Yes he did, that is why I am a fan of the Bassy addition.
Blue Man, you starting to see the light with him and getting on board?
Yes he did, that is why I am a fan of the Bassy addition.
Getting that new assistant should help the defense improve you would think , what we will lose in recruiting from Kenny should be offset in Coach W bench coaching
Yes, I/ll make that trade off.
That is the best 5 for me too, Reef, pending any further starter level additions.
Jersey, what’s your very your early top 4-5 look like ?Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago Loyola may be the only A10 team that currently has their entire 24-25 roster filled, all 13 scholarships.
They seem to have a solid rotation and could finish in the top 4 again.
They return:
(CG/Wing)) Watson - 2nt Team All-A10 (23-24) averaged 12.6 pts (39% 3PT)/4.6 rebs.
(C) Miles- All-Defensive Team A10 and All Rookie Team A10 (23-24).
(CG) Dawson - Started 15 games, averaged 8 pts (37% 3PT).
Plus CG's averaging double-digit minutes: Quinn and Edwards.
Added from Portal:
(PG) Justin Moore (Drexel) - Averaged 12.4 pts and 3.5 assists.
(PF/F) Nwaokorie (San Diego) - Averaged 11.3 pts/ 5.5 rebs.
(PF/F) DeLoach (Georgia/VCU) - In 22-23 (VCU) averaged 10 pts/ 7 rebs, 3rd Team All A10.
(F) Houinsou (Washington State) - Averaged 4.3 pts/3.4 rebs.
Have the #1 recruiting class (2024) in the A10, freshmen: (F) Young, (F) Hendawy, (G) Turner, (G) Glaskov.
Still very early Drums.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoJersey, what’s your very your early top 4-5 look like ?Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago Loyola may be the only A10 team that currently has their entire 24-25 roster filled, all 13 scholarships.
They seem to have a solid rotation and could finish in the top 4 again.
They return:
(CG/Wing)) Watson - 2nt Team All-A10 (23-24) averaged 12.6 pts (39% 3PT)/4.6 rebs.
(C) Miles- All-Defensive Team A10 and All Rookie Team A10 (23-24).
(CG) Dawson - Started 15 games, averaged 8 pts (37% 3PT).
Plus CG's averaging double-digit minutes: Quinn and Edwards.
Added from Portal:
(PG) Justin Moore (Drexel) - Averaged 12.4 pts and 3.5 assists.
(PF/F) Nwaokorie (San Diego) - Averaged 11.3 pts/ 5.5 rebs.
(PF/F) DeLoach (Georgia/VCU) - In 22-23 (VCU) averaged 10 pts/ 7 rebs, 3rd Team All A10.
(F) Houinsou (Washington State) - Averaged 4.3 pts/3.4 rebs.
Have the #1 recruiting class (2024) in the A10, freshmen: (F) Young, (F) Hendawy, (G) Turner, (G) Glaskov.
So far I am thinking - in no particular order - Dayton (depending on if Holmes stays), SLU and Loyola (based on your recommendation above) but am unsure of anyone else yet because I haven’t paid much attention to them.
That said, I like what we have done so far and think we have closed the gap between us and the top but I need to take a closer look at the other A10 teams to see how many we have potentially jumped to finish closer to the top.
Yet it’s sounding here like people are satisfied with their suggested starting 5rambone 78 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago We are going to be about a .500 team in conference and maybe slightly above that overall.
As of now, my take anyway.
Again, not good enough.
I still hope we get another impact transfer which could improve that prediction.
Bone, we have 4 openings left ?rambone 78 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago We are going to be about a .500 team in conference and maybe slightly above that overall.
As of now, my take anyway.
Again, not good enough.
I still hope we get another impact transfer which could improve that prediction.
My wish is that...of the 4 open spots, we fill them with 3 players that can start next season, and all these dudes folks are penciling in to start now...take a step back. Is there anyone NOT wishing/hoping/pleading for that??? Like...why would that not be a good thing?Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoBone, we have 4 openings left ?rambone 78 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago We are going to be about a .500 team in conference and maybe slightly above that overall.
