Probably the worst of the year

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
14,101
7,686
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
Same reason. There aren't that many versatile, talented 6'8, 6'9 guys out there. But, I hear you. I want to get as many solid players as possible. I wanted Reed too, but I have been pretty happy with our recruiting the last several years.
You can't have every side of every argument. There are these guys out there, but we have not landed them, or come close to developing them. Case in point, the guy at VMI last year, Stephens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8legs1dream

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
14,101
7,686
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
AND we had Justin Harper!!!!! If you can't sell that to guys, I don't know what you can! Lightly recruited by p5 (Providence, not current Providence level, offer) developed into NBA top of 2nd round pick!! Good job! BUT effing use that to get the next guy, Blew it moon. I know 47 I know, it just cannot be done. no way.
 

GKiller

Head Coach
Jun 3, 2003
8,771
4,512
113
To me our lineup with the best balance of Off Def athleticism & shooting is Goose/Roche/Burton/Bigs/Grace. I don't think we've seen it because of Grace injury and Nelson getting most of the mins at PG. But if Grace fully back and Nelson sees some level of decreased mins like the last couple games, hopeful there is more opportunity bc right now that's our best lineup. Nelson I see as integral player for 4 years but that doesn't change w ~25 mins of pt as he ramps up. Obviously there will be many combinations, I'd like to see a pressing lineup and run when we can too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

mr.spider

Star
Nov 18, 2003
1,032
384
83
I will say this. I don't like taking the air out of the ball with 3-4 minutes left. With the 3 point shot, a team can turn a 6 point deficit into a tie in less than a minute. I don't want Nelson out there dribbling for 20 seconds. I don't think the coaches do either. Now, maybe you don't want to chuck up a 3 with 25 on the clock when leading late, but keep running the offense, and if we can get a good look for our guys with 15 on the clock up 6 with 3 minutes left, let's do that. I hear on here how Mooney always has his guards dribble the clock down, but I don't think we saw that a lot with Jacob. He would dribble off some time, but then get us in our offense, and we could get it to Grant at the key, or get it to Cayo when we had to. So, I agree we have seen it a few times this year, and my thinking is it is more an issue because of the new guys instead of being a strategy issue. But, whatever it is, I agree we don't want to keep seeing it.
Hold on, guys. We can't let this pass. Slight almost acknowledgement by Mooney's biggest supporter that running down the clock with a small lead might not be the best strategy. But please, you can't tell me it's not by design if you watched Mooney coach at all over the years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8legs1dream

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
You can't have every side of every argument. There are these guys out there, but we have not landed them, or come close to developing them. Case in point, the guy at VMI last year, Stephens.
Yes, at VMI. So, if you get on us for not getting Stephens, shouldn't you also get on 200+ other programs?
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
AND we had Justin Harper!!!!! If you can't sell that to guys, I don't know what you can! Lightly recruited by p5 (Providence, not current Providence level, offer) developed into NBA top of 2nd round pick!! Good job! BUT effing use that to get the next guy, Blew it moon. I know 47 I know, it just cannot be done. no way.
I didn't say it can't be done. i said it is a lot harder than you think. I didn't realize Justin Harper types were on all these non power teams out there.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
Hold on, guys. We can't let this pass. Slight almost acknowledgement by Mooney's biggest supporter that running down the clock with a small lead might not be the best strategy. But please, you can't tell me it's not by design if you watched Mooney coach at all over the years.
you absolutely want to reduce the number of possessions both teams get in the last 4 minutes if you have a lead. it's much tougher to make up a 6 point differential in 5 possessions than it is in 10.
but we've never held the ball to this extent and then not gotten a decent shot up. run the offense but be selective in the shots we take especially early in the count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

brooklyn brownstone

Team Manager
Oct 31, 2007
2,655
535
113
Or roche isn’t one of the best players on the team like he was at the CITADEL so he’s getting less shots? This offense is great for Roche, maybe if we had a bit more play making to get him more looks, it might help.
But this team averaged the same amount of assists as turnovers and that’s CM’s fault. He should tell them every single pass to make and tell them when the other guy isn’t open! LMAO
Nice straw man argument. Keep the pom poms out and cheer for your guy/relative.

