2012's Rebuild vs. Today

[Rhody72]

Posters here are projecting between 3 and 8 conference wins. Is anyone projecting more wins than 8? Scholarships are renewed in June I believe. We have no players in the portal right now. We one senior, two committed recruits and maybe one open scholarship. Do I have it right?

[NYGFan_Section208]

Rhetorical question.

Getting a high school and a transfer is the exact same thing. You recruit them. Therefore, they are recruits.

Totally wrong....HS recruits are 16-18 and in living rooms with moms (draftees). Transfers are 'seasoned, hardened businessmen' of 19-20+ years old that have been in it, and are somewhat known commodities (free agents). Big difference, I think.

Yea Brandon Weston was a seasoned harness businessmen with his 1 total minute of action last season.

You recruit transfers, high school kids, international kids, etc to come to your program.

In what world are you idiots living in?

Dude, I put 'seasoned, hardened, businessmen" in quotes for sarc-emphasis. Obviously, they aren't. But just as obviously, there is a huge difference between Weston's situation - having lived a season, whether he played or not - and that of a 17 year old in high school. There just is....

[BruceW]

Weighing in on the current topic the biggest word that perhaps that I have have not seen mentioned is maturity. There is a big difference with a transfer vs a in-coming freshman. The learning curve of how to handle not just basketball but academic responsibilities can be very challenging at first for an in-coming freshman. So in answering this spirited debate. Most assuredly there are differences.

[rambone 78]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

[bigappleram]

Purdue is winning without overly relying on transfers. Same for Michigan State, Uconn and in our own league Dayton (Camara is only major contributor that is a transfer). I think it's misguided thinking that there is only 1 way to the top. Every program doesn't have to go full blown Musselman to win.

I would put Archie (based on his past/resume) in more of the Matt Painter, Tom Izzo philosophy of program building. They have made a career out of finding 2-3 star gems, developing guys over long term, etc. I do see him trying to land an impact big in the offseason, and perhaps a shooter...but I don't see him going out and bringing in 7 new transfers and conducting a massive roster overhaul beyond the now normal amount of movement. Just my opinion.

[Blue Man]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

[KeaneyBluBallz]

Weighing in on the current topic the biggest word that perhaps that I have have not seen mentioned is maturity. There is a big difference with a transfer vs a in-coming freshman. The learning curve of how to handle not just basketball but academic responsibilities can be very challenging at first for an in-coming freshman. So in answering this spirited debate. Most assuredly there are differences.

honest question (not necessarily geared @ you) What's the programs graduation rate last 10 years? 20 years?

[SGreenwell]

Weighing in on the current topic the biggest word that perhaps that I have have not seen mentioned is maturity. There is a big difference with a transfer vs a in-coming freshman. The learning curve of how to handle not just basketball but academic responsibilities can be very challenging at first for an in-coming freshman. So in answering this spirited debate. Most assuredly there are differences.

honest question (not necessarily geared @ you) What's the programs graduation rate last 10 years? 20 years?

I believe the metric the NCAA uses, instead of graduation rate, is APR - it basically accounts for students going to class and passing, IIRC, even if they don't necessarily get a degree. In Cox's three graded years released so far, his scores were 1000, 959 and 1000. (Because of the pandemic, the 2019-20 year seems to have been skipped.) Results for 2021-22 haven't been released on the database site yet. Your three-year average needs to be above 940 to avoid any issues, so we're pretty well above that threshold. Although we've had plenty of guys transfer out, most of them have ended up at other four-year colleges, which is ultimately good for us. (I want to say that a component of the APR is making sure players don't wash out of school entirely because their basketball situation isn't good, but I might be mistaken there.)

The site its kept on: https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2013/11/20/ ... e-apr.aspx - Then the right hand tab for D-I coaches.

[rambone 78]

You guys make good points about some programs still relying on developing players over 3-4 years...
But now how many players stay in the same program that long? That's another part of the challenge facing Archie. Some schools have very low transfer rates and some have revolving doors.

[SGreenwell]

You guys make good points about some programs still relying on developing players over 3-4 years...
But now how many players stay in the same program that long? That's another part of the challenge facing Archie. Some schools have very low transfer rates and some have revolving doors.

At least when I looked at the All-A10 teams from 2022, I think there was one or two transfers from the first and second teams (11 or 12 players total), and even one of those might have been a grad transfer, which I consider different. (I don't think you can really complain as a fan base if you got four out of five years of a player's career.) The sheer number of transfers is now high, year to year, but the majority of them are coming from teams that are bad or teams that made a coaching change.

