Looking into next season - men's basketball

[97spiderfan]

Here is what our rotation should look like if we want to be one of the top A-10 teams:

PG Johnston
G Lopez
W McGlothin
F Daughtry
BIG Walz

G Thomas
G one of the freshman
F Robinson

Back up BIG Beagle

* I am not saying this will happen. Far from it. My point is with 6 guys in here out of the last 2 recruiting years, we should have landed 3 who can beat out Tyne, Tanner, and AP, who each played good minutes on an 8 win team last year. If this happens, and McGlothin, Robinson, and a freshman are all legit, we look like a team that can be A-10 champs. If it doesn't, well, we kind of saw this movie last year. I just don't see Tyne, Tanner, or AP being key pieces on a top A-10 team. Would these guys make VCU's or Dayton's rotation? I don't think so.

Agree 100%. And I really like this starting line-up. Mooney has shown that he needs a really dynamic alpha PG to be really successful. Tyne has way too many holes in his game to be that for us. I'm not saying he can't improve, I think he will but if we want to be really good next year, it will be with a starting line-up like the one above. Tyne to me would make an excellent 6th man for a change of pace type of guard, so I do see Tyne as still a critical piece in such a line up, just not in a starting capacity.

Tanner and AP are better suited in a deeper reserve role for a quality A-10 team. I would love if both of our redshirt freshmen beat them out, in fact we kind of need that to happen.

 

[spiderman]

We had a very talented roster when Tyler was a freshman.

we had a talented starting 5 (Gilly, Francis, Sherod, Cayo, Golden).
we had a good guard/wing in Goose off the bench.
Wojcik backed up at the 2, scoring 3 ppg.
Grace backed up Golden and scored 0.9 ppg.

who else was Burton competing with at backup forward?
Sal? Verbinskis? Kulju???

seriously, it was way easier to get time as a freshman in 2019.

 

[spiderman]

Hate to be negative, but I don't think Tyne just magically becomes a good shooter. I see no step forward from him and think we are toast if he gets close to the 31+ mpg he got last year. It's not like he is a 3rd year guy who has steadily improved and is a ready for bigger minutes type of guy. He has played a lot of minutes and shot (and missed) a lot of 3s here. We kind of know who he is by now.

he just turned 20 and has 2 years left. you're giving up on a talented kid really early.
and you may be right, but we'll see.

 

[spiderman]

Here is what our rotation should look like if we want to be one of the top A-10 teams:

PG Johnston
G Lopez
W McGlothin
F Daughtry
BIG Walz

G Thomas
G one of the freshman
F Robinson

Back up BIG Beagle

if those are the best, I'm all for it. but man, you've come a long way from thinking the redshirts must suck if they couldn't win spots last year to suddenly starting one and making the other a big part of the rotation.

until I see otherwise, I'm betting on
PG Johnston
G Tyne
W Lopez
F Daughtry
BIG Walz

G Thomas
Back up BIG Beagle

AP, Tanner, McG, JRob

 

[spider23]

I wonder who is running with the 1's as the 1 in the summer workouts

sorry, couldn't resist that one - but I really do wonder who Mooney will have on the ball with the 1's this summer.

 

[GKiller]

if those are the best, I'm all for it. but man, you've come a long way from thinking the redshirts must suck if they couldn't win spots last year to suddenly starting one and making the other a big part of the rotation.

until I see otherwise, I'm betting on
PG Johnston
G Tyne
W Lopez
F Daughtry
BIG Walz

G Thomas
Back up BIG Beagle

AP, Tanner, McG, JRob

I’d lean to yours. I’d like 4700 lineup but too much unknown w McG to say. & Moon likes Tyne. Strong vet guard. He’s got to improve the shot making tho.

We do seem to highlight Donnie Richardson a lot in the summer socials. Idk if that means anything - probably nothing - but I have noticed.