Nowhere on my post did I say Roche was one of the best players on the team. I did mention that he appears to be a great shooter and I want more looks for him bc the offense is not generating good looks at large, and not enough to utilize one of its main offensive weapons. Because regardless who is considered best/one of the best/etc. players on team 45% from 3 is hugely beneficial to an offense. Any offense. 45% 3 point shooters should get minimum 6+ shots from deep per game. A Roche 3 is one of the best results we can ask from the offense on an efg% basis on any possession, To not give him more shots at that rate because "he's not one of the best on the team" overall is high-level insanity if he maintains that rate.

Sdad - nowhere did I mention that the A10 is not a good step up from Southern Conf. Another straw man fallacy POM created. Everyone knows A10 is better, not even an argument.

sman - is your argument that the offense works, but not with these players? Because that is essentially what my argument is, that it is not maximizing the talents of our players on this season's team, especially at beginning and end of games. I'm trying to parse what your argument is. At what point does the offense officially not work this season, even if historically it has worked?
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Hold on, guys. We can't let this pass. Slight almost acknowledgement by Mooney's biggest supporter that running down the clock with a small lead might not be the best strategy. But please, you can't tell me it's not by design if you watched Mooney coach at all over the years.
I don't expect to always 100% agree with coaches. I can still think the coach is a good coach, and it doesn't mean I want them fired if I sometimes disagree. I have always felt Mooney fouled too early when up 3 late. Maybe it's okay inside of 5 seconds, but I have noticed fouls by us with 8 or 9 seconds left. I'm not sure if it has cost us, but I think that puts too much pressure on us to make FTs with 6 or 7 seconds left if the other team makes their 2 with 8 or 9.
 

SpiderDad75

Star
Gold Member
May 12, 2020
1,094
2,602
113
Nice straw man argument. Keep the pom poms out and cheer for your guy/relative.

Nowhere on my post did I say Roche was one of the best players on the team. I did mention that he appears to be a great shooter and I want more looks for him bc the offense is not generating good looks at large, and not enough to utilize one of its main offensive weapons. Because regardless who is considered best/one of the best/etc. players on team 45% from 3 is hugely beneficial to an offense. Any offense. 45% 3 point shooters should get minimum 6+ shots from deep per game. A Roche 3 is one of the best results we can ask from the offense on an efg% basis on any possession, To not give him more shots at that rate because "he's not one of the best on the team" overall is high-level insanity if he maintains that rate.

Sdad - nowhere did I mention that the A10 is not a good step up from Southern Conf. Another straw man fallacy POM created. Everyone knows A10 is better, not even an argument.

sman - is your argument that the offense works, but not with these players? Because that is essentially what my argument is, that it is not maximizing the talents of our players on this season's team, especially at beginning and end of games. I'm trying to parse what your argument is. At what point does the offense officially not work this season, even if historically it has worked?
My apologies, you're right and I missed POM posing it as a question...so thats my mistake.
 

8legs1dream

Team Manager
I don't expect to always 100% agree with coaches. I can still think the coach is a good coach, and it doesn't mean I want them fired if I sometimes disagree. I have always felt Mooney fouled too early when up 3 late. Maybe it's okay inside of 5 seconds, but I have noticed fouls by us with 8 or 9 seconds left. I'm not sure if it has cost us, but I think that puts too much pressure on us to make FTs with 6 or 7 seconds left if the other team makes their 2 with 8 or 9.

This might be the single most hilarious thing you have ever posted in here 😂

a) you do always 100% agree with one coach that I know of
b) THAT is your one fault you can come up with for Moonie? That one? REALLY? 🤣🤣🤣
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spider B

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
sman - is your argument that the offense works, but not with these players? Because that is essentially what my argument is, that it is not maximizing the talents of our players on this season's team, especially at beginning and end of games. I'm trying to parse what your argument is. At what point does the offense officially not work this season, even if historically it has worked?
I believe this offensive system works really when run properly. I know some think it's too perimeter based, but that's the game today.

it's not working well right now with all our new pieces. it may take longer than we like to get it running proficiently but once we get it I know it works. the talent on the roster can certainly handle the offense.

this isn't travel ball where you scrap an offense and put in a new one during Sunday practice after a Saturday night loss. you keep working at it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700

brooklyn brownstone

Team Manager
Oct 31, 2007
2,655
535
113
ok, maybe I need my questions to be more direct. If I have it correct, you say the offense works well when run properly, but also we're not shooting well which is the reason it looks bad now. My question is: with a quarter of the season gone, when do you adjust if you realize you have a team where the outside shooters are inconsistent and you're not generating lots of high % looks from bigs at the rim?

