'19 MD F Marial Mading (Pacific Commit)

[DC_Rams]

What exactly did Layssard do to make him 'have to go'?

Again, you are asking for information that was purposely left private. It protects the kid and his future.

[BleedBlue87]

I know this is a crazy thought but sometimes two parties just don't mesh or develop chemistry through no fault of either side.

[DC_Rams]

I know this is a crazy thought but sometimes two parties just don't mesh or develop chemistry through no fault of either side.

You’ve got to be kidding me. No way.

[RamStock]

What exactly did Layssard do to make him 'have to go'?

He couldn’t play basketball at this level. Very simple. He was never going to see the court

[SandorClegane]

If our rotational players start leaving, then I’d panic. Until then, there really is nothing to be concerned about. CT leaving was more about him being close to home than anything else. He earned the right to do that. He wanted to go out as a starter as a senior. Wasn’t going to happen here.

Agreed.

[adam914]

Looking at all these guys, minus CT, none of them effected the nuclei of the team. They weren’t even considered rotational. Yes, it sucks, but would you prefer to have a wallflower at the end of your bench, or a guy you can put in and trust to spell CL when he’s in foul trouble, or Harris when he is limping, or Fatts when his shooting is off. I think Cox knows, in order to be successful, he needs to be able to count on his depth, last year, we had none. This year’s roster looks to change that.

We will have a bit more depth this year, but the open question definitely remains just how quality that depth will end up being. We've got Sheppard and Walker presumably as the first two off the bench, and both are guys that have not played D1 basketball in over a year. Sheppard was at least playing somewhere and had better numbers as a D1 freshman than Walker, but both of these guys are largely unknowns going into this season and will be counted on heavily if this team is going to go anywhere. Then we have Tate who I think showed enough last season to prove that he can be a useful bench piece at the least.

After that, we are counting on freshman, who I think we probably should have learned by now should not be counted on for too much out of the gate. So while there is some potential there for quality depth if everything breaks the right way, I think there is definitely reason to be concerned that last years struggles could continue into this year. Others have said it already, but to me next season will ultimately come down to the improvement of Martin and Harris. If those guys don't make big leaps in year 2, I am concerned about our outlook.

None of this has anything to do with Mading (or any of those others guys that left) specifically, but I think some overall concern about the roster makeup right now is warranted. Of course this all could change again if they add another player for this season, but there have been a lot of responses about "trusting the staff" in the past and in my mind the staff definitely gets a mulligan on last season, but if things don't go the way most expect this year then I think there is legitimate reason to start to second guessing some things.

[TruePoint]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

[DC_Rams]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

Exactly, I’m not sure why some aren’t embracing this concept. Im truly excited.

[Taylor Swift]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

Exactly, I’m not sure why some aren’t embracing this concept. Im truly excited.

Exactly TP and DC. If I knew I wasn’t going to see playing time I’d probably look elsewhere to where my talent level was better suited. This applies to many life situations and isn’t “oh my god the sky is falling!!!”

[theblueram]

TS, I would think any player ranked 300+ should just assume he's not getting playing time here unless somebody really screwed up the rankings.

[adam914]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

Yeah of course, certainly not expecting eight proven contributors returning any given year, just pointing out what I think some of those question marks are and that I think there are valid reasons to be concerned about some of them. We've been burned in the past when expecting too much from transfers and freshman (though I realize circumstances are always different), so I guess I am just still in wait and see mode.

[Rhody83]

Looking at all these guys, minus CT, none of them effected the nuclei of the team. They weren’t even considered rotational. Yes, it sucks, but would you prefer to have a wallflower at the end of your bench, or a guy you can put in and trust to spell CL when he’s in foul trouble, or Harris when he is limping, or Fatts when his shooting is off. I think Cox knows, in order to be successful, he needs to be able to count on his depth, last year, we had none. This year’s roster looks to change that.

We will have a bit more depth this year, but the open question definitely remains just how quality that depth will end up being. We've got Sheppard and Walker presumably as the first two off the bench, and both are guys that have not played D1 basketball in over a year. Sheppard was at least playing somewhere and had better numbers as a D1 freshman than Walker, but both of these guys are largely unknowns going into this season and will be counted on heavily if this team is going to go anywhere. Then we have Tate who I think showed enough last season to prove that he can be a useful bench piece at the least.

