KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

bigappleram wrote:Its easier said than done. First off, you have to have the personnel -- long teams can play a tough zone, we arent exactly a long team pending who is on the floor. Its also something you have to practice A LOT to be proficient at, given practice time is limited and there are many things a team needs to work on something has to give. I don't subscribe to the notion that a Zone defense is the cure to our ills. VCU played us zone last night for a few stretches and our offense looked much better. Per an earlier post, at the Div 1 level zones can get shredded with simple execution. I do like it as an occasional wrinkle you throw a team out of a time out or late game situation. Also prefer zone in dead ball situations under your own hoop.

I do not think the Zone defense is the cure either.
Last night was interesting when we changed up to the press and wend from down 22 to 9 when all thought the game was completely over, even me. It was a solid comeback with about 9 minutes to go.

Interesting the announcer last night said VCU had gone to a zone with one guy covering Four exclusively. Whatever they did with Four it worked as they pitched a shut out with Four getting zero points.

Four couldn't even get a shot off. Unfortunately, he is useless against a defense like that. Not only zero points, but zero assists also.

VCU also had, at most times, three guys on the floor that shoot over 40% from 3-point land. Not the best recipe for playing zone when a team is that good at shooting out of it.

Even if we had no injuries, it's highly questionable we would have had the frontcourt depth to be an NCAA tourney team this season.

Akele and Thompson wouldn't have played as much either.

Hassan, Iverson, and Watson for the 4 and 5 spots. Not nearly enough, especially with their propensity for fouling.

Maybe we shouldn't have bought into the hype to begin with?

If so, maybe this train wreck of a season would have been a little easier to take.....

I have been a huge Thompson fan since he signed and I combed the internet for whatever I can find on him. Im disappointed he hit a wall.

I really want to believe that the whole team goes into the offseason and comes back several times better.

Many guys you have to question what they will look like next year.

Jarvis? Continues his dominance? Fixes free throw woes?

Jared? Comes back more consistent? Will he ever consistently rebound?

Iverson? He does a lot. For him to be great he has to do more. Add to everything he showed this year.

Martin? Comeback the player that dominates? Not the guy thats on the bench?

EC? Healthy? Lead guard for a Tournament team?

Thompson? Confident? Tournament Contributor?

Akele? Stronger? Tournament contributor?

Robinson? Wild card?

Berry? Continue to morph that body into something special? Kid has great touch and rebounding skills. I wonder if Hurley hasn't already made his mind up on Berry.

Freshmen additions? Is there a front court starter there? A guy that can play a role on a Tournament team? Maybe 2?


The worst thing for Hassan Martin will be if DH refuses to play HM with a bigger guy allowing Martin to abuse the smaller player. Martin's length is an issue against tall teams and forcing him to be the center is not good for his career IMHO.

No more hype for me, it seems it is already out there with descriptions of awesome talent etc for next year and once again can't miss Dance. I am going one game at a time, the in coming players, I think will not be out of the box A-10 ready to make immediate signicant contributions. Also, as we have seen the other teams do not stay stagnant, they will all evolve as we will. The previous hype was easy to buy into as we are so starved for the Dance......

"Next year's potential" is like the weather forecast. If it turns out sunny, great, but you can't bank on it.
I really don't think you can gauge much without seeing a few games first...just my humble newbie opinion...

My personal observation of last nights game was this; Garrett was trying to do too much, but IS the leader (just hit the free throws) Terrell had a good game, aggressive and takes great shots, looks like he can take over a game at times. Iverson also had a good game, much improved over Dayton, Hassan had a good game too, had to deal with Alie-Cox who is a handful, everyone else was a no show on offense. Four didn't score, Thompson is still off. Watson didnt do much. Defense broke down constantly. Man, zone, it didn't matter, speed kills both types of defenses.

Why is everyone so negative? This team is undefeated...if you count the moral victories, the games they were winning with 5 minutes to go, and the games they didn't quit.

This team can go to Brooklyn and dominate!

