Sal updates
- Thread starter Ulla1
- Start date
For once, I agree with our stat analysis. Not saying Gilyard is not a good player, but reason he is putting up these stats is because there are very few rookies who are going to average 35 minutes per game and be a focal point of our offense.
He's being as effective with his minutes as Anderson was his freshman campaign (given the higher # of assists and steals with lower number of TO's, I'd actually argue he's more effective at this point in his career). He's not in consideration because he's logging the time - he's in consideration because he's a very talented player.
He's talented for sure, but Anderson's numbers on a way better team are far more impressive than any numbers Gilyard puts up on this team. It's not just minutes, Gilyard gets lots more opportunity within the minutes too. Here's the example, Michael Carter-Williams was NBA rookie of the year playing on a putrid 76ers team. He played plenty on minutes and he was arguably the best player on that god awful team that started the "Process". That team played fast and there were 100+ points and 20+ assists and 5+ steals etc. etc. to go around every night even as they got blown out regularly and as a result of being the one eyed squirrel in the land of the blind, MCW got lots of numbers because someone had to and . . . as a result of the numbers. . . rookie of the year. Sixers realized watching him that numbers were better than the player and he became the first ever reigning rookie of the year traded away. Since then he has been a deep bench journeyman. He wasn't a player just cause he was putting up numbers as a rookie and his numbers could have been compared favorably to many many great players rookie numbers (even one who got 30+ minutes like him).
Now, I DON'T think Gilyard is going to flame out a la MCW, and as bad as we are, we aren't anywhere near as bad as that Sixers group (relatively speaking) and the other guys on the floor are far better than MCW's Sixers teammates etc. But, looking at the numbers and reading much of anything into them given the circumstances isn't going to be very persuasive to me. It's better to me to say you have been watching him and you like what you see because he can do this and that really well etc. and point to skills, abilities, attributes he has etc. and not just say he's gonna be great because his freshman numbers compare favorably to someone else who did in fact turn out great.
All that said, I do believe JG will turn out to be a worthy heir to our "little PG" tradition. Where he might end up overall probably depends on how bad we are for his years here. In the end, if he plays all 4 years on bad teams and puts up the best numbers, but we stink, no way he can get past KA (or probably even KO) on my list.
Is this what you saw?
https://247sports.com/Recruitment/Souleymane-Koureissi-98666/RecruitInterests
Offers by - Seton Hall, Minnesota, USF, URI, SBU, SLU, UMass, GW, and Duquesne? out of 22
Add that to Senior Stats and their is a fighting chance that he will fit in.
Gilyard has played well all year but to me even with the stat similarity, he was not bringing the same "it" factor as Kevin Anderson. Again, keep in consideration that KA was a generational player whose name and number are now retired. Which is why, I don't think the comparison should be made. Folks were talking about Buck last year in a similar vein, Buck is a really good player as well, he is not and won't be a KA level player.
However, last night Gilyard had the "it" factor. He controlled that game from start to finish. We don't win yesterday without Grant's big game and also Nick and Buck had really good games. But as I watched the game, Gilyard had the "magic" that brought it all together. Just an outstanding performance by him last night, both ends of the court The "it" factor is not about stats, it is about having big time games in the biggest of games and making big time plays in critical junctures of games. Gilyard came up spades in all of that last night.
His play from a traditional point guard stood out to me also. His stats so far are better than KA's were his freshman year and that team wasn't that good going 16-15 and 9-7 in conference play. Probably won't ever be the scorer that was KA. Though from an assist/turnover ability, JG is already his equal if not ahead of KA, and only going to get better. JG has a basketball court sense that can't be taught.
The comparison above, of Jake to Michael Carter-Williams, with the 76ers, is an interesting one. However, I believe that was a case of the voters ignoring some obvious "holes" in MC-W's game AND STATS. If you care to, go back and look at MCW's shooting percentage and 3-point shooting percentage and FT%. And, throw in his turnovers, for good measure. MCW was a terrible shooter, even in his rookie year, and has never been that great of a ball-handler. His bad shooting just showed up as a bigger factor when he was traded to a better team.
In dire contrast, Jake does not have any holes in his game, with the possible exception of a stat that is seldom tracked (number of his shots that have been blocked). Jake's FT% is the the best on our team, or should be. His 3-point shooting and range are definitely in our top 3, and I would argue that he would beat even Nick in a game of "horse, " including shots from 30-feet. At least the outcome (and closeness) of this head-to-head competition would surprise most on this board.