Even then, the guys transferring are mostly ones that aren't playing, although I realize for us as a fan base, we're probably raw because Tyrese Martin and Jacob Toppin left, and Fatts final URI year was disappointing. It sucks that it happened to us, but across the Atlantic 10, the good teams (Dayton, VCU, Richmond, SBU) are mostly retaining their players year to year.

[RamStock]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

The problem is maturation only works if you have the right players that will develop. In our case we do not. As many people have mentioned it would not be devastating to see any of these players leave the program. Most likely he will be starting over with around 6 new players which includes the freshman. Archie as a coach is a million times better than Cox, but he didn’t exactly set the world on fire in Indiana for 4 years. I think he can and will succeed, but very few players on this team look like ones that make an impact for an NCAA tourney team even after 1-2 years in the program. The A-10 is ultra bad this year so wins are tough to judge.

[KevanBoyles]

It will be interesting to see how Archie handles the younger scholarship guys that he doesn’t see developing. Will he honor their commitment to the program or find a way to have them move on? If move on, exactly how does he do that without ruining his credibility?

[LoveThoseRams]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

I am all in on Archie BUT I do not subscribe to the "We will be good when we are good."Certainly not at the GOOD salary that we are paying Archie.
Also, some from Indiana may disagree that "Archie's system works".

I am not ready to throw in the towel, but I do not see the improvements that I had expected by this point.

[Jersey77]

It will be interesting to see how Archie handles the younger scholarship guys that he doesn’t see developing. Will he honor their commitment to the program or find a way to have them move on? If move on, exactly how does he do that without ruining his credibility?

I don't think it ruins his credibility at all.
Every coach has hits and misses, you really don't know how a player fits in until they arrive.
Archie also has a right to tweak his roster depending upon the needs of the team.
Nothing is set in stone.

[Rhody15]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

I am all in on Archie BUT I do not subscribe to the "We will be good when we are good."Certainly not at the GOOD salary that we are paying Archie.
Also, some from Indiana may disagree that "Archie's system works".

I am not ready to throw in the towel, but I do not see the improvements that I had expected by this point.

Couldn’t agree more.

[SGreenwell]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

The problem is maturation only works if you have the right players that will develop. In our case we do not. As many people have mentioned it would not be devastating to see any of these players leave the program. Most likely he will be starting over with around 6 new players which includes the freshman. Archie as a coach is a million times better than Cox, but he didn’t exactly set the world on fire in Indiana for 4 years. I think he can and will succeed, but very few players on this team look like ones that make an impact for an NCAA tourney team even after 1-2 years in the program. The A-10 is ultra bad this year so wins are tough to judge.

I agree with this. Drastic jumps in player performance are unusual, and if they happen, a lot of the times it's because of a coaching change. Ish looking great this year is probably a function of Archie's coaching, unless there was some undisclosed injury or personal matter last year that drastically effected his game, for example. It's much more common that a player makes incremental improvements, or, his performance improves because his role is solidified, thanks to improved talent around him or opportunity via graduation / a better player leaving.

Based on what we've seen so far... Ish and Freeman seem like keepers. Freeman is frustrating, I realize, but he's at least a guy that can clearly play at the A-10 level. Bilau was promising, but he's hurt, which makes it tough to rely on him in the future. Weston's shown enough that I think he'll be OK as a guy in an 8 or 9-man rotation, maybe a starter, but I'd be surprised if he's more than that.

(This is a weird comparison, but - Jarvis Garrett was pass first, and Freeman is shoot first when it comes to PG. Their overall values as players are similar so far, but both had limitations that made them replaceable as a starter on a better team, but still useful while they were here. However, shoot first players always garner more criticism than pass first players, because it's easier to notice a shot that didn't go in, vs. a pass first player setting up an open shot that an inferior teammates misses instead. Anyway, this is a long aside for me to note that it wouldn't surprise me if Freeman is recruited over and transfers out, or if he gets shifted to a bench role, or if on a good team he's more like the third or fourth option instead of the first or second on this one.)

I haven't been crazy about Samb or Tchikou's production lately, but I'm slightly more bullish on the latter because at least he rebounds and blocks shots a smidge better than Samb, who's an OK offensive player but can't really create his own shot. I think Samb would be more likely to transfer, because he hasn't yet, and he could probably play 25+ MPG at a lower level if he wanted. I'm not super optimistic on Foumena - guys that redshirt for an entire year or sit at the end of the bench are seldom The Answer, but they're sexy and mysterious because you haven't seen the flaws yet. See: Matthew Butler, Tres Berry, Bam Harmon, etc. (The guard version of this currently is Ant Harris.) But it's hard to imagine that Foumena is drastically worse than Samb and Tchikou. Regardless, Samb, Tchikou and Foumena all seem like "average, below average" starters to me at best.

