Abundance of minutes is my opinion. We've already seen he's a clutch player. How to explain the late-season, late game turnovers, where he was stumbling forward, almost falling down, when he got his pocket picked? I wanted to yell, "Keep your feet under ya, fella!"
The starting 5
- Thread starter Halldan1
- Start date
Abundance of minutes is my opinion. We've already seen he's a clutch player. How to explain the late-season, late game turnovers, where he was stumbling forward, almost falling down, when he got his pocket picked? I wanted to yell, "Keep your feet under ya, fella!"
A PG point guard ? In the Arkansas game ,there was a span for 5-6 minutes where we had a lot of turnovers ,bad passing ,etc, This was where we lost the game . My point being ,the experienced point guard (jones should have steadied the team) could have settled the team down.
Anything is a bonus. What did he play, maybe 70-80 minutes all season last year?
This problem wouldnt effect anyone but walker at the 1. And if he outperforms then the 5th year guy gets minutes cut. who cares.
The dilemma youre describing is called DEPTH. Do you want it?
Right, and if he doesn't -- the core 4 graduate, and maybe he transfers. Oops, need a point guard again.
I think the staff played it right. If Angel would have left, then they would have gotten Thorpe because our style of play would have changed and there would have been enough minutes for Walker. With Angel the team has enough quality guards. Is there some risk with KC and Walker at the point. Probably, but if we take Thorpe with Angel in the fold maybe we don't get Walker.
That's it in a nutshell. Even Willard said that during the season. Deeno just wasn't comfortable playing the point.
His play this season in my mind is the most important of any player on the team. Playing the point and knowing when and where to give up the ball is very difficult. Especially for a player who has a scorer's mentality.
Deeno is an excellent 2G. One of the best in the conference. But how he handles the point will determine if we're a good team or a VERY good one.
I know the pick and roll is a very important part of the Willard offense. Having a player like IW who was very comfortable with the ball in his hands, being a play maker, and understanding what the defense was giving him allows that pick and roll to work. If this isn't Deeno's strength is there another way the staff can come up with maximizing Deeno's strength's as a scorer but also lighten the load even if it means going away from a pick and roll offense. Something where Deeno brings the ball up the court but then ball movement really gets the ball out of his hands for most of the possession.
thats no different than what can happen currently. Youre digging to hard now. Kid is a 3 star recruit if he transfers cause he doesnt get starting minutes than hes valuing himself way too high cman. Huge stretch of a scenario.
Walker isnt even going to start and we have no other pgs. Staff had no such scenario in mind. Esp considering delgado literally left. Sone crazy talk goin on
Agree with all the points you made about KC at the point which leads to me ask if the staff recognized the problem with KC playing at the point why they didn't bring in a graduate senior or a high quality JUCO at that position and leave KC at a position he's not only comfortable in but an excellent one at that. You and others keep pointing out how many top players we're involved with in the 2018 class and I'm sure that includes a point who could come in an start as a Freshman and fill our need there going forward.
Agree you can't always worry about someone transferring, in the pursuit of improving your team. BUT, Dan specifically said they were worried about "chemistry," so maybe not so much of a stretch?
Yea i think chemistry is valid as weve seen it first hand what happens when guys dont.
BUT
Both walker and Thorpe would be first time SHU players so you could have chemistry issues with each.
I agree a 5th year senior might want to control things more and lead to chemistry issues.
Was this is the case? Was there red flags around chemistry as it related to Thorpe? If so then yea i'm fine with the decision.
I suppose he was more of the top dog on his previous teams, but his previous teams sucked. I would think any 5th year who wants to WIN to send his career out on a high note would understand his role on a team with 3 1000 pt scorers. Maybe not, but i look at Madison Jones and think hes the standard for when a 5th year point goes right.
What i really like in a 5th year vs freshman is the turnovers. Madison had a great A/TO if i'm not mistaken. PG is the one position where experience goes farthest. If you have a decent player that can keep his cool and make the right decisions your team is soooo much better, even if he doesn't score. Issue i have is that i believe KC and Walker will commit an amount of turnovers that is too costly to make serious (like contending waves).
I mean, its moot now. I hope walker is amazing from day 1. I like walker. I am ecstatic he's on the team. But i'm not sold that a 5th year point isn't better.
I'm not looking at the future. We are in the best win now scenario we might ever be in. And if we make the s16 you better bet it has a more positive effect on the future.
Shuathlete, funny that you say you are so concerned about turnovers with KC and Walker. But Thorpe averaged 3.0 turnovers a game last year. That is a lot from a point guard. Contrast that with Madison Jones who averaged 2.0 turnovers a game. (btw Carrington avg 2.3 TO). I have been consistent in saying that Walker will be better next year than any 5th year grad transfer that we were looking at.
Yea im fine with that. didnt know about thorpes turnovers. What was his A/TO ratio. Im assuming his usage rate was WAY higher than madison jones. And KCs TOs were probably all from the 1 position.