After that, we are counting on freshman, who I think we probably should have learned by now should not be counted on for too much out of the gate. So while there is some potential there for quality depth if everything breaks the right way, I think there is definitely reason to be concerned that last years struggles could continue into this year. Others have said it already, but to me next season will ultimately come down to the improvement of Martin and Harris. If those guys don't make big leaps in year 2, I am concerned about our outlook.

This post make no sense to me.
Some facts.
Rhody had seven players average more than 8 mins/game last year and six of them are returning including the top 4 in mins/game and points/game. The six returners made up 163.2 of the total 200 mins available (81.6% of total) and 60.7 of the total 69.5 points per game (87.3%). How many teams do you think have that returning - very, very few.

URI has had success with recent transfers - KI, Stan and Munford. They all sat out a year. KI and Stan didn’t come in with great stats from Memphis and Indiana.

From a minutes standpoint, next year’s team is replacing Thompson (5th in mins) with Sheppard and Preston (8 mins/game) with Walker. Along with Martin, Harris & Tate all with a year of experience.

[ace]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

Yeah of course, certainly not expecting eight proven contributors returning any given year, just pointing out what I think some of those question marks are and that I think there are valid reasons to be concerned about some of them. We've been burned in the past when expecting too much from transfers and freshman (though I realize circumstances are always different), so I guess I am just still in wait and see mode.

Which is a perfectly reasonable approach. Going into the season, I have this team as a bubble team wrt the tournament, given the conference (by which I mean all of the top 4 are on the bubble given how hard it is for the A10 to get teams in- slim margin for error). I think they’re top 4- that hopefully gets them in. No one reasonably thinks the talent they lost makes them worse, it’s just something to keep an eye on. I don’t see that as a negative view at all, but I’ve been told otherwise.

Jeff and Cyril are all-conference. Tyrese will be great. I hope Jermaine is better- it wasn’t just his physicality, which could be related to health, that was a concern, but we know bigs sometimes develop on their own path. I have Walker and Sheppard as the keys, and I feel more confident with Sheppard, along with more strategic usage of Fatts. No one, least of all you, is saying there isn’t reason to be optimistic.

The OOC is tough, and there’s a lot of new pieces to work in. Last year, they would have needed all the new guys to excel to make the tournament. There’s more breathing room this season. We always hope there’s conference games that will allow them to pick up big wins, but they’ve been burned before with that when other teams weren’t as good as predicted.

[theblueram]

Adam, I hear what you’re saying, but how many teams have eight proven contributors returning in any given year? There are always question marks. Overall, I’m happy with the level of talent on the team based on what I know today. And if anything, the turnover has made me happier with the level of talent rather than the other way around.

Yeah of course, certainly not expecting eight proven contributors returning any given year, just pointing out what I think some of those question marks are and that I think there are valid reasons to be concerned about some of them. We've been burned in the past when expecting too much from transfers and freshman (though I realize circumstances are always different), so I guess I am just still in wait and see mode.

Which is a perfectly reasonable approach. Going into the season, I have this team as a bubble team wrt the tournament, given the conference (by which I mean all of the top 4 are on the bubble given how hard it is for the A10 to get teams in- slim margin for error). I think they’re top 4- that hopefully gets them in. No one reasonably thinks the talent they lost makes them worse, it’s just something to keep an eye on. I don’t see that as a negative view at all, but I’ve been told otherwise.

Jeff and Cyril are all-conference. Tyrese will be great. I hope Jermaine is better- it wasn’t just his physicality, which could be related to health, that was a concern, but we know bigs sometimes develop on their own path. I have Walker and Sheppard as the keys, and I feel more confident with Sheppard, along with more strategic usage of Fatts. No one, least of all you, is saying there isn’t reason to be optimistic.

The OOC is tough, and there’s a lot of new pieces to work in. Last year, they would have needed all the new guys to excel to make the tournament. There’s more breathing room this season. We always hope there’s conference games that will allow them to pick up big wins, but they’ve been burned before with that when other teams weren’t as good as predicted.

Well, we have our starting 5 returning with 2 Seniors, 1 Junior and 2 Sophs. If this team can't dance next year, well it doesn't bode well for the year after.

[ace]

Looking at all these guys, minus CT, none of them effected the nuclei of the team. They weren’t even considered rotational. Yes, it sucks, but would you prefer to have a wallflower at the end of your bench, or a guy you can put in and trust to spell CL when he’s in foul trouble, or Harris when he is limping, or Fatts when his shooting is off. I think Cox knows, in order to be successful, he needs to be able to count on his depth, last year, we had none. This year’s roster looks to change that.