Leave Garrett alone!
What the hell do you people want from the guy?
He's playing with an injury that would keep MLB millionaires
out for months.
Ramster, who cares if you 2 guard rebounds? Are you serious?
Frontcourt? Mo Allie-Cox abused ours, and he's only 6'6".
We made that Egyptian kid look like an all star.
I'd love to see Hassan for once play PF, and not have to be buried
in the middle.
I like Iverson. He's such a good rebounder. He made a couple
of super passes that went uncommented on by the talking heads.
He does a lot of things. He only needs to solve the fouls to be
an impact player.
However, there is some real talent here on in the program.
It needs to be supplemented by size and depth. Quality depth.
The lack of in season development by Thompson
and to a lesser degree, Akele, is troubling.
Hassan, EC, Terrell and Garrett all greatly improved
from the beginning of their freshman year to the end of that year.
These kids are going the other way.
I'm not going to comment on next year.
We've heard the hype and bought into it in previous years.
Time for everyone to step back and see the actual product
before buying in.

^^^
Well said Rod, especially the Hassan observation.

3rd game this year we got pummeled and still mounted a spirited comeback.

Did any of you really have this one in the win column pre season?

Agree with Rod - Martin is ultimate team player and is only now nearing 100% fit.

Time to turn him loose in his natural position !!!

Too bad it won't be until his senior season. Hassan that is.

As far as CT and Akele. there is some concern that just how talented are they?

CT seems to have lost his confidence in his shot.

Akele imo just needs to get stronger.

I doubt either of them will be much more than role players during their time here.

But hopefully quality role players. There's always a need for them.

rodfromcranston wrote:Leave Garrett alone!
What the hell do you people want from the guy?
He's playing with an injury that would keep MLB millionaires
out for months.
Ramster, who cares if you 2 guard rebounds? Are you serious?
Frontcourt? Mo Allie-Cox abused ours, and he's only 6'6".
We made that Egyptian kid look like an all star.
I'd love to see Hassan for once play PF, and not have to be buried
in the middle.
I like Iverson. He's such a good rebounder. He made a couple
of super passes that went uncommented on by the talking heads.
He does a lot of things. He only needs to solve the fouls to be
an impact player.
However, there is some real talent here on in the program.
It needs to be supplemented by size and depth. Quality depth.
The lack of in season development by Thompson
and to a lesser degree, Akele, is troubling.
Hassan, EC, Terrell and Garrett all greatly improved
from the beginning of their freshman year to the end of that year.
These kids are going the other way.
I'm not going to comment on next year.
We've heard the hype and bought into it in previous years.
Time for everyone to step back and see the actual product
before buying in.

Ramster, who cares if you 2 guard rebounds? Are you serious?
Sure I am serious.
But my original comments on Terrell's rebounding were made after the Dayton game when Terrell only had 1 rebound - not after last night's game. Last night Terrell had a better 4 instead of 1 and we was more aggressive on the boards than he was against Dayton. We were much stronger in rebounding last night outrebounding VCU by 12 rebounds 41-29. Against Dayton we were outrebounded by 8 so rebounding was not our problem last night.
In the Dayton game our 3 starting guards were outrebounded by Dayton's starting guards 15-5 - that was my original point.
Last night our starting guards had a much improved 13 rebounds: Garrett (4), McGlynn(5), and Terrell(4)
Furthermore, Not sure I would call Terrell a 2 guard when we have Garrett the PG, McGlynn @ SG, then Terrell becomes the 3 Guard, or I suppose you could say we are playing with two "2" guards.
If no injuries then Terrell would be the 2 guard but he had to switch to 3 guard in the 3 guard offense that we play.
Hurley after the Iona game told Terrell he needed to rebound better, specifically on the offensive boards.
Looking back at the stats:
Last year:
2014-2015 Terrell 2.4 rpg in 27 mpg. .5 offensive. He was 6th on the team in rpg
2015-2016 Terrell 3.7 rpg in 35 mpg. .5 offensive. He is 5th on the team in rpg
Iverson 6.6
Martin 5.9
Watson 4.7
Garrett 3.9 with 1.0 offensive
Terrell 3.7

If those two(CT and Akele)do not develop and grow into more than role players, counting on them as part of the needed depth sounds a concern to me.....

rambone 78 wrote: As far as CT and Akele. there is some concern that just how talented are they?

CT seems to have lost his confidence in his shot.

Akele imo just needs to get stronger.

I doubt either of them will be much more than role players during their time here.

But hopefully quality role players. There's always a need for them.

Maybe pump the brakes a little on CT and Akele? I seem to remember a lot of people ready to give up on Garrett and Terrell earlier this season to.