As of now, my take anyway.
Again, not good enough.
I still hope we get another impact transfer which could improve that prediction.
My wish list for 2 of the final 4 spots that could boost us up past mid-pack and into top 4-5 with improvement from the core returners…
I would like a good 3pt shooter and a good rim protector/defender for the front court.
For the final 2 I would like to see a couple of developmental players that could potentially stick here for a few years.
STOP. Please... I think Arch was the best hire available. But...if he could bring in 4 starters, better than what's here now, and didn't, because of how the locker room and bench would have hurt feelz....we should all be calling for his head.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago NYG, 4 more starter quality players would be great from our perspective. But, I don’t think 4 more would come here as it would be too crowded for PT. Plus, not sure we can even afford them.
Also, yes it is too late for one of the core starters we have now to enter the portal since it’s closed but bringing in four other starters and Archie likely loses the locker room and potentially the bench.
Why do you refuse to grasp that Arch wanted to keep a core group of players and build a team around them?NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoSTOP. Please... I think Arch was the best hire available. But...if he could bring in 4 starters, better than what's here now, and didn't, because of how the locker room and bench would have hurt feelz....we should all be calling for his head.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago NYG, 4 more starter quality players would be great from our perspective. But, I don’t think 4 more would come here as it would be too crowded for PT. Plus, not sure we can even afford them.
Also, yes it is too late for one of the core starters we have now to enter the portal since it’s closed but bringing in four other starters and Archie likely loses the locker room and potentially the bench.
And not a SINGLE coach in America would want an entirely new roster in year 3. It's preposterous.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago If he could is a big if, NYG. I don’t think we can yet as I don’t believe we are able to from an NIL standpoint at this point in time.
We are paying for the core and the 3 new players we brought in already. Do you know that we have the NIL money available to add 3 more talented starters in addition to what we already have ? If yes, then enlighten me.
Of course any coach would add 3 more starter upgrades if they could afford it but not every coach has the NIL to do that.
The rest of us are just speculating on what we can realistically add at this point.NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoMy wish is that...of the 4 open spots, we fill them with 3 players that can start next season, and all these dudes folks are penciling in to start now...take a step back. Is there anyone NOT wishing/hoping/pleading for that??? Like...why would that not be a good thing?Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoBone, we have 4 openings left ?rambone 78 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago We are going to be about a .500 team in conference and maybe slightly above that overall.
As of now, my take anyway.
Again, not good enough.
I still hope we get another impact transfer which could improve that prediction.
My wish list for 2 of the final 4 spots that could boost us up past mid-pack and into top 4-5 with improvement from the core returners…
I would like a good 3pt shooter and a good rim protector/defender for the front court.
For the final 2 I would like to see a couple of developmental players that could potentially stick here for a few years.
I like their coach also , Will guess he will be in the P5 within a few years , he’s so darn young too !Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago Loyola may be the only A10 team that currently has their entire 24-25 roster filled, all 13 scholarships.
They seem to have a solid rotation and could finish in the top 4 again.
They return:
(CG/Wing)) Watson - 2nt Team All-A10 (23-24) averaged 12.6 pts (39% 3PT)/4.6 rebs.
(C) Miles- All-Defensive Team A10 and All Rookie Team A10 (23-24).
(CG) Dawson - Started 15 games, averaged 8 pts (37% 3PT).
Plus CG's averaging double-digit minutes: Quinn and Edwards.
Added from Portal:
(PG) Justin Moore (Drexel) - Averaged 12.4 pts and 3.5 assists.
(PF/F) Nwaokorie (San Diego) - Averaged 11.3 pts/ 5.5 rebs.
(PF/F) DeLoach (Georgia/VCU) - In 22-23 (VCU) averaged 10 pts/ 7 rebs, 3rd Team All A10.
(F) Houinsou (Washington State) - Averaged 4.3 pts/3.4 rebs.
Have the #1 recruiting class (2024) in the A10, freshmen: (F) Young, (F) Hendawy, (G) Turner, (G) Glaskov.
