General Recruiting Discussion/Comments 2022 and before

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 9 years ago

reckless jake wrote:Reality check, our roster isn't that strong. We have one (1) legitimate inside post player, a 6'7 PF. That's it. Outside of 6'6 Earl Watson and Iffy ( if you count them) we've got no proven inside game at all. Iverson is a wing player and Butts is a freshman.

sorry but you're wrong.

you could roll the ball out there today and the roster as it stands would finish top 3 in the league. a top 50, 2 top 100 and 3 top 150 recruits + one of the top grad transfers is a strong roster. period.

no matter how much hand wringing the chicken littles want to engage in

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 9 years ago

We may have won 23 games but who did we beat of any significance? Exactly.

And last year team didn't make it to the NCAA's.

Counting wins? That's a Jim Baron-like season.

I'm not saying we don't have talent, we do. At the guard spots and on the wing.But if we want to beat the top teams in the A10 and win the OOC games that mean something, we've got to have better post play than last year. And as inconsistent as Biruta was we have no replacement for him right now. That's a glaring weakness. Hassan Marno can't do it alone. That's all I'm saying. As presently constructed we are no closer to an NCAA caliber team than we were last season.

Shaolin Swat · Unread post by **Shaolin Swat** » 9 years ago

Our roster is definitely strong. The roster has its flaws and is by no means perfect, but it is still a very talented one. Nearly all of the production is returning from a team that won 23 games last year and has one of the most talented cores in the Atlantic 10. I think we need to continue to add pieces (aka bigs) to the roster but, as it stands right now, this is a strong and talented roster.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

What we do have are 4 quality starters. That's a great start. The 5th starter and the quality of the bench are unknowns at this point?

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

If you dont expect 2 sophomores and 2 freshmen to improve you're a fool. Good health and those guys will get another 23 games.

No Biruta>!? IT IS a glaring weakness to not have a center. The only center we've had these past 3 years has been literally a no show.

Seems like centers are allergic to Kingston, RI. I didnt want Andrew Charab...however you spell it from Butler but wow we would have been good to get him. He would be a guy getting minutes in our front court right in the thick of our current roster.

We have missed out on some height and I doubt they could have known how bad iffy is. We need some height! fast!

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 9 years ago

A Jim Baron comparison really? Now I have heard everything.

Agree with the post about Chrabascz- he would have been that missing piece.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

If the question is whether the roster is perfect or ideal or complete, then the answer is no. If the question is whether the roster is "strong," I guess it is a subjective thing but I think with no other pieces added to what we have now I will pick us to win the league. Is that the highest goal for this program? No. But considering where we are coming from and compared to what we've had here for the last 17 years, it is definitely strong, IMO.

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 9 years ago

I said counting wins -for the sake of wins- was Jim Baron-era thing.
I hoped we were beyond that now.

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 9 years ago

I still think winning games is the goal no? 3rd place finish with a team starting 4 underclassmen. This wasn't a senior laden team that tanked down the stretch or started off 19-2 only to lose 8 in a row down the stretch. The only comparison is that they were both basketball teams.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

I think what Jake was trying to say is, yes, we won 23 games,
but like CFL's teams didin't beat anyone better than us. Fact.
Now, we have four good players as our core. Now, after that, what?
Iverson? Could be great. We all hope so, but he has to prove a lot.
Thompson? Should be a contributor.
Butts? The best thing I've heard is "serviceable",
McGlynn? Never played at this level, and who sits of the three
guards for him to get any playing time?
Of course, we have nobody over 6'7" (not counting SF-SG Iverson)
Iffy and Watson are 6'6".
So, as things stand at this moment, no, this isn't an overall
strong roster.
You have question marks on incoming players, and question marks
on yet to be recruited players.
Anybody who thinks this roster today, could be a world beater, is
delusional.