We will have a bit more depth this year, but the open question definitely remains just how quality that depth will end up being. We've got Sheppard and Walker presumably as the first two off the bench, and both are guys that have not played D1 basketball in over a year. Sheppard was at least playing somewhere and had better numbers as a D1 freshman than Walker, but both of these guys are largely unknowns going into this season and will be counted on heavily if this team is going to go anywhere. Then we have Tate who I think showed enough last season to prove that he can be a useful bench piece at the least.

After that, we are counting on freshman, who I think we probably should have learned by now should not be counted on for too much out of the gate. So while there is some potential there for quality depth if everything breaks the right way, I think there is definitely reason to be concerned that last years struggles could continue into this year. Others have said it already, but to me next season will ultimately come down to the improvement of Martin and Harris. If those guys don't make big leaps in year 2, I am concerned about our outlook.

This post make no sense to me.
Some facts.
Rhody had seven players average more than 8 mins/game last year and six of them are returning including the top 4 in mins/game and points/game. The six returners made up 163.2 of the total 200 mins available (81.6% of total) and 60.7 of the total 69.5 points per game (87.3%). How many teams do you think have that returning - very, very few.

URI has had success with recent transfers - KI, Stan and Munford. They all sat out a year. KI and Stan didn’t come in with great stats from Memphis and Indiana.

From a minutes standpoint, next year’s team is replacing Thompson (5th in mins) with Sheppard and Preston (8 mins/game) with Walker. Along with Martin, Harris & Tate all with a year of experience.

I actually think you two are almost saying the same thing. Yes, they have players of significance returning. They also weren’t that good last year, so there’s ground to make up, especially if the conference is better as it’s expected to be.

You’ve laid out ways the team should be better, and I think they’re possible, likely closer to probable. I can also see reason for keeping one’s optimism cautious. They don’t need all the new guys to excel, just a few.

[adam914]

We will have a bit more depth this year, but the open question definitely remains just how quality that depth will end up being. We've got Sheppard and Walker presumably as the first two off the bench, and both are guys that have not played D1 basketball in over a year. Sheppard was at least playing somewhere and had better numbers as a D1 freshman than Walker, but both of these guys are largely unknowns going into this season and will be counted on heavily if this team is going to go anywhere. Then we have Tate who I think showed enough last season to prove that he can be a useful bench piece at the least.

After that, we are counting on freshman, who I think we probably should have learned by now should not be counted on for too much out of the gate. So while there is some potential there for quality depth if everything breaks the right way, I think there is definitely reason to be concerned that last years struggles could continue into this year. Others have said it already, but to me next season will ultimately come down to the improvement of Martin and Harris. If those guys don't make big leaps in year 2, I am concerned about our outlook.

This post make no sense to me.
Some facts.
Rhody had seven players average more than 8 mins/game last year and six of them are returning including the top 4 in mins/game and points/game. The six returners made up 163.2 of the total 200 mins available (81.6% of total) and 60.7 of the total 69.5 points per game (87.3%). How many teams do you think have that returning - very, very few.

URI has had success with recent transfers - KI, Stan and Munford. They all sat out a year. KI and Stan didn’t come in with great stats from Memphis and Indiana.

From a minutes standpoint, next year’s team is replacing Thompson (5th in mins) with Sheppard and Preston (8 mins/game) with Walker. Along with Martin, Harris & Tate all with a year of experience.

I don't think anything I said disputed any of your facts. I'm not sure I get what conclusion you are drawing from them though.

Rhody had seven players average more than 8 mins/game last year and six of them are returning including the top 4 in mins/game and points/game. The six returners made up 163.2 of the total 200 mins available (81.6% of total) and 60.7 of the total 69.5 points per game (87.3%). How many teams do you think have that returning - very, very few.

I understand what we have coming back. My post was in regards to our depth. Outside of the top 3 of Fatts, Cyril and Jeff, we have the three freshman back from last year. As I stated I think the key to this team next season will end up being the improvement of Tyrese and Harris. But if they don't improve as we all hope/expect then there is at least a chance that we end up looking a lot like we did this past season and that would be a disappointment. FWIW I do think Tyrese showed enough flashes last year that I am confident in him stepping up offensively this year.

