Closer look at the roster next season vs this past season

[brianpoe]

I just don't see UVA getting ranked that high. I mean, why would they? We all seen what happened to UVA after Anderson. If they lost Darrion (sp?) Atkins during that time as well, they would have dropped even more games. Now Atkins and Anderson are both gone. That's a lot of defense, and even more offense.

They have a very solid pg, their leading scorer and top rebounder back. They lost two players. They will be very good. Other teams get better each year they bring players back. Anderson was very solid but Brogdon is their scorer.

They have bigs and play solid defense. Shayok will be very good for them this year.

UNC
Duke
UVA
Kansas
Iowa State
Maryland
UK

7 top teams IMO, not in any order, however UK is by far the biggest unknown.

As a fan base we seem to be the worse at recognizing that other teams are good as well (not directed at you Rhavicc). These teams have good players who will be even better this year.

 

[3rex]

You gonna wait for me to get back online to actually read your post, or are you gonna ask 5 more times before I post again? Not too sure, but that's not entirely the point. We visibly seen Booker take less than a handful of contested threes, out of the 58 that he made (which was good for 41% from the 3 point line, which is exactly the same distance as the JUCO line). Mulder made around 30 more of them than Booker did, and shot for 46% on the season.
So riddle me this. If both are wide open from a 3 point line that is the exact same distance, and Mulder makes 5% more shots than Booker from deep on the season, how is he not the better 3 point shooter?

I never said he wasn't. I haven't seen him play, but in the 2 posts I quoted you based your opinion on Mulder being the better shooter on Booker's uncontested 3's vs. Mulder's 3's, many of which you say we're contested.
So, I ask again. What % of Mulder's 3s were contested?

 

[Rhavicc]

I never said he wasn't. I haven't seen him play, but in the 2 posts I quoted you based your opinion on Mulder being the better shooter on Booker's uncontested 3's vs. Mulder's 3's, many of which you say we're contested.
So, I ask again. What % of Mulder's 3s were contested?

You truly are stupid. I never said most of his were contested. I said that most of Booker's were uncontested, and said that it doesn't matter whether it's JUCO, or not, because no defender equates to no defense at any level. The point is, we know that Booker only took a handful of contested threes. I would honestly say less than 5 on the season, and made 41%
Mulder, whether contested or not contested, shot more threes, and hit a higher percentage (at 46%), so no, it doesn't matter how many he took, because stats, and what we visibly seen from Booker (which was that he very rarely took a contested 3), Mulder is the better shooter.
Do I need to break that down for you any further?

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Here's a simply question Rhavicc: If Boker and Lyles were both back, along with Mulder, who of the three would start?

 

[brianpoe]

You truly are stupid. I never said most of his were contested. I said that most of Booker's were uncontested, and said that it doesn't matter whether it's JUCO, or not, because no defender equates to no defense at any level. The point is, we know that Booker only took a handful of contested threes. I would honestly say less than 5 on the season, and made 41%
Mulder, whether contested or not contested, shot more threes, and hit a higher percentage (at 46%), so no, it doesn't matter how many he took, because stats, and what we visibly seen from Booker (which was that he very rarely took a contested 3), Mulder is the better shooter.
Do I need to break that down for you any further?

I get what you are saying. I do think you need to take into account the bigger stage. Larger crowds, national TV, pressure to excel, better defenses who can recover faster even if you are open, etc.

I can still hit 3's in church league. I wouldn't hit the backboard in Lucas Oil Stadium in front of 80,000....

 

[3rex]

no one can look at a number, one seasons number, in this case 45% vs 41%, and just come to the blanket conclusion that either is the better shooter.
If you've seen both play, multiple times, then I'll listen to you. But this is ridiculous.

Heck, I hope Mulder IS a better shooter!! Would be great for the Cats. But hoping that's true & just deciding, "well, the line is the same distance in JC & he shot 4% higher..." so he is factually a better shooter?! No.
I'll wait & see.

All that said, I hope he turns out to be the best shooter we've ever had. Would be exciting to see this season.

 

[weatherbird]

I would go as far as to say that next year's roster or team will be better, but it is not out of the question. People should realize that how good a team isn't really reflected in the record. Did I think last year's team had a chance to go undefeated? Yes, but for one reason and one reason only, depth. Most of the time, a team can be really dominant with just a couple of players, but it's unrealistic to believe they would go undefeated because they would depend pretty heavily on those couple of players. Last year's team was able to work through things such as foul trouble and injuries and such because of tremendous depth. But make no mistake, they had issues as well. The team next year will also have issues, but a lack of depth can help due to the fact that different roles will be much better defined. Being a great team has more to due with chemistry, and how the pieces fit together than the talent of the individuals on the team. Considering that only 5 can play at a time, it is possible that next year's team could be better and still not set records, go undefeated, and all those other things. One thing I think people fail to realize is that we will return 4/5 of the second platoon from the Bahamas, which at least at times looked better than the first platoon. Ulis, Hawkins, Willis, and Lee, plus we add a starter in Poythress, and a top 3 recruiting class. We will know 10-12 games into the season whether this team is great, or just really good, but they will be at least really good.