Unread post by **SGreenwell** » 9 years ago

I think TP alludes to the problem here - Everyone is kind of using esoteric terms to describe the roster, whether we're saying strong or weak or world beater or whatever. As is, I think the 2015-16 roster (assuming they just don't fill 3 open spots, which they won't) is probably equivalent to 2014-15 roster. Yes, they have absolutely no height beyond Watson and Butts, and even they're kind of undersized, but I still think URI is a top-five Atlantic 10 team even if they have to play a Dayton-esque lineup. It's not ideal that there currently isn't an experienced big man on the roster, but the roster still has time to change.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

World beater, no. Best URI team in 17 years? Probably.

There are obvious areas of need, but don't let that warp your opinion. It isn't like we need to sign a center or we will finish 9th in the league. We probably do need one to make a deep tournament run, but I think we can acknowledge that without being obnoxious about it and having that be the only tune we can sing. Like, who the hell are we to turn our noses up at a league title and a tournament berth all of a sudden? I'd like more, but I'd take that without complaining.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Except Dayton could shoot. Dayton could shoot free throws.
We don't.
Pollard is a wide body as an undersized post player, like
Mo Allie-Cox is.
Yes, Terrell and Garrett should improve. Should. No guarantees.
EC didn't really improve from his freshman season.
Lots of grades being given out here today, when an incomplete is in order.
TP, try to stop being a wise guy and think big for a change.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Rod, I am with you in wanting a big and recognizing what it would do for this team next year. I just think the narrative that we are DOOMED if we don't get one are a little overstated. I think we could still have a fun year. I agree that to have a great year, we need another piece or two in the frontcourt.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Dan knows we need at least one, probably two more frontcourt players.

We have ZERO depth there. Butts is an unknown really, plus he's a freshman.

Iverson is more of a 3. Watson is undersized. Iffy is at most a role player.

Sorry, we're not Dancing without help there. We certainly are not advancing in the tourney, even if we were to make it.

We need to take the next step next season. The season after, should be the payoff.

If we have to bring in a couple of stopgap bigs to make it next season, that's what they will do.

2016 looks to be a HUGE recruiting year for this program, at least it looks that way.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Hell ,yeah! It'll be fun, regardless of who is or isn't added.
Nobody said we're doomed, but we sure aren't an NCAA lock,
by any means.
We need to at least replace Gilvydas' minutes. Other teams needed to game plan
for him, in case the "good Gil" showed up.
His numbers should be easily duplicated by an just OK center, juco or 5th year guy.
I'd hate to see Hassan and EC have to wait to be seniors to go to the NCAAs.
So far, they are the 2015 version of Pappy Owens and Marc Upshaw. Two superb
players, who never went to a tournament.
Plenty of time to change that. I'm sure Dan knows what needs to be done.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

I want fun AND great.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

EC to his credit stepped into the lead position on offense as a sophomore on a team that didn't have much else offense and contended for the 1st place trophy.

I would have wanted more but I bet we get more. He was also hurt. Add some good size and this team should win the A10. Make the tourney.

To think these guys have topped out as freshmen or sophomores is not fair to them. They ARE hard workers. They also are nice kids that are aware of their strengths and weaknesses.

rhodylaw · Unread post by **rhodylaw** » 9 years ago

I think EC's game will improve if we have some shooters around him (i.e. four). Spacing was bad this year because we were so bad from the outside. Stretch the D, open up some lanes and EC's game will flourish.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Again, I'll ask, are you going to sit Terrell, Garrett or
EC, to get McGlynn playing time?
Don't tell me about TJ's time, because he was a multi
task player, who was an energy guy, not put in for
any single skill..
Also, Thompson will be looking to fill a role.
Iverson is a 2-3.

ace · Unread post by **ace** » 9 years ago

They're losing 42+ minutes/game from the guard position. On a team that plays 3 to 4 guard types at a time, figuring out a way to mix in Garrett, Matthews, Terrell, McGlynn, Thompson, and Iverson seems like fun.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

ace wrote:They're losing 42+ minutes/game from the guard position. On a team that plays 3 to 4 guard types at a time, figuring out a way to mix in Garrett, Matthews, Terrell, McGlynn, Thompson, and Iverson seems like fun.