Hutchinson has had very, very small bursts of productivity. Regardless of how athletic and long he's looked in practices or warm-ups or whatever, it hasn't translated to his production in the slightest. He's 8th on the team in steal percentage, 9th in block percentage, 9th in rebounding rate, dead last among scholarship players in usage rate (shot creation). His playing time has gone down as the year has gone on, and presumably, as he's gotten "used" to the speed of D-I basketball. I suspect he needs to transfer down.

I'd have the same comments for Stewart, but moreso. Per 40 minutes, he leads the team in 3PA - 6.3 per 40, with Freeman and Leggett next at 5.5 and 5.4. He's shooting them at 12.5 percent, which suggests he can't shoot them well under D-I pressure. He probably either needs a major retool to his shot or to radically change his game to more of an inside banger over the summer. Unless he loves the beach, or he and Foumena are ride-or-die blood brothers, I suspect he would also be a candidate to transfer down.

[SGreenwell]

It will be interesting to see how Archie handles the younger scholarship guys that he doesn’t see developing. Will he honor their commitment to the program or find a way to have them move on? If move on, exactly how does he do that without ruining his credibility?

I kind of doubt any coach nowadays would say, "Hey, you need to get the hell out." The optics on choosing to not renew a scholarship are pretty bad. But, I think coaches should always be realistic about what a player's role will be the following season, and I think that's plenty for a player to decide whether to stay or go, and most are going to go. It's not like Hurley's rosters were the Good Ship Lollipop - players left, and it didn't result in the world ending.

If Player X is comfortable being here, knowing that they'll likely be a body for practices, and they work hard and are a good student... Well, a good coach probably wants him around anyway. It's still someone that has value to the program overall as a mentor and example to other players. The whole roster can't be guys like that, but you have more scholarships and players than available minutes anyway. But I don't think you can blame a player for wanting to play either, and transferring to a lower school that'll give him minutes.

[Jersey77]

Archie would prefer to build a program with freshmen recruits and develop them over time. That's the way things used to be done for the most part. Not the case any more. If we want to get good soon he has to bring in a number of immediate impact transfers.

With recruiting freshmen, coaches have to develop relationships with the player over time. With transfers, decisions are made usually within weeks if not sooner. Especially with NIL money now. Finding the right fit is paramount also.

The coaches who win nowadays are winning the transfer game. Will we?

I don't think he wants to "get good soon" I think he wants to get good. Really good. Hence the "we'll be good when we're good" philosophy.

Archie's system works, that part is unimpeachable. Virginia and Michigan State come to mind as two additional examples that have stood the test of time and change in recruiting cycles. Implementing that system is hard. It takes the right kind of guys and time.

When you have a team full of players who understand that system - it's easy to add one or two to the mix and have them pick it up. When you're like us - a team that's completely rebuilding - it will take time for everyone to get on that page.

We're a lot closer than some would like to believe. We're still a handful of plays/shots away from having a winning record - but we're competitive.

Almost every game we've lost we've blown a lead, sometimes a large lead. While frustrating, I take it as encouraging. We're good enough to get these leads. It'll take maturation of all our guys to hold those leads and close teams out.

This is what a rebuild is. We didn't endure it with David Cox because he inherited a really good team. A team that was good enough to be on the bubble despite coaching shortcomings. Embrace the suck, we'll be good when we're good.

I am all in on Archie BUT I do not subscribe to the "We will be good when we are good."Certainly not at the GOOD salary that we are paying Archie.
Also, some from Indiana may disagree that "Archie's system works".

I am not ready to throw in the towel, but I do not see the improvements that I had expected by this point.

Indiana is in a whole different world than what we have going on here in the A10.
Besides Archie will probably be the first to admit he had made some mistakes at Indiana, and needed the following year off to reflect, learn, and adjust.

I still think it is too early to see the improvements.

Having Bilau start late and then losing him early for the season was huge.
He was the only true center we really had with Foumena redshirting.
Both Alex and Samb are playing out of position.

Also Hutch had a late start and his strength weakened by mono.
Weston needed the year to rehabilitate his body.
So, at this point I really don't know what we have in some of our young players.

