxury of being picky with recruits.
 
Ulla, per your question above about what the difference is between the Houston Rocket's offense and ours...There are a multitude of differences.
1. The Rockets take almost exclusively 3-point shots and lay-ups/dunks. We continue to take a lot of low-percentage mid-range shots.
2. Houston's offense leads to wide-open 3-point shots. How many of those did we have in our current offense this past season? (Answer: not nearly enough!).
3. Houston run's lots of pick-and-rolls. Our "weave" offense does not include many pick-and-rolls (which would be very effective with Grant and Jake doing their thing).

I could go on, but hopefully you will just try watching a Rockets game during the playoffs this season and see if you do not prefer their offense to ours... And, if you happen to have any influence, why not try persuading our coaches to check out a new offense too?
 
spiderman said:
Can we talk players and not coach for a minute here?

Last year's starters, player by player, were a seriously talented group. Literally all 5 guys projected to be 1,000 point scorers. But playing our best 5 together didn't work. We were too small. Our defensive mismatches weren't offset by what we hoped were offensive mismatches in our favor. We lost 20 games and in my opinion it was the lineup and not the scheme.

Until the recent GS Warriors teams, the best ever was the Bulls in the Jordan era. Granted Jordan was special but it wasn't an all star scoring team. It was a couple of great players and a bunch of guys who played roles.

I think moving someone (Khwan) to a 6th man role, despite him clearly being a top 5 player, could have done wonders. We just didn't have a big forward to go to. Thought we did in Solly but that didn't work. And Nathan wasn't ready for that role. Plus we probably didn't have the guts to bring a guy as good as Khwan off the bench. It's easier to do in retrospect after losing 20 to make that adjustment.

We lose a TON of talent in Fore and Buckingham. Saying otherwise is foolish. But it wasn't working playing that group together and I don't think it would have worked much differently next year if we went about it the same way. The loss of talent is huge, but the impact won't be.

Offensively ... not a problem. We'll get the same number of shots up and shoot about the same percentage. Won't be Buck of Khwan getting shots, but someone will. Most of those lost shots will go to Gilyard, Sherod and Golden. That's a good thing. We want that group getting more shots. Defensively? Listen, I think Fore and Buckingham were two of our better individual defenders ... but it wasn't working as a group. We were AWFUL defensively. Blame scheme if you want but the scheme has worked. I think we'd have been horrible defensively in a straight zone or a man defense too last year for the same reasons we were horrible in the matchup. Adding size will help.

Next year we are forced into a more traditional lineup. We still have our 3 stars starting. Julius and a freshman will fill in fine at the 2, playing a supporting role to the big 3. Also in support at the 4 will be Nathan, Sal and other appropriately sized big forwards. Bench? Who knows what we really have there. Time will tell. But it isn't crazy to believe we'll get more production from it than last year. That's a low bar.

We'll be less talented without Khwan and Buck ... but we're going to be better.
Click to expand...
I think we are in trouble if Julius is starting. He can give us a short spurt of energy, but he doesn’t have the athleticism and ability to play starting minutes in this league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not-A-Homer
PASpider said:
I think we are in trouble if Julius is starting. He can give us a short spurt of energy, but he doesn’t have the athleticism and ability to play starting minutes in this league.
Click to expand...

Agree, but who starts at the 2? One of the freshmen?
 
ur2K said:
Agree, but who starts at the 2? One of the freshmen?
Click to expand...
Sherrod.

My hope is for gilyard, Sherrod, Cayo, Sal, and Golden as our starting 5. Ford, Julius, and either Schneider or Woj as our top 3 in rotation.

Admittedly not sure if Cayo has the shooting to start at the 3 though. I am however bullish on Sal being ready early.
 
Interesting, I’d be suspect of Sherod’s handle. We’ve relied on both guards being able to bring the ball up and start the offense for a long time, JG is already going to play nearly the entire game, would be nice to get some relief for him occasionally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderman
nathanw19 said:
Sherrod.

My hope is for gilyard, Sherrod, Cayo, Sal, and Golden as our starting 5. Ford, Julius, and either Schneider or Woj as our top 3 in rotation.

Admittedly not sure if Cayo has the shooting to start at the 3 though. I am however bullish on Sal being ready early.
Click to expand...
Intriguing...
 