Exactly.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

True. But, Jarvis, Jared and E.C. aren't getting a decrease in minutes. So, at best, that leaves the 3 new guys to split the 42 or so.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Sorry, defending status quo doesn't cut it, when there's
so many unanswered questions that won't be answered
until well into next season.
Four new players need to find roles and develop. Plus
there are at least two more coming in, which makes six.
That's a lot of people to learn systems and earn playing time.
That's not being negative. It's being around the game for decades
and seeing the impact of bringing in a slew of new players.
It's the reason why coaches like to balance classes, to avoid having
an influx of new players.
It takes time and patience.

3wisemen · Unread post by **3wisemen** » 9 years ago

Couple points here:
-- Just because nobody on this board has answers on new players, roles, etc., doesn't mean that the staff is in the dark on those issues. The flow of information has dried up noticeably, and I think TruePoint has hit on why.
-- This isn't going to be the mess of two seasons ago in terms of chemistry. New players at this point are being recruited to a winner, not to a rebuilding project. Stands to reason they would be better and would receive better direction from a staff that, frankly, has some much-needed experience that it lacked.
-- Rod preaching patience? Let's all remember this moment seven months from now on November 18th when he's having a meltdown over someone only playing seven minutes in an opening blowout over Maine/New Hampshire/UMass-Lowell/buy game opponent to be inserted here.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Billyboy78 wrote:True. But, Jarvis, Jared and E.C. aren't getting a decrease in minutes. So, at best, that leaves the 3 new guys to split the 42 or so.

Which is probably fine. One of them is a freshman, one can probably play short stretches as the four (and is only going to play half the year), and the other probably is going to fill a role that doesn't demand a ton of minutes. Plus, the distribution of minutes isn't going to be static over the entire season. Guys will get hurt, guys will get in foul trouble, opponents' game plans may alter the rotation sometimes. I just don't think this is something to worry about. They didn't bring all these guys in then realize the construction of the roster. There is a plan.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

I just love how this 3 Wisemen only posts to bust my ass.
Two years ago, you had Biruta, Biggie, Rieschel and Oneykaba,
practicing for a year. Got that? A YEAR.
We were told Biruta would be one of the best bigs in the A-10, Biggie was a lockdown defender, Reischel
was the best all around player on the team, and Oneykaba was
destroying Hare in practice and had a tremendous upside.
As for our staff being soooo much better now, they have three guys who never
saw one minute of D-1 ball.
We had a guy on staff, who played in an Elite 8, under one of the best coaches in college
basketball and played on 3 NCAA teams.
Plus, we had the greatest D-1 PG in history, who was a 2 time AA, and a 2 time
NCAA champion. playing under the winningest coach in NCAA history, and was
an NBA lottery pick..
So, who is his right mind thinks anyone comes close to Bobby and Preston?
Preston's inexperience lead to him doubling his salary elsewhere.
You can see how Bobby's inexperience has cost him. Making 1.5 million a year.
Yeah, right.
Anymore vacant ridiculous statements?

3wisemen · Unread post by **3wisemen** » 9 years ago

They had a guy on staff who played in the Elite 8...who left his alma mater for a pay raise to go to a place that screwed the man who recruited him to URI. Very nice.
They had the greatest D1 PG in history...and went 8-21 with him on staff in one year. Who also didn't recruit Matthews, Martin, Garrett or Terrell and did recruit Minnis and Onyekaba.
They have no assistants who played D1 ball...and yet Brad Stevens and Shaka Smart, neither of whom played D1 ball, have reached three combined Final Fours at mid-majors. Ed Cooley played at Stonehill. Jim Calhoun played at AIC. Success as a player doesn't automatically equal success as a coach. There are an unknown number of examples that would support this.
As far as what your were told.....P.T. Barnum said it best. Look it up.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Spare me the phony sanctimony. As if YOU would turn
down doubling you salary.
I'm sure all of our assistants will become Brad Stevens and Shaka Smart.
Bobby's trips to Detroit during the year he was here, was to
assure Matthews that he'd done the right thing, when those around him
were slamming him for picking URI.
You're the guy who rapped Dan's first staff for inexperience.
I'll take Bobby and Preston over any two we have, now.
Anyone who'd point to Dan's first season's record, as if the staff somehow
was responsible is just trolling.