More importantly, Jake's assist to turnover ratio is the best on our team by a mile, and likely better than Kevin or Kendall's in their freshman (or any) year. Jake is going to be a far better contributor, over the course of his career, than Kendall, in my view, largely because he fills the stat sheets, and Kendall was mostly a shooter. If anybody cares to do the research, I would bet that Jake has the highest rebound numbers for guards under 6 foot on our squads, and Jake is WAY under six feet. He just has a great "nose" for the ball, and will likely get as many rebounds this year as Kendall did in 2-3 (maybe 4) years. To compare Jake to MC-W, in any way is way off-base, in my view, since Jake will likely see his stats (especially his assists) improve as the team learns to play better together. He had 8 assists in the VCU game, and I believe his assist numbers will continue to increase. And, when it comes to steals, FORGET about it! Jake is an outstanding "box-score-stuffer," in terms of not only shooting but the more important categories like rebounds, assists, and steals.
In dire contrast, Jake does not have any holes in his game, with the possible exception of a stat that is seldom tracked (number of his shots that have been blocked). Jake's FT% is the the best on our team, or should be. His 3-point shooting and range are definitely in our top 3, and I would argue that he would beat even Nick in a game of "horse, " including shots from 30-feet. At least the outcome (and closeness) of this head-to-head competition would surprise most on this board.
More importantly, Jake's assist to turnover ratio is the best on our team by a mile, and likely better than Kevin or Kendall's in their freshman (or any) year. Jake is going to be a far better contributor, over the course of his career, than Kendall, in my view, largely because he fills the stat sheets, and Kendall was mostly a shooter. If anybody cares to do the research, I would bet that Jake has the highest rebound numbers for guards under 6 foot on our squads, and Jake is WAY under six feet. He just has a great "nose" for the ball, and will likely get as many rebounds this year as Kendall did in 2-3 (maybe 4) years. To compare Jake to MC-W, in any way is way off-base, in my view, since Jake will likely see his stats (especially his assists) improve as the team learns to play better together. He had 8 assists in the VCU game, and I believe his assist numbers will continue to increase. And, when it comes to steals, FORGET about it! Jake is an outstanding "box-score-stuffer," in terms of not only shooting but the more important categories like rebounds, assists, and steals.
Getting back on the topic of this thread (Sal)....
UR Mite, Thanks for the list of offers for Sal. I had not realized that we had managed to beat out a very formidable list of competitors for Sal's LOI.
Probably more impressive than the list of suitors is the fact that Sal's senior numbers have close to doubled, and have been very impressive. He averaged about 10-points per game as a highly-sought junior, but is now likely averaging 18-20 points per game. If anyone has access to his senior-year stats, I would love to see them. Of greatest interest would be his FT% and his 3-point%, followed by his rebounding and block numbers. I could easily see Sal come in and make it into our next-year rotation, depending on how much he continues to develop and how much weight and muscle he can put on. It would be nice to see him also make the A-10 all-rookie team. Anybody have the senior stats (any of them), so far, for Sal?
UR Mite, Thanks for the list of offers for Sal. I had not realized that we had managed to beat out a very formidable list of competitors for Sal's LOI.
Probably more impressive than the list of suitors is the fact that Sal's senior numbers have close to doubled, and have been very impressive. He averaged about 10-points per game as a highly-sought junior, but is now likely averaging 18-20 points per game. If anyone has access to his senior-year stats, I would love to see them. Of greatest interest would be his FT% and his 3-point%, followed by his rebounding and block numbers. I could easily see Sal come in and make it into our next-year rotation, depending on how much he continues to develop and how much weight and muscle he can put on. It would be nice to see him also make the A-10 all-rookie team. Anybody have the senior stats (any of them), so far, for Sal?
It is past time for more updates on Sal. All I could find is that Iona Prep is ranked #7 overall in the State of NY, and is currently sporting a 14-4 record. Sounds like a very good team. Also they are the top team in their size and in Catholic schools as well (#1). When I click on their "box-scores" i get absolutely nothing.
Does anyone have a good link that gives actual statistics or box-scores, or does anyone have updates on how Sal has been playing. Given that we just may have continuity in our coaching staff over the next year, the odds of Sal playing in the RC are probably pretty good. And, it would be nice to know how his senior year is going.. Ulla?