[McRam]

Are we sure that Foumena Ed sir Ted because he was not ready for A10 or might it have been for medical reasons. Wasn’t he in the hospital before the season started?

[ramster]

Are we sure that Foumena Ed sir Ted because he was not ready for A10 or might it have been for medical reasons. Wasn’t he in the hospital before the season started?

Correct. His decision to redshirt this year from what I heard unofficially.
He was easily our best big man in the preseason scrimmage
Made all tournament team at the NPSI at RIC last February for Orangeburg Prep. He played against RJ Lewis at NPSI and both scored 20+ points. RJ Luis did not make All Tournament like Foumena did and Luis just made A10 Rookie of the Week. I heard good things about Foumena’s play at NPSI at RIC so I was not surprised at how good he looked at the intrasquad scrimmage but was happy to see what I had heard be confirmed. RJ Luis was out in our game last weekend along with Fernandes but Luis is going to be a good one for Frank Martin.

[rambone 78]

It's true the top A10 programs haven't had many transfers out...but that's because they're good..

When we are good, the turnover rate will decrease.

Until then though, expect a lot of movement.

[Iggy1979]

I see 3 definite A10 caliber players: Leggett, Bilau and Freeman.
Definite no's: Thomas, Martin, Stewart, Samb, Carey.
The rest are question marks.

[Rhody15]

I see 3 definite A10 caliber players: Leggett, Bilau and Freeman.
Definite no's: Thomas, Martin, Stewart, Samb, Carey.
The rest are question marks.

Carey a definite no? Are you serious?

Grouping him in with those 4 is ridiculous.

[NYGFan_Section208]

It's true the top A10 programs haven't had many transfers out...but that's because they're good..

When we are good, the turnover rate will decrease.

Until then though, expect a lot of movement.

Don't you mean "hope for" a lot of movement?

[bigappleram]

Carey is at best on the cut line of those 2 groups.

He’s a 23-24 year old 5th year senior.
He has moments of athletic marvel but many many more moments of awful decision making for someone who has played that much basketball.

Samb, Rory and Thomas are low major/D2 level players IMO.

[NYGFan_Section208]

He has moments of athletic marvel but many many more moments of awful decision making for someone who has played that much basketball.

And is on the cut line for best on the team...there you have it...

[KevanBoyles]

Interesting article on the current red shirts playing the long game at UVA.

https://virginiasports.com/news/2023/01 ... long-game/

[ramster]

I see 3 definite A10 caliber players: Leggett, Bilau and Freeman.
Definite no's: Thomas, Martin, Stewart, Samb, Carey.
The rest are question marks.

Agree
Leggett, Bilau and Freeman are a core to build around
Leggett would be very desirable in the transfer portal as he has raised his stock this year. Miller needs him here.

[Rhodymob05]

I would say Carey is A10 caliber.

[Jersey77]

I see 3 definite A10 caliber players: Leggett, Bilau and Freeman.
Definite no's: Thomas, Martin, Stewart, Samb, Carey.
The rest are question marks.

Agree
Leggett, Bilau and Freeman are a core to build around
Leggett would be very desirable in the transfer portal as he has raised his stock this year. Miller needs him here.

Bilau will be an unknown factor, not sure what to expect from him when he does return sometime in Dec. or Jan.
We will need major help or improvement in the frontcourt.

I have thought about the Ish thing if he ever thinks about trading up and possibly being closer to home because of his ill father.

[ramster]

I see 3 definite A10 caliber players: Leggett, Bilau and Freeman.
Definite no's: Thomas, Martin, Stewart, Samb, Carey.
The rest are question marks.

Agree
Leggett, Bilau and Freeman are a core to build around
Leggett would be very desirable in the transfer portal as he has raised his stock this year. Miller needs him here.

Bilau will be an unknown factor, not sure what to expect from him when he does return sometime in Dec. or Jan.
We will need major help or improvement in the frontcourt.

I have thought about the Ish thing if he ever thinks about trading up and possibly being closer to home because of his ill father.

Leggett is the most important player for Miller to keep. His leadership, his tenaciousness, work ethic, upside potential and overall talent. He can shoot, drive, rebound, pass, defend and lead.
Other teams see it. He has shown the most improvement of anyone on this team and maybe in the whole A10.
Maryland could knock hard on his door but so could any P6 Team.
Also he ciukd look at having just a couple years left and will URI be the best place those years? Lot to consider.
You see Miller having him at the Media Event today - Miller knows what he has in Leggett. Miller is helping develop Leggett with giant strides being made since Miller arrived.