Ramsey · Unread post by **Ramsey** » 9 years ago

idk about all this fighting but ive always been of the though process that the 3 starting guards will play about 90 mins altogether, leaving another 30 for bench guards. Four will take up about 20ish of that until kuran is eligible with Thompson having to earn his minutes early on. once Kuran is in however, I think that Four will see his mins drop slightly while Kuran plays about 10 mins at guard and another 10 to 14 at a hybrid SG/SF/Point Forward position ala earl clark from Louisville.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Ramsey wrote:idk about all this fighting but ive always been of the though process that the 3 starting guards will play about 90 mins altogether, leaving another 30 for bench guards. Four will take up about 20ish of that until kuran is eligible with Thompson having to earn his minutes early on. once Kuran is in however, I think that Four will see his mins drop slightly while Kuran plays about 10 mins at guard and another 10 to 14 at a hybrid SG/SF/Point Forward position ala earl clark from Louisville.

Agreed

Andrew · Unread post by **Andrew** » 9 years ago

Anyone think that Matthews or Terrell in particular will be more effective with less minutes? We saw EC struggle with his injury obviously, but also play very inefficiently as the rest of our offense struggled. We also saw Terrell hit a wall and do zilch on the offensive end for a few games throughout the year. Hass also plays a ton of minutes, and some rest may just may these guys more effective, especially on offense. Writing via mobile so I'm sure I'm rambling, but more good guards are never a bad thing. We'll find room for everyone.

Unread post by **SGreenwell** » 9 years ago

Andrew wrote:Anyone think that Matthews or Terrell in particular will be more effective with less minutes? We saw EC struggle with his injury obviously, but also play very inefficiently as the rest of our offense struggled. We also saw Terrell hit a wall and do zilch on the offensive end for a few games throughout the year. Hass also plays a ton of minutes, and some rest may just may these guys more effective, especially on offense. Writing via mobile so I'm sure I'm rambling, but more good guards are never a bad thing. We'll find room for everyone.

I'd agree with this, and obviously, more talented players available in practice probably helps. However, it's always a balancing act. You want healthy competition, but not guys actually disgruntled / surly about not receiving enough minutes, and you don't know if that'll be the case until you get them in the program.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

I'm surprised people have such a pessimistic outlook with this upcoming team.

Yes the roster has a lot of turnover. But not at the top and idk how people can advocate for cutting guys that don't contribute and then question mixing in new guys.

Our team had zero experience this year. ZERO. They hung in there and now they have good experience.

I think the biggest loss is TJ because he had a mature game in doing everything with a mature body. But the younger guys should mature physically. Gil tried his best but he didn't leave any legacy.

Our teams in the beginning of the DH years sucked. I personally don't think you can draw any conclusions about future anything while looking at that.

We had a great exciting staff and crap basketball. Now uri is in another place. DH is a better coach and is now going to learn how to succeed against other successful coaches/programs.

brady1 · Unread post by **brady1** » 9 years ago

Sea, the 3wisechumps basement boy is a nitwit pc flyer fan.

GO RHODY!

DeanDome88 · Unread post by **DeanDome88** » 9 years ago

Seawrightspostgame wrote:I'm surprised people have such a pessimistic outlook with this upcoming team.

Yes the roster has a lot of turnover. But not at the top and idk how people can advocate for cutting guys that don't contribute and then question mixing in new guys.

Our team had zero experience this year. ZERO. They hung in there and now they have good experience.