Well Archie said all year he wanted an older more experienced team that has been together multiple years and that is what he is accomplishing this offseason.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago True, PRT. Shouldn’t overlook or underestimate the possibility of returning players improving. I didn’t consider it in the debate with NYG.
That said, NYG’s an intelligent poster. I even recommended him for Rhody GM/KB liaison earlier today. I might have to rethink that if he keeps disagreeing with me.
With our current roster, the chances of us landing three more starters are slim to none. House, Green, and Lawerence are definitely starting. Fuchs and Bassy are most likely starting or, at the very least, playing starter minutes. Cam should have a big role.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago If he could is a big if, NYG. I don’t think we can yet as I don’t believe we are able to from an NIL standpoint at this point in time.
We are paying for the core and the 3 new players we brought in already. Do you know that we have the NIL money available to add 3 more talented starters in addition to what we already have ? If yes, then enlighten me.
Of course any coach would add 3 more starter upgrades if they could afford it but not every coach has the NIL to do that.
Yes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWith our current roster, the chances of us landing three more starters are slim to none. House, Green, and Lawerence are definitely starting. Fuchs and Bassy are most likely starting or, at the very least, playing starter minutes. Cam should have a big role.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago If he could is a big if, NYG. I don’t think we can yet as I don’t believe we are able to from an NIL standpoint at this point in time.
We are paying for the core and the 3 new players we brought in already. Do you know that we have the NIL money available to add 3 more talented starters in addition to what we already have ? If yes, then enlighten me.
Of course any coach would add 3 more starter upgrades if they could afford it but not every coach has the NIL to do that.
I think we could land a starting-caliber or 6th-man wing or big, but three starters? Not a chance.
While I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoYes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWith our current roster, the chances of us landing three more starters are slim to none. House, Green, and Lawerence are definitely starting. Fuchs and Bassy are most likely starting or, at the very least, playing starter minutes. Cam should have a big role.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago If he could is a big if, NYG. I don’t think we can yet as I don’t believe we are able to from an NIL standpoint at this point in time.
We are paying for the core and the 3 new players we brought in already. Do you know that we have the NIL money available to add 3 more talented starters in addition to what we already have ? If yes, then enlighten me.
Of course any coach would add 3 more starter upgrades if they could afford it but not every coach has the NIL to do that.
I think we could land a starting-caliber or 6th-man wing or big, but three starters? Not a chance.
We just need to add quality depth at this time that can give us solid minutes.
I would add a rim protector and maybe 1 or 2 more frontcourt players, plus the best available at that point, possibly a scoring wing or guard.
Also, wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some youth with at a least 2-years left, but I would still take a solid veteran contributor if able.
Unlike several others here, I would be okay as mentioned before with our starting 5: Bassy, House, Lawrence, Green, and Fuchs.
I feel that backcourt would be able to compete well with most of the others in the A10.
Green would have a full year now, was our leading scorer, and many felt our best player last season, averaged 14.3 pts (43.4% 3PT).
Fuchs will only develop and get better, had a strong freshman season averaging 8 pts/ 6.4 rebs, plus 6 double-doubles.
I was one of those who wasn't immediately sold on the addition of Green and Fuchs, but admittedly I was mistaken, glad for that.
We have limited NIL $, trying to be realistic.RamStock wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhile I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoYes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
With our current roster, the chances of us landing three more starters are slim to none. House, Green, and Lawerence are definitely starting. Fuchs and Bassy are most likely starting or, at the very least, playing starter minutes. Cam should have a big role.
I think we could land a starting-caliber or 6th-man wing or big, but three starters? Not a chance.
We just need to add quality depth at this time that can give us solid minutes.
I would add a rim protector and maybe 1 or 2 more frontcourt players, plus the best available at that point, possibly a scoring wing or guard.
Also, wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some youth with at a least 2-years left, but I would still take a solid veteran contributor if able.
Unlike several others here, I would be okay as mentioned before with our starting 5: Bassy, House, Lawrence, Green, and Fuchs.