 

[spider23]

And no, I don't like Tyne as a super small off guard. More and more I think Lopez needs to be the 2. Agree with 4700's starters. Yes, if Tyne can shoot 40% and become a Gilly like steal pest - that could work. If not, got to be Lopez, and really really need McGlothin to be good at the wing, and play defense.

 

[spider23]

I think sman's lineup is likely to start anyway. But I again have grave concerns with defense and rebounding. I'll give Johnston the benefit of the doubt, but we already have one poster questioning his defense. Hopefully that is unwarranted. Tyne is just a prime target to be targetted. Lopez, no idea on D - and only 2 rebounds per game. Daughtry and Walz - not seeing guys that are plus defenders or rebound out of their space.
But Mooney will scheme up a 1-3-1 and switch things up to protect them. RIGHT. So normal concerns. That is why very hopeful that Bryson and Robinson are the real deal and can be good - with Lopez as big guard.

 

[VT4700]

if those are the best, I'm all for it. but man, you've come a long way from thinking the redshirts must suck if they couldn't win spots last year to suddenly starting one and making the other a big part of the rotation.

until I see otherwise, I'm betting on
PG Johnston
G Tyne
W Lopez
F Daughtry
BIG Walz

G Thomas
Back up BIG Beagle

AP, Tanner, McG, JRob

U mussed my point, which was to be one of the best A-10 teams this year, we would need 3 of the 6 guys from our last 2 recruiting classes to beat out Tyne, Tanner, and AP. You could put anyone's name in there instead of the 3 I mentioned. To be a top A-10 team, we should have guys from our last 2 classes ready and able to beat them out. Not saying we will. But, we should be able to recruit well enough to have guys beat those guys out. Yes, I am still concerned about the fact McGlothin and Robinson couldn't play for an 8 win team last year. I hope things have changed and they are ready. We need them to be because we know what we have elsewhere.

 

[Eight Legger]

I will say that Daughtry is a big dude. Physically imposing. Looking forward to seeing him on the court.

 

[spiderman]

I agree with both sman and 4700 here. It is tougher for true freshman to play since portal and NIL proliferation. Heck, Rutgers had two TOP FIVE NBA draft picks and was mediocre.

I'd say "mediocre" is being generous. It's insane that they had 2 top 5 picks in the draft, plus guys who have since transferred to Washington, Georgetown and Dayton ... and they went 9-17 in non-Q4 games.

 

[urfan1]

I'd say "mediocre" is being generous. It's insane that they had 2 top 5 picks in the draft, plus guys who have since transferred to Washington, Georgetown and Dayton ... and they went 9-17 in non-Q4 games.

not saying this was case, but sometimes coaching matters.

 

[spiderman]

not saying this was case, but sometimes coaching matters.

I mean I don't know who their coach is but if I'm a booster who paid whatever it took to land 2 top 5 drafted guys? the results weren't worth it.

or like Pitino (?) said ... you can't win anymore with freshmen.
well unless they're Flagg and Knueppel.

 

[spiderstudent17]

plugging in 4 upperclass transfers isn't good long term for the program, but it sure helps in the short term. it's just tough on the freshmen who would normally get early time.

I'd love to bring in freshmen so good that they're better than juniors and seniors. but if you do, it suggests you missed when recruiting the guys who are now juniors and seniors. maybe we did, maybe not. maybe AP and Tanner will make the jump.

It can be a short-term solution every now and then. This seems to be the norm we’ve gotten ourselves into. Again, I have no problem with transfers. In fact, I’ve repeatedly said it’s how the new era of college transfers work and I would love to get impact transfers every year, which we can definitely due if we’re smart about how we allocate our NIL/house settlement money. However, we can’t rely solely on transfers as a model of success. We need high school recruits who have an impact all 4 years here to be at the core and then ideally plug in transfers every year where there is a role we need.