I think the biggest loss is TJ because he had a mature game in doing everything with a mature body. But the younger guys should mature physically. Gil tried his best but he didn't leave any legacy.

Our teams in the beginning of the DH years sucked. I personally don't think you can draw any conclusions about future anything while looking at that.

We had a great exciting staff and crap basketball. Now uri is in another place. DH is a better coach and is now going to learn how to succeed against other successful coaches/programs.

Zero Experience?

I can not get behind this narrative sold by the head coach towards the end of the season;

Last year's team had only 2 first year players, 4 second year players (EC and Hass played plenty as freshman Butler and Iffy not so much (Iffy even had an extra year of practice), JR and Biggie who each completed their third season of college basketball (along with an extra year of practice), Earl Watson who had already played junior college, Gil Biruta and TJ both playing their fourth season of college basketball. The coach can play who he chooses, that did not make the more experienced guys unavailable to play.

On another note, I also do not like the "core 4" talk. It is a slight to the other guys on the team and just does not really make sense to me. Martin was easily the best player on the team this past year. If we are going to start ranking our players he belongs on his own level. He was our only above average player on both ends of the court last year. I can not imagine where we would have been without him.

I think the new recruits will help add some punch to the offense. We really need to improve the 3 point shooting if we are going to start beating top fifty teams. It is disappointing to see so many guards playing and not being able to hit more 3 point shots and turning the ball over too frequently.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

brady1 wrote:Sea, the 3wisechumps basement boy is a nitwit pc flyer fan.

GO RHODY!

I don't know about that. I agree with his point that being a good player has almost nothing to do with being a good coach. Good players can become good coaches, but you can be a good coach without having played at a high level.

hrstrat57 · Unread post by **hrstrat57** » 9 years ago

Pessimistic ?

No. But our Rams were 2nd round NIT knockout with zero signature wins.....Entertaining season for sure but a lot of work to do ?

You bet!

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Truth! ^^^^^^^^^

bressler3south · Unread post by **bressler3south** » 9 years ago

Da_Process_Survivor wrote:
rodfromcranston wrote:Our roster isn't that strong, by any means.
lol, what? just quit while you're behind.

regarding low level players/walk ons getting a scholarship. you need those players for 12,13,14 on the bench. Also in some cases its done as a nice gesture to the walk on for the years of sacrifice and hard work they put in knowing they wont see the floor.

LOL, what?!?!?!?
Survivor of what?
So, big deal, there are five guys who are good players -- at least, four known qualities/quantities.
Depth, Process Survivor -- that is -- QUALITY DEPTH -- NINE DEEP, anyone, anytime out on the floor without any qualms is what Rod is probably referring to.
As of NOW, the answer my SURVIVOR, is that you'd be voted off the Rhode Island.

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 9 years ago

I think people confuse "talent" and roster construction. To be sure, we have some talented players, especially at the off guard and wing positions, where we have both talent and depth. With Minnis' departure we lack proven depth at the point guard position right now.

On the flip side, we presently have only 1 proven inside player. And while Martin is extremely talented, and will improve, he's still only 6'7. Although Iverson is 6'9 he's not considered an inside player by most observers. Butts is an unknown freshman and Iffy needs to keep working on his game. This isn't pessimism, it's reality.

The good news is it's only April 19th and we're a long way from playing games. Hopefully, we'll add at least one talented inside player. Ideally a juco or a 5th year who can contribute right away.

However, until that happens this is still a team with flaws and limitations. A group of physically talented guards who, until they prove otherwise on the court, can't shoot it. And a shortage of size and skilled inside players we can rely on. That's how our current roster is constructed.

I want to see us win the A10 regular season and the tournament titles and finally hear our name on Selection Sunday. And hopefully make it to the second weekend.

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 9 years ago

I forgot to mention 6'6 Earl Watson in my post above. And I sure hope Earl will provide some quality minutes this upcoming season..