Are you advocating we just continue to run the same sets, same personnel and hope we miraculously begin to outperform the baseline of our FG% running the offense? How long are you going to wait? That's one of my arguments - and what many feel Moon lacks - the ability to adapt (not scrap, adapt) to suit team strengths. The rigidity of decisions is often confounding.

My main argument is simple - get Roche more looks from 3 any way possible. The EFG% on those shots is like 65% - it's the best look in the UR offense right now.

My 2nd argument is generate better looks for Quinn and others and loosen strings to allow other guys better looks too, in transition or otherwise because they aren't getting good looks within the offense IMO.

And yes, I do expect a tenured coach like the one UR has to make changes that effect positive results.
 

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
14,101
7,686
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
Yes, at VMI. So, if you get on us for not getting Stephens, shouldn't you also get on 200+ other programs?
YOU are missing the POINT. This just shows the guys are out there. And we are supposedly a program under Mooney that wants 5 guys on the floor that can handle and shoot, so that should be easy to sell for a shooting big man, but it is not for Mooney. Yes, out of 370 D1 programs I expect us to be MUCH better than 200+. But keep lowering away.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
YOU are missing the POINT. This just shows the guys are out there. And we are supposedly a program under Mooney that wants 5 guys on the floor that can handle and shoot, so that should be easy to sell for a shooting big man, but it is not for Mooney. Yes, out of 370 D1 programs I expect us to be MUCH better than 200+. But keep lowering away.
I was talking about the top 200+ teams that did not land Stephens. I wasn't lowering anything.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
ok, maybe I need my questions to be more direct. If I have it correct, you say the offense works well when run properly, but also we're not shooting well which is the reason it looks bad now. My question is: with a quarter of the season gone, when do you adjust if you realize you have a team where the outside shooters are inconsistent and you're not generating lots of high % looks from bigs at the rim?

Are you advocating we just continue to run the same sets, same personnel and hope we miraculously begin to outperform the baseline of our FG% running the offense? How long are you going to wait? That's one of my arguments - and what many feel Moon lacks - the ability to adapt (not scrap, adapt) to suit team strengths. The rigidity of decisions is often confounding.

My main argument is simple - get Roche more looks from 3 any way possible. The EFG% on those shots is like 65% - it's the best look in the UR offense right now.

My 2nd argument is generate better looks for Quinn and others and loosen strings to allow other guys better looks too, in transition or otherwise because they aren't getting good looks within the offense IMO.

And yes, I do expect a tenured coach like the one UR has to make changes that effect positive results.
we're not shooting well, we're not moving well, and we're not passing well. not sure we've hit a back cut all season. and I don't believe defenses suddenly learned to stop it. either we're not cutting hard enough to get open or we're not making the pass.

I want Roche to get more shots too. he has to get free and guys have to try to find him. I think we can do that in the offense. we got Sherod looks and he was substantially slower than Roche.

I know it's not what you want to hear but I think the offense is a process and if we stay with it the players will become proficient in it.
 

urmite

Spider's Club
Gold Member
Dec 2, 2004
10,206
3,281
113
you absolutely want to reduce the number of possessions both teams get in the last 4 minutes if you have a lead. it's much tougher to make up a 6 point differential in 5 possessions than it is in 10.
but we've never held the ball to this extent and then not gotten a decent shot up. run the offense but be selective in the shots we take especially early in the count.
I agree it is easier to make up 6 points in 10 possessions than in 5.

But I would rather we score on 5 of our possessions and give the opponent 8 possession or
even score on 6 of our possessions and give the opponent 10 possession than
give the opponent 5 possessions and never shoot on any of our 5, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg and urfan1

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
I agree it is easier to make up 6 points in 10 possessions than in 5.