Thompson especially I think still has a chance to be a very solid A-10 guard.

Sorry, if you depend on your 2 guard for rebounding,
there's a serious personnel problem.
Guards that rebound are a luxury,not the rule.

Only one ball to go around so I am not sure how much CT's development really will impact the team next year with EC back. Obviously, better is a whole lot better than worse. Still...I don't buy the "wall" thing for him. He played nine minutes over seven days before last night. He's a bench guy and should be able to give 15 minutes even as a frosh. I am much more worried about the wall for JG. Logging a ton of hard, hard minutes and not the biggest guy in the world. Rod is right, though. This team needs frontcourt help if it wants to dance next year. Whatever you do......do NOT look at Rokas Gustys game log for this year. Holy cow.

"Whatever you do......do NOT look at Rokas Gustys game log for this year. Holy cow."

Why would we want to?

RAM67 wrote:"Whatever you do......do NOT look at Rokas Gustys game log for this year. Holy cow."

Why would we want to?

There are some on the board who have implied that Gustys would be a Ram but DH decided to hold the last scholarship for Jordan Hare to return in the fall, which he did briefly, before leaving school again. I believe he is exactly the player URI is missing. He would let HM move out to his more natural spot.

Sorry, GBG, I did look.
Wow!
FOUR 20 rebound games!
EIGHT games over 15 rebounds.
Nineteen double figure rebound games.
Thirteen double-doubles.
Two 20-20 games.
33 blocked shots.
64% FG%.
Only weakness is horrid FT%.
Granted it's at a lower level of play,
but still, the ability is obvious.
In any case, one hell of alot better than
the ghost of Jordan Hare.
He's only fouled out of two games.

rodfromcranston wrote:Sorry, if you depend on your 2 guard for rebounding,
there's a serious personnel problem.
Guards that rebound are a luxury,not the rule.

Yes, I expect much more than one rebound in 38 minutes in a game against Dayton.
but is Terrell a 2 guard or a 3 guard? In my mind he is a 3. McGynn is clearly the 2, Garrett is the 3.

But again, my comments were from the Dayton game, not last night's game. Last night rebounding was much better outrebounding VCU by 12, Dayton we got outrebounded by 8.

and yes, Guards that rebound are a luxury, a very nice luxury. The rebounding gap between McGlynn and our 3 guard of last year is very significant
McGlynn 2.4rpg and 2.2 in conference
Mathews last year 4.6rpg, 4.6 in conf so an additional 2.4 rpg the rest of the team has to make up to break even in conf play

Those rebounds will be a nice luxury to have back next year, especially in close games

Gonebarongone wrote:Only one ball to go around so I am not sure how much CT's development really will impact the team next year with EC back. Obviously, better is a whole lot better than worse. Still...I don't buy the "wall" thing for him. He played nine minutes over seven days before last night. He's a bench guy and should be able to give 15 minutes even as a frosh.

I don't think you understand what the "wall" is all about. Minutes you're playing in the games might matter somewhat, but the bigger impact is the months and months of training and competing at a level a whole order of magnitude different than anything that you've done in your athletic career up to that point. I think there is definitely some evidence that Thompson has hit a wall, whereas I think Akele is just more a developmental player and probably right about where you'd have expected him to be. Rambone questioning whether these guys will even amount to solid rotation guys is classic Rambone.

You also have players juggling academics and
basketball at the collegiate level,
for the first time.
Something one and done guys never have to deal with.

TruePoint wrote:

Gonebarongone wrote:Only one ball to go around so I am not sure how much CT's development really will impact the team next year with EC back. Obviously, better is a whole lot better than worse. Still...I don't buy the "wall" thing for him. He played nine minutes over seven days before last night. He's a bench guy and should be able to give 15 minutes even as a frosh.

I don't think you understand what the "wall" is all about. Minutes you're playing in the games might matter somewhat, but the bigger impact is the months and months of training and competing at a level a whole order of magnitude different than anything that you've done in your athletic career up to that point. I think there is definitely some evidence that Thompson has hit a wall, whereas I think Akele is just more a developmental player and probably right about where you'd have expected him to be. Rambone questioning whether these guys will even amount to solid rotation guys is classic Rambone.