Does anyone have a good link that gives actual statistics or box-scores, or does anyone have updates on how Sal has been playing. Given that we just may have continuity in our coaching staff over the next year, the odds of Sal playing in the RC are probably pretty good. And, it would be nice to know how his senior year is going.. Ulla?
Oldie, it's been mentioned several times...his basketball team has a very active Twitter account. They retweet a lot of people that cover their games as well, which provides additional insight into the games. They're playing tonight at 7:30.
+1 Spider 2020. Thanks for your patience and for re-posting the twitter link. For those who may not want to scroll through the entire twitter log, here are a few highlights:
1. Our new commit, may go by "Sal," "Sol," or "Soul." Just depends on the source. I believe someone on here said that Sal is the most correct choice for name.
2. Sal's team, Iona Prep beat the #1 ranked HS team in NYC on January 15th, by 64-56. The team is in the top 8 for the State.
3. Sal's numbers have dipped just a bit, so that he is not as often cited as the #1 or #2 scorer over the last 21 days. He has had games where he scored 10 (Jan 9), 11 (Jan 11), 11, (Jan 19), and 8 (Jan 25). During this time he has stepped back a bit as a scorer, but his team continues to win (15-4 overall) and is rated highly.
4. There is some good video in the twitter feed, and the best may be at January 21st, where he is shown with a very nice blocked shot, a nice rebound and follow, and a nice inside move for a lay-up. Reminded me a little bit of Grant on the inside move, with the quick dribble and step. Gotta love it!
Am guessing that Sal was averaging about 18 points and 6 boards prior to January 5th, and has probably dropped back to about 14 points and 5 boards (overall) since then. However, I have not seen any season stats on him and am basing these numbers strictly on the summary posts by twitter users on the link above. In any case, am definitely looking forward to seeing Sal at the RC, and hope he can put on some weight and muscle over the next 6 months. Reminds me of Nate too, and could give us more front-court depth, if he puts on some muscle and is seen by the coaches as a 4 or 5 (which will probably not be the case at about 180 pounds). I see him as a future 4 or 3, depending on weight-room work.
1. Our new commit, may go by "Sal," "Sol," or "Soul." Just depends on the source. I believe someone on here said that Sal is the most correct choice for name.
2. Sal's team, Iona Prep beat the #1 ranked HS team in NYC on January 15th, by 64-56. The team is in the top 8 for the State.
3. Sal's numbers have dipped just a bit, so that he is not as often cited as the #1 or #2 scorer over the last 21 days. He has had games where he scored 10 (Jan 9), 11 (Jan 11), 11, (Jan 19), and 8 (Jan 25). During this time he has stepped back a bit as a scorer, but his team continues to win (15-4 overall) and is rated highly.
4. There is some good video in the twitter feed, and the best may be at January 21st, where he is shown with a very nice blocked shot, a nice rebound and follow, and a nice inside move for a lay-up. Reminded me a little bit of Grant on the inside move, with the quick dribble and step. Gotta love it!
Am guessing that Sal was averaging about 18 points and 6 boards prior to January 5th, and has probably dropped back to about 14 points and 5 boards (overall) since then. However, I have not seen any season stats on him and am basing these numbers strictly on the summary posts by twitter users on the link above. In any case, am definitely looking forward to seeing Sal at the RC, and hope he can put on some weight and muscle over the next 6 months. Reminds me of Nate too, and could give us more front-court depth, if he puts on some muscle and is seen by the coaches as a 4 or 5 (which will probably not be the case at about 180 pounds). I see him as a future 4 or 3, depending on weight-room work.
I have a feeling that he will surprise you and become tonic we need.....C'mon man, he hasn't even gotten here yet....I guess you were all world.
I've seen way too many guys who had so much hype surrounding them come in here and do absolutely nothing. This guy has that written all over him.
You have to give the guy a chance first....He will come here with a chip on his shoulder with his eyes on you, lol.
He will be another recruiting miss by Mooney. Probably similar to some of the big men he has brought here that ended up transferring to D2 and weren't even good there.
you're a drag, VT.
you want us to lose to prove you're right about Mooney.
now you want his recruits to fail to prove you're right about Mooney.
give the kid a chance.
you want us to lose to prove you're right about Mooney.
now you want his recruits to fail to prove you're right about Mooney.
give the kid a chance.
Dude look at the list of recruiting misses he has had since he's been here, it's unbelievably long. I don't know what he sees in some of those guys? Like is he just a bad talent evaluator? I could evaluate talent better than him, just about anyone can.