I feel that backcourt would be able to compete well with most of the others in the A10.
Green would have a full year now, was our leading scorer, and many felt our best player last season, averaged 14.3 pts (43.4% 3PT).
Fuchs will only develop and get better, had a strong freshman season averaging 8 pts/ 6.4 rebs, plus 6 double-doubles.
I was one of those who wasn't immediately sold on the addition of Green and Fuchs, but admittedly I was mistaken, glad for that.
I think it’s nuts to say a freshman like Fuchs couldn’t be a difference maker on a postseason team. Ever since we sucked it seems like people on here forget how raw some of our freshman looked before they become good starters on nit/ncaa Rhody teams in the past. I’ve listed examples of former players a handful of times so I’m not doing it again but if Fuchs continues to improve which many players do he could definitely be one of the better big man in the conference his junior/senior year. The problem is most players are gone by then in this day and age.RamStock wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhile I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoYes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
With our current roster, the chances of us landing three more starters are slim to none. House, Green, and Lawerence are definitely starting. Fuchs and Bassy are most likely starting or, at the very least, playing starter minutes. Cam should have a big role.
I think we could land a starting-caliber or 6th-man wing or big, but three starters? Not a chance.
We just need to add quality depth at this time that can give us solid minutes.
I would add a rim protector and maybe 1 or 2 more frontcourt players, plus the best available at that point, possibly a scoring wing or guard.
Also, wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some youth with at a least 2-years left, but I would still take a solid veteran contributor if able.
Unlike several others here, I would be okay as mentioned before with our starting 5: Bassy, House, Lawrence, Green, and Fuchs.
I feel that backcourt would be able to compete well with most of the others in the A10.
Green would have a full year now, was our leading scorer, and many felt our best player last season, averaged 14.3 pts (43.4% 3PT).
Fuchs will only develop and get better, had a strong freshman season averaging 8 pts/ 6.4 rebs, plus 6 double-doubles.
I was one of those who wasn't immediately sold on the addition of Green and Fuchs, but admittedly I was mistaken, glad for that.
Ya like sure I’d love to have two players that dropped 14 a game decide to stay and come off the bench so we can have two other better players instead but that’s not happening. At least not this year as we are still trying to rebuild. Lawrence and Bassy was a nice start. Traore I’m not sure but I’m willing to give him a shot. We definitely have a better team right now. The question is can we be much better which really needs to happen.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWe have limited NIL $, trying to be realistic.RamStock wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhile I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
Yes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.
We just need to add quality depth at this time that can give us solid minutes.
I would add a rim protector and maybe 1 or 2 more frontcourt players, plus the best available at that point, possibly a scoring wing or guard.
Also, wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some youth with at a least 2-years left, but I would still take a solid veteran contributor if able.
Unlike several others here, I would be okay as mentioned before with our starting 5: Bassy, House, Lawrence, Green, and Fuchs.
I feel that backcourt would be able to compete well with most of the others in the A10.
Green would have a full year now, was our leading scorer, and many felt our best player last season, averaged 14.3 pts (43.4% 3PT).
Fuchs will only develop and get better, had a strong freshman season averaging 8 pts/ 6.4 rebs, plus 6 double-doubles.
I was one of those who wasn't immediately sold on the addition of Green and Fuchs, but admittedly I was mistaken, glad for that.
Besides I expect a major jump in the returning player's production, plus staff improvement.
Doubt we can do any better than Bassy, House, Lawrence, and Cam in the backcourt.
Green according to many was our best player, so doubtful he sits.
Fuchs had a very strong freshman season, he should also continue to improve.
I think the 2 new additions will give us a boost, plus a year together with the others will help.
To add to this point, it’s almost being dismissed about the lack of continuity or availability of our rotation and their familiarity with each other and the system they’re in.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoYa like sure I’d love to have two players that dropped 14 a game decide to stay and come off the bench so we can have two other better players instead but that’s not happening. At least not this year as we are still trying to rebuild. Lawrence and Bassy was a nice start. Traore I’m not sure but I’m willing to give him a shot. We definitely have a better team right now. The question is can we be much better which really needs to happen.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWe have limited NIL $, trying to be realistic.RamStock wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
While I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.