But I would rather we score on 5 of our possessions and give the opponent 8 possession or
even score on 6 of our possessions and give the opponent 10 possession than
give the opponent 5 possessions and never shoot on any of our 5, lol.
agreed. what we're doing at the end isn't working.
can't run it through Quinn. can't just ask Nelson to do it himself. I don't think isolating Burton is the answer. so run the offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whampas

MrTbone

Head Coach
Apr 27, 2005
7,819
5,630
113
This might be the single most hilarious thing you have ever posted in here 😂

a) you do always 100% agree with one coach that I know of
b) THAT is your one fault you can come up with for Moonie? That one? REALLY? 🤣🤣🤣
You guys need to settle down, VT was making a rational concession on a point we most all agree with. No need to pile on.
 

SpiderGuy

Team Manager
Oct 13, 2014
2,036
1,735
113
We're 3-5 after losing 4 games we gave away. We have no chance at an at-large bid, and it's Dec. 7. I'm not sure when we should start to panic if not now.
Accurate.

I’ll take realism over optimism all day long. Staying grounded in reality prevents chasing the pot of gold at end of rainbow and hoping for unicorns. We r who we r; not who we’d like to be. Somehow that gets lost in our quest every year and in conversations yearly about “this year NCAA tourney”.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Accurate.

I’ll take realism over optimism all day long. Staying grounded in reality prevents chasing the pot of gold at end of rainbow and hoping for unicorns. We r who we r; not who we’d like to be. Somehow that gets lost in our quest every year and in conversations yearly about “this year NCAA tourney”.
This is a really strange post. Did you dig it up from 3 years ago, or is it really from tonight, only 9 months after what we did last March, and only a few years after we went 24-7? "Gets lost in our quest every year". Really? EVERY year? LOL. Okay.
 

Spiders4ever

Starter
Aug 2, 2019
851
780
93
This is a really strange post. Did you dig it up from 3 years ago, or is it really from tonight, only 9 months after what we did last March, and only a few years after we went 24-7? "Gets lost in our quest every year". Really? EVERY year? LOL. Okay.
24-7
 

urmite

Spider's Club
Gold Member
Dec 2, 2004
10,206
3,281
113
Yep. Pretty special year, wasn't it? We have never won more regular season games in the history of our program.
I do agree it was special. But I do prefer fewest losses to most wins when comparing unequal totals. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t a great year…
 
Last edited:

bullfrog91

Assistant Coach
Gold Member
Dec 14, 2008
544
373
63
LOL. Yes, it is up to the coach. I am glad he is our coach. People I talk with, most of who know the game of basketball, think we would be crazy to let Mooney go. I agree with them. It is the same debate every year. You guys say we win games because of our players and lose games because of our coach. As a result, our coach will always get 100% of the blame and 0% of the credit. That hasn't changed for years, and will never change as long as a guy you all hate with a passion remains our coach.
See Jerry wainwright post a few pages back...
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Aberration. 55/45 for 17+ years and currently trending down.
65-34 (65.6%) the past 3+ years. Isn't that what several recent posts were asking for? 65%? So, the past 3+ years, you have your 65%. But, 24-7 and and A-10 title and a 1st round win over Iowa is not good enough because you want to go farther and farther back in history, getting more and more irrelevant in the process, to make your point.
 

Eight Legger

Spider's Club
May 27, 2003
18,235
14,448
113
So far this year, 37%. This was/is such an important year because to become a PROGRAM we need to string multiple really good years together back to back. We haven’t done that in a long time. All the momentum of last year disappears if we go 15-18 or something this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg and whampas

POMSpidur

Rookie
May 26, 2022
187
81
28
Yeah, he's only shooting about 45% from three so far this year, clearly he's terrible. 🙄
I never once said he’s shooting bad or playing bad…
Yeah, I don't think he's our best player but I would say he's one of the best, which POM doesn't agree with. I just think when you have a guy who is making almost every other three that he takes, you find a way to get him shots. The irony is that I thought our offense was designed to get shooters good looks, so I don't know what's going on.
When you watch does it look like the offense mooney usually runs? Or does it look like some guys are confused out there? Not as smooth when you lose all your play makers…
 

POMSpidur

Rookie
May 26, 2022
187
81
28
AND we had Justin Harper!!!!! If you can't sell that to guys, I don't know what you can! Lightly recruited by p5 (Providence, not current Providence level, offer) developed into NBA top of 2nd round pick!! Good job! BUT effing use that to get the next guy, Blew it moon. I know 47 I know, it just cannot be done. no way.
Sell the guy playing in Japan who had 1 good college season. Over a decade ago… yeah Goodluck moon.
 