 

[Chuckinden]

There are so many "ifs" about the incoming team and I don't like to speculate, but I firmly believe that "if" Poy is healthy, that Ulis will make him a better player. I will be disappointed if this doesn't happen. Poy coming back to play with Ulis at PG may be the key to Poy finally being able to break out and show what he can do on a consistent basis....and that may be the determining factor of how successful we are.

 

[Rhavicc]

Here's a simply question Rhavicc: If Boker and Lyles were both back, along with Mulder, who of the three would start?

Well UNC*** fan, that's a good question. If Booker (not Boker), and Lyles were both back, it may depend on a lot of things. Does their shooting improve? Does Booker work on his athletic abilities so he can be a better defender?
The problem with Lyles was he could consistently hit the high school 3 pointer on the college court, but it only counted for 2 points. His range never started to extend past that, so he could only spread the floor so far, but he could take his man inside and be efficient. Booker could really spread the floor, but rarely beat his man off the dribble. Now, he shot over his man a lot, but rarely beat him off the dribble to the basket. Transition is the only time where we seen him get to the basket uncontested consistently. He just doesn't have that speed and ball handling in the half-court, and not a huge offensive arsenal to help with his lack of explosiveness. Aaron Harrison, for example, was not an explosive athlete, nor was he a consistent shooter, but he has a pretty diverse offensive skillset. He finds ways to get the ball to the rim without athleticism, primarily along the baseline, but besides the point.
We haven't had a really athletic guard with that size, that could shoot 3 pointers that consistently in some time. That has the opportunity to offer more for the rest of your offense. On defense, with that kind of shooter with that kind of athleticism, do you back off so you don't get beat off the dribble, or do you play close and risk getting beat off the dribble to the rim for points, or a kickout for a 3?
It really depends on too much to answer now. Reality is though, they're not back, and they can't start here. My common sense would direct me to saying Booker and Lyles though due to experience, size, and assuming they make progressions on both ends (plus, it's 2 players at that position, vs only 1 of Mulder). But in that scenario, I would start Mulder at the 2, and nothing would change that, because we would probably do that stupid a** platoon swap again this season if they came back, and Briscoe would likely get significant PG time.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Well UNC*** fan, that's a good question. If Booker (not Boker), and Lyles were both back, it may depend on a lot of things. Does their shooting improve? Does Booker work on his athletic abilities so he can be a better defender?
The problem with Lyles was he could consistently hit the high school 3 pointer on the college court, but it only counted for 2 points. His range never started to extend past that, so he could only spread the floor so far, but he could take his man inside and be efficient. Booker could really spread the floor, but rarely beat his man off the dribble. Now, he shot over his man a lot, but rarely beat him off the dribble to the basket. Transition is the only time where we seen him get to the basket uncontested consistently. He just doesn't have that speed and ball handling in the half-court, and not a huge offensive arsenal to help with his lack of explosiveness. Aaron Harrison, for example, was not an explosive athlete, nor was he a consistent shooter, but he has a pretty diverse offensive skillset. He finds ways to get the ball to the rim without athleticism, primarily along the baseline, but besides the point.
We haven't had a really athletic guard with that size, that could shoot 3 pointers that consistently in some time. That has the opportunity to offer more for the rest of your offense. On defense, with that kind of shooter with that kind of athleticism, do you back off so you don't get beat off the dribble, or do you play close and risk getting beat off the dribble to the rim for points, or a kickout for a 3?
It really depends on too much to answer now. Reality is though, they're not back, and they can't start here. My common sense would direct me to saying Booker and Lyles though due to experience, size, and assuming they make progressions on both ends (plus, it's 2 players at that position, vs only 1 of Mulder). But in that scenario, I would start Mulder at the 2, and nothing would change that, because we would probably do that stupid a** platoon swap again this season if they came back, and Briscoe would likely get significant PG time.

Thanks for the response, and for pointing out that obvious spelling mistake. Sorry for the ill posed question, what I meant was the following. Based on everything you've seen last year and assuming Booker and Lyles are back, who would you have starting and who are their backups? As you said, we can't predict how someone will improve, so let's ignore that and only use how all players performed this past season. With this in mind, who are your first five and who are their reserves?

 

[Rhavicc]

Thanks for the response, and for pointing out that obvious spelling mistake. Sorry for the ill posed question, what I meant was the following. Based on everything you've seen last year and assuming Booker and Lyles are back, who would you have starting and who are their backups? As you said, we can't predict how someone will improve, so let's ignore that and only use how all players performed this past season. With this in mind, who are your first five and who are their reserves?