To have some stability in a program you need to have high school recruits who are good as freshmen and sophomores. That way we as fans and our coaches can say with confidence we’ll be good the next 2-3 years and can build around these guys with transfers. If we repeatedly can’t bring in At least 1 freshmen every recruiting cycle who can make their way into the rotation, that is a problem. Right now, we’re playing transfer roulette and bringing in a bunch of mostly graduate players and hope they gel/are good enough for the A10 in their 1 year here. Not everyone is going to be a Jordan King. Plus, this lends more credence to scheduling weak every year, since we will have a lot of unknown players. It’s just all around not a good situation for our program to be in.

 

[VT4700]

I'd say "mediocre" is being generous. It's insane that they had 2 top 5 picks in the draft, plus guys who have since transferred to Washington, Georgetown and Dayton ... and they went 9-17 in non-Q4 games.

Isn't that exactly what mediocre in hoops is? 77 NET, 4-13 Q1, 3-2 Q2, 2-2 Q3, and 6-0 Q4. That is mediocre, and, while they were not above average and they missed the dance, it is definitely not generous to call them that.

Also, don't forget the draft is always based on potential. These guys weren't 2 of the top 5 players in college last year. Far from it.

 

[VT4700]

I mean I don't know who their coach is but if I'm a booster who paid whatever it took to land 2 top 5 drafted guys? the results weren't worth it.

or like Pitino (?) said ... you can't win anymore with freshmen.
well unless they're Flagg and Knueppel.

And, Flagg and Knueppel had much better talent around them.

 

[Eight Legger]

It can be a short-term solution every now and then. This seems to be the norm we’ve gotten ourselves into. Again, I have no problem with transfers. In fact, I’ve repeatedly said it’s how the new era of college transfers work and I would love to get impact transfers every year, which we can definitely due if we’re smart about how we allocate our NIL/house settlement money. However, we can’t rely solely on transfers as a model of success. We need high school recruits who have an impact all 4 years here to be at the core and then ideally plug in transfers every year where there is a role we need.

To have some stability in a program you need to have high school recruits who are good as freshmen and sophomores. That way we as fans and our coaches can say with confidence we’ll be good the next 2-3 years and can build around these guys with transfers. If we repeatedly can’t bring in At least 1 freshmen every recruiting cycle who can make their way into the rotation, that is a problem. Right now, we’re playing transfer roulette and bringing in a bunch of mostly graduate players and hope they gel/are good enough for the A10 in their 1 year here. Not everyone is going to be a Jordan King. Plus, this lends more credence to scheduling weak every year, since we will have a lot of unknown players. It’s just all around not a good situation for our program to be in.

I don't think we can recruit HS players with the expectation that they will stay for four years. Those days are over. The best you can expect is 2 years for good players. You can hope for more, but relying upon more will leave you playing catch-up when they transfer out.

 

[kneepadmckinney]

My money is on Donnie Richardson being the freshman that forces himself into PT.

 

[spiderstudent17]

I don't think we can recruit HS players with the expectation that they will stay for four years. Those days are over. The best you can expect is 2 years for good players. You can hope for more, but relying upon more will leave you playing catch-up when they transfer out.

Between the two, I’d rather be in the situation where we have really good players leaving after 2 years than not so good players who don’t make an impact the first couple of years and we hope they develop by junior/senior year, which is what we have now.

 

[GKiller]

I don't think we can recruit HS players with the expectation that they will stay for four years. Those days are over. The best you can expect is 2 years for good players. You can hope for more, but relying upon more will leave you playing catch-up when they transfer out.

Mooney doesn't believe you. He's basically said he's relying on the pendulum swinging back to not just 4 year guys, but 5 year guys. 5 year is what we're doing with all the freshman redshirting. Tho redshirting may not matter soon anyway if they go to 5 years outright. Or look at Marcus Randolph. Have they ruled on his waiver yet? Lasalle seems to be expecting he can play. So at very least burn the shirt and play a little, u will still get the 5th.

 

[GKiller]

My money is on Donnie Richardson being the freshman that forces himself into PT.

Just curious, is that because he's getting the most visibility from Richmond bball social media or something else?

 

[spiderstudent17]

Not sure where to put this and not worthy of a new thread in my opinion, but Richmond finishes 117th in D1 Director’s Cup.