Besides I expect a major jump in the returning player's production, plus staff improvement.
Doubt we can do any better than Bassy, House, Lawrence, and Cam in the backcourt.
Green according to many was our best player, so doubtful he sits.
Fuchs had a very strong freshman season, he should also continue to improve.
I think the 2 new additions will give us a boost, plus a year together with the others will help.
It wasn't that long ago that you wouldn't have to remind people that continuity matters and that players get better over time. Especially freshmen. Oh and of course, injuries and player availability lolol.Blue Man wrote: ↑3 weeks agoTo add to this point, it’s almost being dismissed about the lack of continuity or availability of our rotation and their familiarity with each other and the system they’re in.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoYa like sure I’d love to have two players that dropped 14 a game decide to stay and come off the bench so we can have two other better players instead but that’s not happening. At least not this year as we are still trying to rebuild. Lawrence and Bassy was a nice start. Traore I’m not sure but I’m willing to give him a shot. We definitely have a better team right now. The question is can we be much better which really needs to happen.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
We have limited NIL $, trying to be realistic.
Besides I expect a major jump in the returning player's production, plus staff improvement.
Doubt we can do any better than Bassy, House, Lawrence, and Cam in the backcourt.
Green according to many was our best player, so doubtful he sits.
Fuchs had a very strong freshman season, he should also continue to improve.
I think the 2 new additions will give us a boost, plus a year together with the others will help.
For everyone that keeps putting Loyola on a pedestal, we’re doing literally what they did to a T one year behind their schedule. They were worse than us 2 years ago, and then this last year they retained a core and added some pieces and made a huge jump. That jump wasn’t their transfers, it was the development of the bodies already in the building.
We were not as bad as our record and some of the teams we lost to. There was a huge lack of maturity and leadership - which makes sense because you had zero seniors, one player with even a lick of A10 experience, and we relied on 2 true freshmen for major minutes.
I put it in detail in another post but not a single A10 team had the breadth and time missed in their starters and rotation that URI did up and down the roster.
Through growth and the couple pieces we’ve added so far were head and shoulders better. We retained our 2-3 best players, and 4 of our top 5. You could make an argument we actually retained our 4 best players.
I can guarantee you - even though the sunshine brigade is acting like losing Luis as a PG was some kind of negative indication of the direction of our program - that if we didn’t get a true PG they would be bitching that we had a slow PG would couldn’t run in Luis still hanging around.
Bassy as a PG (not necessarily player) is an upgrade over Luis as a PG. Lawrence is an upgrade over Montgomery. Green, Estevez, and Fuchs should all improve. We’re better. Now it’s about adding depth.
Glad you said it.. that was one of the more idiotic takes i've seen on here. The teams that are successful are the ones that can keep a core together. That will count for something next year.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhy do you refuse to grasp that Arch wanted to keep a core group of players and build a team around them?NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoSTOP. Please... I think Arch was the best hire available. But...if he could bring in 4 starters, better than what's here now, and didn't, because of how the locker room and bench would have hurt feelz....we should all be calling for his head.Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago NYG, 4 more starter quality players would be great from our perspective. But, I don’t think 4 more would come here as it would be too crowded for PT. Plus, not sure we can even afford them.
Also, yes it is too late for one of the core starters we have now to enter the portal since it’s closed but bringing in four other starters and Archie likely loses the locker room and potentially the bench.
I mean, your fixation on this hypothetical just makes zero sense.
It is idiotic to suggest that, if we could get 4 newbs that could start over what is here, that we wouldn't. Calling that take idiotic is just giving in to the idea that he can't get better players than what are here. Maybe he can't, but what the heckskie, don't settle, aim high, or at least allow for the possibility.... Or, on the other hand, continue to ridicule those that would ... Ridicule seems to be the go to here, so carry on with the "depth piece" talkBattleTested wrote: ↑3 weeks agoGlad you said it.. that was one of the more idiotic takes i've seen on here. The teams that are successful are the ones that can keep a core together. That will count for something next year.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhy do you refuse to grasp that Arch wanted to keep a core group of players and build a team around them?NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
STOP. Please... I think Arch was the best hire available. But...if he could bring in 4 starters, better than what's here now, and didn't, because of how the locker room and bench would have hurt feelz....we should all be calling for his head.