URI has had success with recent transfers - KI, Stan and Munford. They all sat out a year. KI and Stan didn’t come in with great stats from Memphis and Indiana.

This is true. But is also no indication of future results. Just like me naming 3 transfers that didn't work out would not be an indication that Walker and Sheppard will not work out, so I'm not sure how relevant it is to my original post.

From a minutes standpoint, next year’s team is replacing Thompson (5th in mins) with Sheppard and Preston (8 mins/game) with Walker. Along with Martin, Harris & Tate all with a year of experience.

Kind of addressed this in my response to the other parts to I think, so probably not much more to add.

[adam914]

We will have a bit more depth this year, but the open question definitely remains just how quality that depth will end up being. We've got Sheppard and Walker presumably as the first two off the bench, and both are guys that have not played D1 basketball in over a year. Sheppard was at least playing somewhere and had better numbers as a D1 freshman than Walker, but both of these guys are largely unknowns going into this season and will be counted on heavily if this team is going to go anywhere. Then we have Tate who I think showed enough last season to prove that he can be a useful bench piece at the least.

After that, we are counting on freshman, who I think we probably should have learned by now should not be counted on for too much out of the gate. So while there is some potential there for quality depth if everything breaks the right way, I think there is definitely reason to be concerned that last years struggles could continue into this year. Others have said it already, but to me next season will ultimately come down to the improvement of Martin and Harris. If those guys don't make big leaps in year 2, I am concerned about our outlook.

This post make no sense to me.
Some facts.
Rhody had seven players average more than 8 mins/game last year and six of them are returning including the top 4 in mins/game and points/game. The six returners made up 163.2 of the total 200 mins available (81.6% of total) and 60.7 of the total 69.5 points per game (87.3%). How many teams do you think have that returning - very, very few.

URI has had success with recent transfers - KI, Stan and Munford. They all sat out a year. KI and Stan didn’t come in with great stats from Memphis and Indiana.

From a minutes standpoint, next year’s team is replacing Thompson (5th in mins) with Sheppard and Preston (8 mins/game) with Walker. Along with Martin, Harris & Tate all with a year of experience.

I actually think you two are almost saying the same thing. Yes, they have players of significance returning. They also weren’t that good last year, so there’s ground to make up, especially if the conference is better as it’s expected to be.

You’ve laid out ways the team should be better, and I think they’re possible, likely closer to probable. I can also see reason for keeping one’s optimism cautious. They don’t need all the new guys to excel, just a few.

I was writing my response at the same time as this post, but basically yeah this!

[rhodylaw]

Out team has two know first team A10 level players returning (Cyril and Jeff). Fatts, could be there with those two with more consistency which I expect but cannot count on, either way he is a good player. Everyone else on the roster has potential to be really good but is really unknown. I like the floor for Tate, Harris and Martin but they need to grow a lot this summer to get this team to the dance.

[Rhody83]

Misunderstood. You really didn’t mention what I guess you are concerned about - how good are the six returning rotational players that will be heavily counted on this year. Seems to be a different question than depth.

[theblueram]

Misunderstood. You really didn’t mention what I guess you are concerned about - how good are the six returning rotational players that will be heavily counted on this year. Seems to be a different question than depth.

We have six returning rotational players returning? News to me.

[TruePoint]

I don’t have any issue with any fan or observer of this program being cautious with respect to their optimism. My optimism is tempered by a good amount of caution. There are definitely some unknowns. There (almost) always are, but I guess my point is I don’t want it to devolve from cautious optimism into pessimism - just like we can’t assume all the unknowns will come out being major pluses, I think it would be a mistake to assume that we’ll come up snake eyes. Of the unknown guys that we will depend on for rotation depth and the younger returning players whose progression is unknown, there is a reasonable case for each of them for why they could be really good.

[TruePoint]

Misunderstood. You really didn’t mention what I guess you are concerned about - how good are the six returning rotational players that will be heavily counted on this year. Seems to be a different question than depth.

We have six returning rotational players returning? News to me.

Jeff, Cyril, Fatts, Harris, Martin and Tate. Which of those aren’t you counting as a rotation player?

[theblueram]

Misunderstood. You really didn’t mention what I guess you are concerned about - how good are the six returning rotational players that will be heavily counted on this year. Seems to be a different question than depth.

We have six returning rotational players returning? News to me.

Jeff, Cyril, Fatts, Harris, Martin and Tate. Which of those aren’t you counting as a rotation player?