I hope Earl shows me the error of my forgetful ways. Go get 'em Earl.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Unless we catch lightning in a bottle or Dan Hurley turns this place into an absolute machine, every URI team will have flaws and limitations. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a flawless URI team. A flawed team probably can't win a national championship, but it can still be a good team. We can definitely get better by adding a frontcourt player, and hopefully we will. But if we don't, we can still be a good team. I personally do not feel like we lost much in terms of frontcourt play compared to last year and we were the third or fourth best team in the league, meanwhile our best players will be back and presumably improved. I expect to compete to win the league even if we started the year with what we have now.

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 9 years ago

reckless jake wrote:I think people confuse "talent" and roster construction. To be sure, we have some talented players, especially at the off guard and wing positions, where we have both talent and depth. With Minnis' departure we lack proven depth at the point guard position right now.

On the flip side, we presently have only 1 proven inside player. And while Martin is extremely talented, and will improve, he's still only 6'7. Although Iverson is 6'9 he's not considered an inside player by most observers. Butts is an unknown freshman and Iffy needs to keep working on his game. This isn't pessimism, it's reality.

The good news is it's only April 19th and we're a long way from playing games. Hopefully, we'll add at least one talented inside player. Ideally a juco or a 5th year who can contribute right away.

However, until that happens this is still a team with flaws and limitations. A group of physically talented guards who, until they prove otherwise on the court, can't shoot it. And a shortage of size and skilled inside players we can rely on. That's how our current roster is constructed.

I want to see us win the A10 regular season and the tournament titles and finally hear our name on Selection Sunday. And hopefully make it to the second weekend.

Literally all 351 teams have flaws and limitations. Even the juggernaut Kentucky (experience)

You'll definitely see an improvement in shooting from Garrett, Terrell and EC. For the 1st 2, freshmen almost never shoot it good. There's an adjustment they have to make as defenders are much faster and better vs what they're used to from HS or prep.

For EC, the foot injury really derailed his season. He wasnt able to practice and didnt have the same explosiveness. Him coming back fully healthy will make a huge difference.

of course an inside presence would be nice to have, but it is not a prerequisite to success at the college level. it's a luxury

Ramulous · Unread post by **Ramulous** » 9 years ago

I come to this section and see all the offers we have made to some super players.....but offers are just offers......I will be more interested when these kids decide which schools to visit on their official visits.....they only get 5......we can offer 1000 kids......

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Well, for 2015 recruiting, so far it's April 19th, and players all
over the country are taking visits.
Not a single one has visited URI.
Oh, and NOBODY wins shit with a 6'7" center. backed up by a 6'6"
guy.
Anyone who watched the NCAAs would have figured that out.
Don't give ne the "but Dayton did" myth. They only won one
game after the play in game at home, against a school that hasn't won
an NCAA game since 1997.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Well, for 2015 recruiting, so far it's April 19th, and players all
over the country are taking visits.
Not a single one has visited URI.
Oh, and NOBODY wins shit with a 6'7" center. backed up by a 6'6"
guy.
Anyone who watched the NCAAs would have figured that out.
Don't give ne the "but Dayton did" myth. They only won one
game after the play in game at home, against a school that hasn't won
an NCAA game since 1997.

And as of now, the 6'6" guy is a starter, and a foul prone one at that. My concern with the roster staying as is, is what happens when Hassan gets 2 fouls in the first half?

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

I don't see Watson as a starter, ever.
Hassan became foul prone in the last month of
the season.
Playing a dangerous game, without front court depth.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:I don't see Watson as a starter, ever.
Hassan became foul prone in the last month of
the season.
Playing a dangerous game, without front court depth.

I imagine Iverson starts 2nd semester. Who starts to begin the season as the 4/5? The thing about Hassan, I don't want him worrying about possible foul trouble and taking away his aggressiveness in going after blocked shots.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Dan will go with his favorite four guard lineup.
Unless somebody comes in that can play forward,
there isn't much choice.

Login • Register