[Rhody72]

To think that so many here thought Ish should enter the portal and now we can't live without him.

[ramster]

Yep

[reef]

Agree
Leggett, Bilau and Freeman are a core to build around
Leggett would be very desirable in the transfer portal as he has raised his stock this year. Miller needs him here.

Bilau will be an unknown factor, not sure what to expect from him when he does return sometime in Dec. or Jan.
We will need major help or improvement in the frontcourt.

I have thought about the Ish thing if he ever thinks about trading up and possibly being closer to home because of his ill father.

Leggett is the most important player for Miller to keep. His leadership, his tenaciousness, work ethic, upside potential and overall talent. He can shoot, drive, rebound, pass, defend and lead.
Other teams see it. He has shown the most improvement of anyone on this team and maybe in the whole A10.
Maryland could knock hard on his door but so could any P6 Team.
Also he ciukd look at having just a couple years left and will URI be the best place those years? Lot to consider.
You see Miller having him at the Media Event today - Miller knows what he has in Leggett. Miller is helping develop Leggett with giant strides being made since Miller arrived.

Yes he looks like our best player by a pretty large margin

[RIFan]

Would Ish have started over JT or EC?

[Rhody15]

Would Ish have started over JT or EC?

…you serious?

[section(105)]

Would Ish have started over JT or EC?

Serious question? A resounding hell no from me.

[RIFan]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

[PeterRamTime]

Would Ish have started over JT or EC?

Not even over freshman EC or JT.

[Jdrums#3]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Excellent reference point, RIfan.

Ish is a very good player and is important to this particular team but he is not of the caliber of the players you mentioned IMO, as well.

Sometimes losing makes us forget how good, good really is. I know the past several years have done that to me. But I am waking up to the fact that no one player in the current rotation is irreplaceable despite how much I may like their game and become attached to them being here.

[Jersey77]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Excellent reference point, RIfan.

Ish is a very good player and is important to this particular team but he is not of the caliber of the players you mentioned IMO, as well.

Sometimes losing makes us forget how good, good really is. I know the past several years have done that to me. But I am waking up to the fact that no one player in the current rotation is irreplaceable despite how much I may like their game and become attached to them being here.

Well yeah, as previously pointed out before, probably none of our current guards will be on our next NCAAT team.

Next season will be very telling in comparing this rebuild with Dan's starting in 2012.
What impact players Archie brings in and how much improvement/development we see in our current players.

[ramster]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Excellent reference point, RIfan.

Ish is a very good player and is important to this particular team but he is not of the caliber of the players you mentioned IMO, as well.

Sometimes losing makes us forget how good, good really is. I know the past several years have done that to me. But I am waking up to the fact that no one player in the current rotation is irreplaceable despite how much I may like their game and become attached to them being here.

Well yeah, as previously pointed out before, probably none of our current guards will be on our next NCAAT team.

Next season will be very telling in comparing this rebuild with Dan's starting in 2012.
What impact players Archie brings in and how much improvement/development we see in our current players.

Nobody’s comparing him to past URI players or ant least I’m not. Only saying Leggett is a guy Miller will want to hold on to and keep away from the portal as best he can. He’s in his 3rd year here with 2 more years eligibility. He has improved significantly from last season and growing as a leader very nicely.

Among A10 Teams Leggett:

• 8th - 15.9 points per game

• 8th - FT 82.3%

• 15th - 6.1 rebounds per game

• 23rd - 3P 34.1%

[McRam]

Are we sure that Foumena Ed sir Ted because he was not ready for A10 or might it have been for medical reasons. Wasn’t he in the hospital before the season started?

Correct. His decision to redshirt this year from what I heard unofficially.
He was easily our best big man in the preseason scrimmage
Made all tournament team at the NPSI at RIC last February for Orangeburg Prep. He played against RJ Lewis at NPSI and both scored 20+ points. RJ Luis did not make All Tournament like Foumena did and Luis just made A10 Rookie of the Week. I heard good things about Foumena’s play at NPSI at RIC so I was not surprised at how good he looked at the intrasquad scrimmage but was happy to see what I had heard be confirmed. RJ Luis was out in our game last weekend along with Fernandes but Luis is going to be a good one for Frank Martin.

. Yep on RJ Luis. Watched him in the LaSalle Umass game. . He looks better than his three stars. I know that he decided very late on Umass, We’re we pursuing him also?

[ramster]

Are we sure that Foumena Ed sir Ted because he was not ready for A10 or might it have been for medical reasons. Wasn’t he in the hospital before the season started?