Spideroldie said:
Ulla, per your question above about what the difference is between the Houston Rocket's offense and ours...There are a multitude of differences.
1. The Rockets take almost exclusively 3-point shots and lay-ups/dunks. We continue to take a lot of low-percentage mid-range shots.
2. Houston's offense leads to wide-open 3-point shots. How many of those did we have in our current offense this past season? (Answer: not nearly enough!).
3. Houston run's lots of pick-and-rolls. Our "weave" offense does not include many pick-and-rolls (which would be very effective with Grant and Jake doing their thing).

I could go on, but hopefully you will just try watching a Rockets game during the playoffs this season and see if you do not prefer their offense to ours... And, if you happen to have any influence, why not try persuading our coaches to check out a new offense too?
Click to expand...

4. They have James Harden.
5. They have James Harden.
6. They have James Harden.
 
I like both Gilyard and Sherod as very good players for us. Sherod is not a guard though, better suited to guarding wings/forwards and handling vs. Forwards. Was really hoping we would bring in an immediately eligible athletic guard to replace Buck and Fore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderman
spider23 said:
I like both Gilyard and Sherod as very good players for us. Sherod is not a guard though, better suited to guarding wings/forwards and handling vs. Forwards. Was really hoping we would bring in an immediately eligible athletic guard to replace Buck and Fore.
Click to expand...
23, your was fulfilled. We brought in Jake and Andre, both tall and highly skilled guards. Congratulations!
 
Last edited:
spider23 said:
I like both Gilyard and Sherod as very good players for us. Sherod is not a guard though, better suited to guarding wings/forwards and handling vs. Forwards. Was really hoping we would bring in an immediately eligible athletic guard to replace Buck and Fore.
Click to expand...

We had athletic guards alongside Jacob and went 12-20. That same lineup would not have worked this year either, especially when the opposing defense would continue to lay off Buck and Khwan and clog the middle. I am glad we will have more shooters and more height on the floor, and am thinking Sal and Jake will fit in perfectly and help right away.
 
I agree that Fore was a real issue with spreading the floor, I saw the defenses back off and not respect him outside 15 feet. He did bring a lot of other things to the court though. Are we going to change defenses up, and go more true zone to protect the lack of foot speed?
 
spider23 said:
I agree that Fore was a real issue with spreading the floor, I saw the defenses back off and not respect him outside 15 feet. He did bring a lot of other things to the court though. Are we going to change defenses up, and go more true zone to protect the lack of foot speed?
Click to expand...

Great to see 23 talk basketball again.

Posts that followed were completely unproductive and have been deleted.
 
If we did start Gilyard, Nick, Sal, Cayo, Grant my guess is we would go from shortest A10 starting 5 last year to perhaps tallest this year.
 
gospidersgo said:
If we did start Gilyard, Nick, Sal, Cayo, Grant my guess is we would go from shortest A10 starting 5 last year to perhaps tallest this year.
Click to expand...

Lol. Probably!

If Woj is ready, maybe he pushes Cayo or Sal out. But I agree with the original sentiment that JJ getting starting minutes is worrisome. Love him as a role player, energy and spot up streaky shooting. Don’t love him as a major piece.

Plus, you can’t teach height, and our defensive will be more effective with length switching with length, instead of teams isolating Grant, getting him switched out of the middle, then taking advantage of guards guarding the block.
 
Mooney teams ALWAYS have 2 ball handlers.
that lineup doesn't. no way is Nick a 2 guard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ur2K
Yes, I think Tomas will be a key to the season, we need him or Ford to really step in with some production.
English police: Verbinskis is a lengthy left-handed wing-type with good length.

Redundant lengthy length. Hopefully all this length helps him on defense.

I like to see who the guys signed with from the state lists - just above and below. Murray State and Towson.
Sal had guys going to Cuse, Michigan and Illinois below him, so that is good.
 
spider23 said:
K, "My Team" will have fun and compete, and you are a key component. You will be playing long after PQ finally gives up on Mooney. You are a true fan.
Click to expand...
If I am a key component on a basketball team, then 12-20 would look very good. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B

Mooney and winning

Replies
21
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
urfan1
urfan1
Section 204and5

WBB- A-10 Tournament - March 5-9

Replies
10
Views
687
UR Basketball Board
Section 204and5
Section 204and5
97spiderfan

VCU Observations

Replies
21
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
Anachnid
Anachnid
97spiderfan

Current NET ranking

Replies
8
Views
606
UR Basketball Board
wr70beh
wr70beh
Anachnid

CM’s coaching philosophy from his own quotes in RTD

Replies
30
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
spider23
spider23
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back