I mean, your fixation on this hypothetical just makes zero sense.
Agreed, Stevey.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑3 weeks agoI think it’s nuts to say a freshman like Fuchs couldn’t be a difference maker on a postseason team. Ever since we sucked it seems like people on here forget how raw some of our freshman looked before they become good starters on nit/ncaa Rhody teams in the past. I’ve listed examples of former players a handful of times so I’m not doing it again but if Fuchs continues to improve which many players do he could definitely be one of the better big man in the conference his junior/senior year. The problem is most players are gone by then in this day and age.RamStock wrote: ↑3 weeks agoWhile I agree they aren’t acquiring 3 more starters. Almost anyone on this team could be passed over if we picked up the right transfer. I was one of the people who thought Fuchs had a very nice year, but I don’t see any of these guys as difference makers on a winning team with a Legitimate chance at postseason. Adding all bench players isn’t even close to good enough. The players returning were from a last place team. Maybe the goal is to just have a winning record this year. I’m hoping we are setting the bar higher than that.Jersey77 wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
Yes Stevey, that isn't happening, actually I doubt we bring in any immediate starters at this time.
We just need to add quality depth at this time that can give us solid minutes.
I would add a rim protector and maybe 1 or 2 more frontcourt players, plus the best available at that point, possibly a scoring wing or guard.
Also, wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some youth with at a least 2-years left, but I would still take a solid veteran contributor if able.
Unlike several others here, I would be okay as mentioned before with our starting 5: Bassy, House, Lawrence, Green, and Fuchs.
I feel that backcourt would be able to compete well with most of the others in the A10.
Green would have a full year now, was our leading scorer, and many felt our best player last season, averaged 14.3 pts (43.4% 3PT).
Fuchs will only develop and get better, had a strong freshman season averaging 8 pts/ 6.4 rebs, plus 6 double-doubles.
I was one of those who wasn't immediately sold on the addition of Green and Fuchs, but admittedly I was mistaken, glad for that.
Battletested, I agree with your core concept but I think describing NYG’sapproach as idiotic is over the top.NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑2 weeks agoIt is idiotic to suggest that, if we could get 4 newbs that could start over what is here, that we wouldn't. Calling that take idiotic is just giving in to the idea that he can't get better players than what are here. Maybe he can't, but what the heckskie, don't settle, aim high, or at least allow for the possibility.... Or, on the other hand, continue to ridicule those that would ... Ridicule seems to be the go to here, so carry on with the "depth piece" talkBattleTested wrote: ↑3 weeks agoGlad you said it.. that was one of the more idiotic takes i've seen on here. The teams that are successful are the ones that can keep a core together. That will count for something next year.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑3 weeks ago
Why do you refuse to grasp that Arch wanted to keep a core group of players and build a team around them?
I mean, your fixation on this hypothetical just makes zero sense.
So, the schools don't pay for overseas trips?
No 208,
If the school is funding a trip .... And the schoolramster wrote: ↑2 weeks agoNo 208,
They do pay for overseas trips but now the NIL Collective is the priority so they are looking at elimination the trips allowed every 4 years in summer months.
Next maybe MTE in season OOC Tournaments will get cancelled or reduced to get more money for player bidding and player retention.
Outside my pay gradeNYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑2 weeks agoIf the school is funding a trip .... And the schoolramster wrote: ↑2 weeks agoNo 208,
They do pay for overseas trips but now the NIL Collective is the priority so they are looking at elimination the trips allowed every 4 years in summer months.
Next maybe MTE in season OOC Tournaments will get cancelled or reduced to get more money for player bidding and player retention.
can't pay NIL...how does canceling trips impact NIL?