Correct. His decision to redshirt this year from what I heard unofficially.
He was easily our best big man in the preseason scrimmage
Made all tournament team at the NPSI at RIC last February for Orangeburg Prep. He played against RJ Lewis at NPSI and both scored 20+ points. RJ Luis did not make All Tournament like Foumena did and Luis just made A10 Rookie of the Week. I heard good things about Foumena’s play at NPSI at RIC so I was not surprised at how good he looked at the intrasquad scrimmage but was happy to see what I had heard be confirmed. RJ Luis was out in our game last weekend along with Fernandes but Luis is going to be a good one for Frank Martin.

. Yep on RJ Luis. Watched him in the LaSalle Umass game. . He looks better than his three stars. I know that he decided very late on Umass, We’re we pursuing him also?

No but we were right there watching Luis’ team play Orangeburg Prep at RI College a year ago when Foumena and Stewart played.
Luis came on late in recruiting. Frank Martin did a good job grabbing him as several P5’s came on late. Solid pickup for UMASS.

[UCH21377]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Where does he fit on this list: EC, Terrel, Dowtin, Stan Robinson, Jarvis Garrett? We had those guys on the SAME TEAM.

Arch has a long way to go.

[Rhody15]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Where does he fit on this list: EC, Terrel, Dowtin, Stan Robinson, Jarvis Garrett? We had those guys on the SAME TEAM.

Arch has a long way to go.

In my opinion the only one you could argue he was better than is Garrett.

[ramster]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Where does he fit on this list: EC, Terrel, Dowtin, Stan Robinson, Jarvis Garrett? We had those guys on the SAME TEAM.

Arch has a long way to go.

A whole other conversation but would EC Mathews, Jared Terrell, Stanford Robinson, Jeff Dowtin, Jarvis Garrett, Hassan Martin, Cutino Mobley, ….even come to URI now with NIL? Or would they stay with No-Sit Out Transfer Policy Porta-Paloosa? Plus players can now go straight from High School, Prep School to the NBA G-League bypassing College completely.

The new world says you need to recruit your current players to keep them from transferring. Transferring was much more rare just 5 years ago.

Losing Leggett would be a huge loss to this current URI team. Hard to replace his experience and leadership. Agree those players mentioned were better than Leggett now, but then again Leggett is only a Sophomore on the roster with this season and 2 more remaining. Story is still being written.

[SGreenwell]

I liked Stan Robinson, but Leggett is better than him. It's always tougher to find someone who can score vs. someone who can defend. He's probably better than Iverson too. Phrasing the question as "would you take him over these X players?" seems kind of silly to me. I'm pretty sure Jared Terrell and E.C. Matthews have exhausted their college eligibility, after all. He's pretty much the one player on the roster with clear All-A10 potential right now, averaging about 16 PPG and 6 RPG in 32 MPG, with a PER of 20.3, and it's not like he's compiling these stats in garbage time of 20-plus point blowouts. It's not his fault that the talent around him hasn't been better.

[SGreenwell]

That’s kinda my point, he is by far our best player, but he wouldn’t have started on our most recent NCAA teams. Just a point of reference for how much of a talent upgrade we need. I assume you would’t start him over Cat either…hahaha.

Where does he fit on this list: EC, Terrel, Dowtin, Stan Robinson, Jarvis Garrett? We had those guys on the SAME TEAM.

Arch has a long way to go.

A whole other conversation but would EC Mathews, Jared Terrell, Stanford Robinson, Jeff Dowtin, Jarvis Garrett, Hassan Martin, Cutino Mobley, ….even come to URI now with NIL? Or would they stay with No-Sit Out Transfer Policy Porta-Paloosa? Plus players can now go straight from High School, Prep School to the NBA G-League bypassing College completely.

The new world says you need to recruit your current players to keep them from transferring. Transferring was much more rare just 5 years ago.

Losing Leggett would be a huge loss to this current URI team. Hard to replace his experience and leadership. Agree those players mentioned were better than Leggett now, but then again Leggett is only a Sophomore on the roster with this season and 2 more remaining. Story is still being written.

All of your listed players pretty much played 20+ MPG right from the start. Minutes per game is still the most valuable currency in college basketball. I realize why people have this dread about URI never being able to retain a young player ever again, but I think it needs to happen more than twice besides during the era of a now-fired coach to really start worrying about it.

[ramster]

It’s all about today. Keeping the players you want to keep.
The recruiting and transfer game has changed immensely