While we are counting "hits" and "misses" the time-frame is important to consider, in a big way. To me, there has been a BIG change since the year when we brought in Buck and Nick (and Grant red-shirted). That year was awesome and this year looks equally good now that Grant and Jake have proven to be extremely capable starters for us. We have had two recent "misses" but they have both been grad transfers, and we just don't seem to play that game well at all. Kwesi was not a player, from the very start, and now it looks like JMA is a very poor fit for UR also. I suppose that we could add Solly, but I look at him differently. He had enough skills to play for us, but just decided he did not want to anymore. That was not so much a talent evaluation miss as reading the guy's character (which is a nearly impossible task).
The three guys who appear to be red-shirting this year (Bryce, Thomas V and Ford) may turn out to be solid role-players or even starters for us in a couple of years, so they can't be evaluated yet.
From a historical point of view, we have been hitting a whole lot more home-runs than strike-outs in the last 2-3 years. The home-runs include Buck, Nick, Jake and Grant. And, I believe that Nate will likely join this group if he can continue to work hard and develop on both ends of the court. Take your shots at CM's recruiting, and list all the "misses," but keep in mind that most of those were before the Buck/Nick class. We appear to be recruiting much more effectively now, minus the Grad transfers, and maybe we should just stop trying with those, since they are only here for a year, and it seems to take longer than that to learn the systems.
The three guys who appear to be red-shirting this year (Bryce, Thomas V and Ford) may turn out to be solid role-players or even starters for us in a couple of years, so they can't be evaluated yet.
From a historical point of view, we have been hitting a whole lot more home-runs than strike-outs in the last 2-3 years. The home-runs include Buck, Nick, Jake and Grant. And, I believe that Nate will likely join this group if he can continue to work hard and develop on both ends of the court. Take your shots at CM's recruiting, and list all the "misses," but keep in mind that most of those were before the Buck/Nick class. We appear to be recruiting much more effectively now, minus the Grad transfers, and maybe we should just stop trying with those, since they are only here for a year, and it seems to take longer than that to learn the systems.
I think most here would concede that recruiting has been better the last three cycles. You probably have 5 guys from those three classes that are A10 capable (by year: JJ, DB/NS/GG, JG). Khwan was a year before those, so 6 over four years if you want to look at it that way.
You have to have on average 2 players per class to compete and have sufficient depth. We are at about 1.5. If this year’s class has at least one more succcess (Cayo) then I’d agree we are on the right track. We would then need both Sal and a new player to be named to show as well.
We have to continue to improve on this front.
You have to have on average 2 players per class to compete and have sufficient depth. We are at about 1.5. If this year’s class has at least one more succcess (Cayo) then I’d agree we are on the right track. We would then need both Sal and a new player to be named to show as well.
We have to continue to improve on this front.
We are continuing to see evidence that Nate Cayo will be an "impact player" who will be a major contributor over his career. Today's Davidson game was more evidence that we no longer have to fear those times when Grant has to go out for a breather. Nate gave us quality post defense and quality offense today also, going 2/2 on his shooting. If Sal can be the kind of player that Nate is turning into (and they do have a lot in common), then we will likely be at very close to that 2.0 per year figure that you mention. That would also help our front-court depth. Within the next 5-10 games hopefully we will all continue to see that Nate may be a guy we can add to our list of "Recruiting Victories." He may not be there yet, but he is "getting closer." .
I believe 2.0 A-10 capable players per year will keep us where we are -- no depth. I see 2.5 as the minimum number. The reason is that very few players can make significant contributions in year one. They normally need that first year to assimilate into the system, leaving three productive years. Also gives us 7-8 productive players at all times, with freshmen having the time to get into the flow.
Agreed, you have to have 8 guys, so I just amortize that across all four classes. Obviously you’re lucky or desperate if any of those are in your first year class. We sadly haven’t even been close to the minimum.
We have been getting about 1 A10 level player on average for the last few years. Not good.
So you would walk up to Buck, Sherod, Golden, Gilyard, Fore, and Cayo and look them straight in the eye and tell them they can’t play in the A10? Please
All of those guys are good players except for Cayo. On average I'd say we get one solid A10 level guy every year.
A few years ago I’d agree but I think the last two recruiting cycles have been good. You have to give Cayo a chance, just like in football a lot of guys with potential make a big leap from frosh to soph year. Cayo will do that
Similar threads