Edit: Yea im right. 4.6 A to 3.0 turnovers. Plus he shot 40% from 3 and 85% from the line. Idk much about thorpe but i think on a MUCH MUCH MUCH better team those stats skew even better esp his turnovers. He wouldnt have to do too much by himself. And he can hit an open 3. You become super wise in your 5th year lol. Ive actually talked myself more onto team thorpe as i look into it. Not to say i am not 100% on team walker as well.
A 1.5 assist to turnover ratio is not what we need as a pg. we need a pg to not turn the ball over, get the ball in great position for Delgado, break down the defense, and be able to keep defenses honest by hitting the outside shot.
Thorpe shoots it well, no doubt but the focus of the offense will be Delgado Carrington and Desi. I guess we shall se
Assist to turnover ratios can be deceiving. The better your teammates the better that stat will be. Plus often a good pass will led to foul shots and not a basket. And for that no credit is given to the passer.
Angel in particular got fouled a lot and didn't always convert the feed meaning no assist but usually points at the line.
Angel in particular got fouled a lot and didn't always convert the feed meaning no assist but usually points at the line.
Turnovers in general are deceiving. If youre the only guy on the team expect to have a bunch of TOs
So often stats don't always tell the story. That why you have to watch the game with a keen eye to understand what is happening.
Just as you can get robbed of assists you can also rack them up with a hot outside shooter.
Sina comes to mind passing to Gibbs for a few bombs. There are sometimes cheap assists (not always) as the passer is not creating anything and the shooter is doing most of the work.
Just as you can get robbed of assists you can also rack them up with a hot outside shooter.
Sina comes to mind passing to Gibbs for a few bombs. There are sometimes cheap assists (not always) as the passer is not creating anything and the shooter is doing most of the work.
You mean like Magic tossing it to Worthy on a break or Kareem in the post? Two assist makers if I ever saw them.
How are turnovers a misleading stat? 3 TO's a game is a lot for a point guard who is a senior. And how misleading are assists? Could it be more than .5 a season? I doubt it.
True but the context is with Geno Thorpe. In his case, I don't think its misleading. 3 TO's a game and 1.5 assist to TO ratio is not what you want from a PG.
Btw, Sina Assist to Ratio was 1.6 his freshman year and 1.85 his Sophomore year. Not impressive at all and yet still higher than Thorpe.
Last edited:
The Thorpe ship has sailed.
Collectively as a team we need to take better care of the ball. MJ and KC averaged 6.1 assists to 4.3 turnovers.
The rest of the team averaged 6.2 assists to 9.3 turnovers.
We were 9th in ast/turnover ratio, 9th in assists and 8th in turnovers.
Angel was 2nd in the league behind Andrew Chrabascz in assists per game. He had 2.2 assists to 2.9 turnovers. No reason why that shouldn't be closer to 3 assists to 2 turnovers this year. With an NBA that expects good passing from their bigs (to find the open 3 point shooters and cutters) he needs to improve his passing (which was good at times but inconsistent and sloppy at other times).
I would be content with 6 assists to 4 turnovers for this upcoming season between KC and Walker. I don't think KC needs to be a risk taker/creater next year. He just needs to start the offense, make good entry passes, avoid the silly/careless turnovers as a point guard and as a player continue to knock down the 3 point shot, make foul shots and iso mid-range at the end of the shot clock.
I like what I heard from Walker during one of the interviews during their TOC run. He talked about how different games the team needs different things from him and one game they needed him to take risks and create both for himself and others and the next game they needed him to focus on ball security and making good entry passes into their bigs.
Collectively as a team we need to take better care of the ball. MJ and KC averaged 6.1 assists to 4.3 turnovers.
The rest of the team averaged 6.2 assists to 9.3 turnovers.
We were 9th in ast/turnover ratio, 9th in assists and 8th in turnovers.
Angel was 2nd in the league behind Andrew Chrabascz in assists per game. He had 2.2 assists to 2.9 turnovers. No reason why that shouldn't be closer to 3 assists to 2 turnovers this year. With an NBA that expects good passing from their bigs (to find the open 3 point shooters and cutters) he needs to improve his passing (which was good at times but inconsistent and sloppy at other times).
I would be content with 6 assists to 4 turnovers for this upcoming season between KC and Walker. I don't think KC needs to be a risk taker/creater next year. He just needs to start the offense, make good entry passes, avoid the silly/careless turnovers as a point guard and as a player continue to knock down the 3 point shot, make foul shots and iso mid-range at the end of the shot clock.
I like what I heard from Walker during one of the interviews during their TOC run. He talked about how different games the team needs different things from him and one game they needed him to take risks and create both for himself and others and the next game they needed him to focus on ball security and making good entry passes into their bigs.
.
BTW, the mention of Sina is proof of my point. He absolutely never created anything on offense just passing the ball around the perimeter taking no chances and playing it safe. Thus that lowered his turnovers and with Gibbs throwing up bombs increased his assist totals.
My point is you have to watch the game/player to really know if the assist to turnover ratio is indicative of the player's game.
I was generalizing. You are being specific.
BTW, the mention of Sina is proof of my point. He absolutely never created anything on offense just passing the ball around the perimeter taking no chances and playing it safe. Thus that lowered his turnovers and with Gibbs throwing up bombs increased his assist totals.