No...I understand. I just don't think it applies to a bench guy in the age of 20 hour NCAA limit weeks. Especially when he had nine court minutes the prior seven days. I think people minds naturally try to draw conclusions. These kids aren't like 30 years ago when you played your local HS games and then, all of a sudden, it's high level D1 hoops. They have played AAU basketball, usually high level prep ball, etc. I am not saying it's not a transition. Only that it's probably not the reason he is missing shots now.

I would rather have Rokas than not, but he has half as many rebounds per game OOC than in conference. The reduction his his production against upper half A10 teams or similar is significant. The CAA, despite good metrics (#9 Conf in KenPom), still has many crap teams he can feast upon.

That said, he would still be able contribute and the net would be positive, given how Hass could play PF.

Gonebarongone wrote:

RAM67 wrote:"Whatever you do......do NOT look at Rokas Gustys game log for this year. Holy cow."

Why would we want to?

There are some on the board who have implied that Gustys would be a Ram but DH decided to hold the last scholarship for Jordan Hare to return in the fall, which he did briefly, before leaving school again. I believe he is exactly the player URI is missing. He would let HM move out to his more natural spot.

All of that may be true, but there is still no reason to look, as he is not on our team, and you and others keep telling people not to say what if EC was not hurt. he's not on the team either. Another less than veiled questioning of DH's decision making.

Sorry, 67, but that was questioned as it was
happening.
It's fair game.

Having Gustys might help a bit. No doubt you could probably cut his counting stats by 30-50% were he playing in the A10. Hindsight is 20/20, and while some did second guess it at the time, I was very much okay with the calculated risk of holding the scholarship for He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named.

Given the pick of any of our near-misses from recruiting recently, Charles Cooke would be at the top of my list followed by Chris Silva.

I'd take Silva over Cook any day.
50% for Rokas if he playing in the A-10?
Totally absurd.

I remember the situation well , but my point is why bother looking at his stats now? He's not on our team and there is no point in playing "what if". DH made the decision to go with Hare, not knowing he would stab him in the back again. I just don't think you can blame Dan after the fact.

rodfromcranston wrote:I'd take Silva over Cook any day.
50% for Rokas if he playing in the A-10?
Totally absurd.

Yeah, I'd predict a drop from 14 and 12 to about 8pts/6-7rbs.

And not that Silva wouldn't be great in Keaney Blue and have lots of upside left, you'd take him "any day" over Cooke? Cooke is averaging 16/6 with shooting percentages of 48/45/71.

50%?

UNC-W is 66 in kenpom and he had 21 boards! 12/7 against Saint Bonnie's. 8/11 against FSU. I think it's closer to 90%.

I would have taken the same risk with Hare. I probably said it back then. I think collecting so many guards where you had to choose between Hare and another big was probably the bigger issue.

If we had any of them, the difference would be substantial.

But we don't, so there's that.

I seem to remember that Rokas also played a role in him not coming here.

I think DH's emphasis on every moment and second fatigues the club.

IF he allows the game to ebb and flow he can pick his spots where he coaches the team up in an inbounds play or whatever. The players will likely find their own rhythm too.

Coaching isn't every conceivable thing. Its plugging a hole and redirecting. I don't think he has gotten that.

Unless you coach a top 5 team. Then your hounding them to dominate every second.

With lessor talented teams they can't win the whole game. They just have to win key moments and the end of the game.

**** Free Advice for Dan Hurley****

I think DH has learned that this isn't Wagner.

Different ballgame. Much steeper learning curve.

This may not be a P5 league, but this is much closer to big boy school, than where he came from.

Just because we have talent, doesn't mean that it translates to big wins.

It's what he does with that talent, that makes the difference.

Why stop at free advice? Maybe we should charge him to attend the Keaney Blue Coaching Clinic. We can watch Hoosiers, tell him how to implement a zone defense, teach him how to coach FTs, and how to run an offense.

I do find it kind of funny/ironic that some of the same people that say having EC wouldn't make much of a difference are saying that having Gustys would make a substantial difference.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have him then not have him given the current situation, I just find it interesting after all the talk about our problems being so much bigger than one player (EC).

We need good big men, more than more guards. We had NO frontcourt depth. At guard, at least we had some.

Both of course would have made a difference.

When I said substantial, having either wouldn't have made enough difference to Dance this year.

Having both? Now that would be different.

I will clarify.

If we had say, Cooke, we would have 3-4 more wins. NIT?

If we had EC, we would have 3-4 more wins. NIT?