To be honest, if we got both Lyles and Booker back, my lineup would be:

1. Ulis
2. Booker (his true position)
3. Mulder (his athleticism as well as shooting ability potentially provides more defensively if he were to get drawn inside by a wing. 6'5 is sufficient at the college level for a 3. Also, his numbers suggest that he's a tough rebounder)
4. Lyles (his true position)
5. Skal

Bench:

1/2. Briscoe
2/3. Matthews
3/4. Poythress (only play him sometimes at the 3 for defensive purposes, the rest of the time at the 4)
4/5. Lee
3/4. Willis
2/3. Hawkins (only seeing time at the 3 for defensive purposes against smaller, faster guards, rest of the time at the 2)

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

To be honest, if we got both Lyles and Booker back, my lineup would be:

1. Ulis
2. Booker (his true position)
3. Mulder (his athleticism as well as shooting ability potentially provides more defensively if he were to get drawn inside by a wing. 6'5 is sufficient at the college level for a 3. Also, his numbers suggest that he's a tough rebounder)
4. Lyles (his true position)
5. Skal

Bench:

1/2. Briscoe
2/3. Matthews
3/4. Poythress (only play him sometimes at the 3 for defensive purposes, the rest of the time at the 4)
4/5. Lee
3/4. Willis
2/3. Hawkins (only seeing time at the 3 for defensive purposes against smaller, faster guards, rest of the time at the 2)

Thanks. One quick question though, you've said Booker is not very quick, so would it be best to put him at the 2-guard spot? I think it would be better with him at the 3 and either Briscoe, or Mathews, or Mulder at the 2.

 

[Rhavicc]

Thanks. One quick question though, you've said Booker is not very quick, so would it be best to put him at the 2-guard spot? I think it would be better with him at the 3 and either Briscoe, or Mathews, or Mulder at the 2.

Booker typically creates a size mismatch at the 2 guard spot. Mulder and Matthews have enough size, length, speed, and athleticism to create mismatches for themselves at the 3 at the college level (due to there being a lot of 3 guard lineups), or defend what is often the most athletic position on the floor (for teams that use a true small forward).
Booker's strength is in his shooting offensively, not blowing by people. It's mostly on how he moves without the ball, and how he shoots off the catch. He has a pretty nice mid-range jumper off the dribble as well, but he's not blowing by many people unless it's in transition where he can afford to put the ball out in front of him a little more and not worry as much about it getting stolen from him.
And as I refer back to, the best athlete on the floor for most teams is the small forward. Just the way they are these days. What hurt him the most against Wisconsin is that Booker was smaller than Dekker, but also didn't have the athleticism to stay in front of him, nor the quickness to steal the ball or get off his feet quick for a blocked shot.
Those are better suited for a person who, although may be one inch shorter, has about a 4 inch wingspan advantage over him, and are much, much better athletes. Better with their body control, quickness, and the ability to make plays in front of somebody, as well as behind on defense. Especially with the vertical that Mulder has, I would definitely rather have him at the 3 than Booker if I had to choose between switching their positions, or leaving them where they were.

 

[brianpoe]

To be honest, if we got both Lyles and Booker back, my lineup would be:

1. Ulis
2. Booker (his true position)
3. Mulder (his athleticism as well as shooting ability potentially provides more defensively if he were to get drawn inside by a wing. 6'5 is sufficient at the college level for a 3. Also, his numbers suggest that he's a tough rebounder)
4. Lyles (his true position)
5. Skal

Bench:

1/2. Briscoe
2/3. Matthews
3/4. Poythress (only play him sometimes at the 3 for defensive purposes, the rest of the time at the 4)
4/5. Lee
3/4. Willis
2/3. Hawkins (only seeing time at the 3 for defensive purposes against smaller, faster guards, rest of the time at the 2)

Rhavicc you are really taking this juco a bit far off a couple youtube clips. I hope you are right and he is all that you say he is.

 

[Rhavicc]

Rhavicc you are really taking this juco a bit far off a couple youtube clips. I hope you are right and he is all that you say he is.

It's not so much based off of clips as it is stats and facts. I could go out and make myself look like a good D1 player with highlight videos. Reality is, I suck. Nonetheless though, his highlight video does show things that mine certainly wouldn't, as well as many other players. His athleticism stands out the most. That, and being a defensive playmaker.
I'm basing the shooting off of stats.

 

[brianpoe]

It's not so much based off of clips as it is stats and facts. I could go out and make myself look like a good D1 player with highlight videos. Reality is, I suck. Nonetheless though, his highlight video does show things that mine certainly wouldn't, as well as many other players. His athleticism stands out the most. That, and being a defensive playmaker.
I'm basing the shooting off of stats.

Kid is incredibly athletic. Hope the shooting transfers over, if I remember correctly it took dale Brown a while to get his shots down and he came with a long range bomber rep.

 

[3rex]

It's not so much based off of clips as it is stats and facts. I could go out and make myself look like a good D1 player with highlight videos

Uhhh...no you couldn't.