POMSpidur

Rookie
May 26, 2022
187
81
28
ok, maybe I need my questions to be more direct. If I have it correct, you say the offense works well when run properly, but also we're not shooting well which is the reason it looks bad now. My question is: with a quarter of the season gone, when do you adjust if you realize you have a team where the outside shooters are inconsistent and you're not generating lots of high % looks from bigs at the rim?

Are you advocating we just continue to run the same sets, same personnel and hope we miraculously begin to outperform the baseline of our FG% running the offense? How long are you going to wait? That's one of my arguments - and what many feel Moon lacks - the ability to adapt (not scrap, adapt) to suit team strengths. The rigidity of decisions is often confounding.

My main argument is simple - get Roche more looks from 3 any way possible. The EFG% on those shots is like 65% - it's the best look in the UR offense right now.

My 2nd argument is generate better looks for Quinn and others and loosen strings to allow other guys better looks too, in transition or otherwise because they aren't getting good looks within the offense IMO.

And yes, I do expect a tenured coach like the one UR has to make changes that effect positive results.
This team is not talented enough to NOT run the usual Richmond/Mooney/Princeton offense. The offense is designed to get easy shots and easy looks. There’s not enough guys to create for themselves or others. In the past UR has always had a good PG and a good 5 in order to be successful and those two are crucial and struggling. Them struggling and not making plays, is making the team struggle. Defense needs to be this teams calling card which it has been in every single one of the wins.
 

urfan1

Moderator
Moderator
Jan 9, 2003
18,153
4,269
113
When you watch does it look like the offense mooney usually runs? Or does it look like some guys are confused out there? Not as smooth when you lose all your play makers…
I don't believe we have had fluid offense yet this year We don't have the same cuts, nor ball movement.
 

I-M-UR

Graduate Assistant
Mar 10, 2006
5,476
1,975
113
If dribbling away time wasn’t the plan why did Mooney let it happen over and over. Mooney relied on Anderson or Gilyard to make a play with 10 seconds left. Nelson can’t do that, he’s neither quick enough nor can he leap enough to create a shot. (Or draw a foul). Mooney has relied on his point guards to bail out his inability to coach under pressure for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8legs1dream

MrTbone

Head Coach
Apr 27, 2005
7,819
5,630
113
Not my point, he should have struck while the iron was hot. Harp was in the league for a couple years. We have not had a 4 or 5 that could shoot 3's in quite some time.
Terry Allen was a decent shooting 4, but other than him, there has been no one to fill that type. Thought Sal could maybe be that guy but didn’t pan out.

These guys are out there, and they don’t all go to power programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger

RichmondNative

Starter
Dec 16, 2018
949
1,073
93
When you watch does it look like the offense mooney usually runs? Or does it look like some guys are confused out there? Not as smooth when you lose all your play makers…
It looks the same in terms of the pass around the perimeter part, but definitely not the cutting and passing part. You are obviously saying this is the players fault because the “system” is fine. Apparently you have forgotten the coach is responsible for developing the players and recruiting. The facts are Mooney relied on his star players (that he got to keep an extra year) last year so there was no development at the key spots you mention PLUS there were misses at the 4/5 in terms of recruiting.

I know I am going to hear how can you take Gilly out of the game etc, but the point is Mooney doesn’t have a process where his teams reload year after year. He is a build a team over a four year period type of coach. His system relies on upperclassmen that have been in the program multiple years and have game experience. This is why he rarely leveraged transfers. The Covid year was a blessing for Mooney and its effects will be over very soon. He is going to have to adapt because he is not going to be able to slowly develop players (at least not in the A10).

….to become a PROGRAM we need to string multiple really good years together back to back.
As I said above, I don’t think this is possible with Mooney. His system is a once every 4 years type to me. He has to land his type of player, go through a 2 year development cycle and then reap the rewards for 2 years. Hopefully in at least one of the last 2 years the team is able to make the dance and win a game. Once every 4 years is the ceiling and everyone knows what the floor is. As VT4700 keeps pointing out we have just seen the glory years. Unfortunately, now we have to experience the barren development years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mo 2.0 and whampas

Latest posts