My point is you have to watch the game/player to really know if the assist to turnover ratio is indicative of the player's game.
My complaint in past years was that against the cupcakes Willards would to early start to sub out starters keeping the games closer than they should. Now I realize the thinking on this, but my take it for most of the first half he should keep the rotation tight and towards the end of the half as the lead grows start subbing more free. One thing now if SHU starts the season in the top 25, winning style will mean more votes and higher ranking. It doesn't look good if you beat a cupcake by 12 because of the substitution pattern. You need to start putting your foot on these teams throats. Big margins of victory open more eyes and gets more votes which gets higher rankings, Which in the cases of some recruits may help.
One thing though if you have Walker, Sandro, Cale, Nzei coming off the bench and on the floor with whichever 2g that's certainly a big step up in depth than years past, 2 top 100 players, and 2 top 150 players off the bench is something they haven't had in a while
It often easier for a coach who has a solid 7-8 man rotation and nothing more. Unless of course the injury bug hits.
I feel that Willard has some issues when he has players on the bench that need and more importantly deserve minutes. Then he has to make more choices and when those choices work nothing is ever said. But when they don't we, myself included, bring them up.
There's nothing easier than second guessing the person in charge. Because when they're right it's expected, but when they're wrong there's hell to pay. Truly a no win situation for a coach. That's why he's making 1.6 or so million a year and we're not.
Bottom line, we all want to see our starters play a good portion of the game. But when you factor in needed rest. foul trouble, match-ups, the need for the bench players to gain experience, etc, Willard like most coaches does a good job.
I feel that Willard has some issues when he has players on the bench that need and more importantly deserve minutes. Then he has to make more choices and when those choices work nothing is ever said. But when they don't we, myself included, bring them up.
There's nothing easier than second guessing the person in charge. Because when they're right it's expected, but when they're wrong there's hell to pay. Truly a no win situation for a coach. That's why he's making 1.6 or so million a year and we're not.
Bottom line, we all want to see our starters play a good portion of the game. But when you factor in needed rest. foul trouble, match-ups, the need for the bench players to gain experience, etc, Willard like most coaches does a good job.
I agree Piratz but with a much more difficult OOC schedule coupled with a highly competitive conference it's going to be tough to get those minutes for Walker . I would also like to see minutes for Gordon to see where he fits in and how his development is progressing.
Last edited:
Willard for the first time has the depth and talent to press. He needs to take advantage of this and sub in fresh legs to wear down the opponent. The Hall is 2 deep at every position except center. I am not callling for 49 minutes of hell. But give me at least 20 minutes of it.
Moreover, this team can play small or big. We all know they can go 3 guards and even 4 guards. But, Carrington, Cale, Desi, Mamu and Delgado is a pretty big team to throw at you as well.
Moreover, this team can play small or big. We all know they can go 3 guards and even 4 guards. But, Carrington, Cale, Desi, Mamu and Delgado is a pretty big team to throw at you as well.
With four seniors leaving ( excluding Nzei who could be a graduate senior ) getting playing time for Sandro, Walker , Gordon and Cale this year will pay dividends in future years for the program as we try to remain a consistent tourney team. Figuring how to do that will not be easy and if we get it right we could have a special season.
Hallwins. Watch every minute of every game. Khadeen against BE guards was beat to his spot all the time. He doesn't have the first step as a pg to break down the defense that we need a pg to do. I'd take a small speedy pg to get in the cracks and make the D adjust than a slower bigger guard
I want to win this year. Developing for the future is great but if we played our seniors 35+ minutes/game this year and we made the Final Four, I would worry about 2018/2019 next year.
I'd like to see less minutes for our starters and think we finally have depth to make it work. Our Big 3 got pushed extremely hard last year and they definitely played on fumes in a lot of critical times towards the end of the year which cost us at the end vs Nova and Arkansas.
I also believe this is why our offense tends to get stagnant late in games as our players play hard on D then use the offensive possessions to recover.
All 3 averaged 36 minutes per game over the last 12-15 games of the year. Willard had no choice as every game was so important and the bench was barren. This year the depth is there to play less minutes and give our starters more in the tank at the end of games and in March.
I also believe this is why our offense tends to get stagnant late in games as our players play hard on D then use the offensive possessions to recover.
All 3 averaged 36 minutes per game over the last 12-15 games of the year. Willard had no choice as every game was so important and the bench was barren. This year the depth is there to play less minutes and give our starters more in the tank at the end of games and in March.
I'd like to get a breakdown of angel's turnovers to separate those dumb half court passes he made to try to create a break over and over. Seems like once a game! He passed pretty well from the post at times, then amazingly sloppy at others. Limit those this year and his turnovers go down significantly.
I don't see why we couldn't play our own version of 40 minutes of hell. We have the legs, we play lockdown defense, we create TO's we can put big bodies on other teams and we have experience and maturity to play with great IQ. Stepping it up on D while playing with a more efficient and more effective offense with better ball movement and player movement will make us very dangerous.