If we had them both, we would have 6-8 more wins. Top 3 in the league. We'd still have some close losses, but not nearly as many.

Get on your Dancin' shoes!

It's fun to play the "what if" game at URI.

It's all we've got, unfortunately. We get to do it a lot.

Good discussion but not in this thread !

We have EC, Gustys and Kenny Green we weren't beating VCU last night.....

I don't know...I think having even just front court depth would have made a huge enough difference.
Think about:
-how thin they looked when KI/HM were hurt
-Earl trying to make a layup
-watching Hass:
-- learn to play matador D, because he 'knows' he has to...
-- having his shot blocked because there's not another 'big' diversion

A recruit we're going to look back on and get frustrated is Tyrique Jones. We were really close to getting him. Murray was all over him. No, he's not a center, but he's a beast at PF and will be at Xavier. He would have been the perfect replacement for Hassan going forward.

adam914 wrote:I do find it kind of funny/ironic that some of the same people that say having EC wouldn't make much of a difference are saying that having Gustys would make a substantial difference.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have him then not have him given the current situation, I just find it interesting after all the talk about our problems being so much bigger than one player (EC).

I haven't watched one single second of Gustys this year. Can't say I have really logged a lot of CAA time, either. I do know that there are two guys in top 10 RPI conferences that are 13/12 guys. Gustys and Ben Simmons. No, I am not saying that Gustys is nearly that. What I am saying is I would want a dominant big on this particular team than EC, if given the choice. HM could play the four (and most likely foul less) and you could rotate KI, JG, JT, CT, and Four through 1-3. That's 30 minutes per for the first three and 15 per for CT and Four. Like I said, I have no idea if he is a dominant big. 20 boards, though, several times in a pretty good league? Sounds dominating to me. Would have been nice to have both, that's for sure.

Billyboy, that's true. I was REALLY hoping we'd get him.

We've got to hope that at least one or two of the newbie bigs can contribute right off the bat next year.

Otherwise Hassan will have played out of position for his entire career here, and that's a shame.

There is no guarantee DH plays any of these bigs with Martin.

How many A-10 teams have a better 4/5 combo than Martin and iverson? Sure they should be playing the 3 and the 4 but all A10 teams lack in that area in either size or talent. To me, our biggest liability is the fact we never have the best player on the court to make a big play when we need it. Pretty much all our losses were to teams that had 1 or 2 guys better than anyone in our lineup and that person made a big play down the stretch. EC as upperclassman would give us a chance to make a difference in that area. Much more than a center with talents equal to Martin. (Although that would be nice too).

sf2010 wrote:Why stop at free advice? Maybe we should charge him to attend the Keaney Blue Coaching Clinic. We can watch Hoosiers, tell him how to implement a zone defense, teach him how to coach FTs, and how to run an offense.

You don't need to be a college coach to notice what things need improving on. No one here thinks they're a better coach than Hurley but that doesn't mean we're not capable of realizing some of the problems of this team.

My reason for Silva over Cooke is ,
one is a freshman the other is a junior.
Size.
How he'd fit in here. 6'9" PF fills a
real need.
Cooke would have been nice, too.

Gonebarongone wrote:

adam914 wrote:I do find it kind of funny/ironic that some of the same people that say having EC wouldn't make much of a difference are saying that having Gustys would make a substantial difference.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have him then not have him given the current situation, I just find it interesting after all the talk about our problems being so much bigger than one player (EC).

I haven't watched one single second of Gustys this year. Can't say I have really logged a lot of CAA time, either. I do know that there are two guys in top 10 RPI conferences that are 13/12 guys. Gustys and Ben Simmons. No, I am not saying that Gustys is nearly that. What I am saying is I would want a dominant big on this particular team than EC, if given the choice. HM could play the four (and most likely foul less) and you could rotate KI, JG, JT, CT, and Four through 1-3. That's 30 minutes per for the first three and 15 per for CT and Four. Like I said, I have no idea if he is a dominant big. 20 boards, though, several times in a pretty good league? Sounds dominating to me. Would have been nice to have both, that's for sure.

Now we'd rather have some guy that wound up at Hofstra than a guy who likely would have been the A10 player of the year. We just outdo ourselves on a daily basis here. Gustys is a nice player and I'd gladly add him to what we have here. But let's try to keep things in perspective.