5 of them are starters. Unless I missed that starters are called rotational players. Thought that was for players who rotated off the bench.

[Rhody83]

I guess there can be different definitions. I thought a rotational player was a player that is part of the regular rotation (usually 7-9 players) which includes all five starters (unless for some weird reason a starter doesn’t play top 7-9 minutes).

[wpbrown8267]

I guess there can be different definitions. I thought a rotational player was a player that is part of the regular rotation (usually 7-9 players) which includes all five starters (unless for some weird reason a starter doesn’t play top 7-9 minutes).

yeah, that is my understanding as well. rotational players are part of the regular rotation. I don't think you can say Tate ins't a rotational player, but hey blueram, agree to disagree

[Rhody83]

Tate was a rotational player. He averaged 15.7 mins/game. He played 16+ mins in 12 out of last 19 games including over 20 minutes in six of those games.

[section(105)]

.......he entered transfer portal?......my bad, I just looked way back.....

[SandorClegane]

Given that we are thoroughly analyzing the immediate impact and talent of our 9-11 (frosh) rotation, shows me that we have some depth this year. Last year we were looking at the 5-10 rotation, with 4 newcomers, CT coming back from injury and Preston a complete unknown.
That’s a positive for me.

[UCH21377]

To me the keys next year are Martin and Shepherd. Can they provide the added scoring punch we need? Kind of assuming Walker will add needed depth in the frontcourt, maybe more than that. Also thinking Fatts will be more consistent, but still not an 18/game scorer. We know what we have with Dowtin and Cyril. Getting another consistent scoring threat or two would make us much more difficult to guard.

[ace]

I don’t have any issue with any fan or observer of this program being cautious with respect to their optimism. My optimism is tempered by a good amount of caution. There are definitely some unknowns. There (almost) always are, but I guess my point is I don’t want it to devolve from cautious optimism into pessimism - just like we can’t assume all the unknowns will come out being major pluses, I think it would be a mistake to assume that we’ll come up snake eyes. Of the unknown guys that we will depend on for rotation depth and the younger returning players whose progression is unknown, there is a reasonable case for each of them for why they could be really good.

To this point, I think there are a handful of people whose default is just set to negative. Almost everyone else counts down the days until tip-off and talks themselves into multiple feasible pathways where the team wins the conference and goes to the tournament. I know which one I find more fun.

[theblueram]

What I find even more fun, is knowing we have a team who is locked in and a sure fire bet to get into the NCAAT.

[Rhody83]

Mading home in Australia

[Iggy1979]

I hope this doesn't turn into a Jordan Hare situation. Player gives up free education and chance to compete to go home.

[PeterRamTime]

I hope this doesn't turn into a Jordan Hare situation. Player gives up free education and chance to compete to go home.

Will Marial work in an Australian grocery store?

To be continued......

[URIRecruitingInfo]

Going JUCO, Chipola College, per Verbal Commits.

[Rhody83]

Going JUCO, Chipola College, per Verbal Commits.

Good for him. Guessing it was academic related then.

[FDshoes]

Kansas just offered mading

[Rhody74]

[KevanBoyles]

WTF?

[rambone 78]

Guess the kid might be pretty good after all.

With Kansas academics won't get in the way lol......

[STC]

I can't believe this...

[RamStock]

This is from the Kansas basketball board in regards to Mading below. I have seen him play and he is so far out of his league it isn’t funny. He should go there right away and take the free scholarship on the bench as the 13th player.

Ryan Noel said... Ooof, 6'11 195? That's a twig of a person.
Just when you think recruiting can't get any worse-it does.

[DC_Rams]

Hard to believe we were in ahead of the rush huh? That won’t be the last HM to offer if Kansas is throwing the hook out.

[reef]

This is a joke right ??

[DC_Rams]

Florida expected to offer very soon.

[Rhodymob05]

How many 6'11 shooters do you know? Thats why hes getting offers.

[Billyboy78]

You can go back and look at what I said about him. I watched him shooting before our games. 25-30 feet from the basket. Effortless. Hardly ever missed. Great looking shooter. And no, nobody was guarding him, so....But I've never seen him play so I have no idea what any other parts of his game look like. But potentially a great shooter .

[SGreenwell]

How many 6'11 shooters do you know? Thats why hes getting offers.

Yeah - it's the kind of body and skill set you can squint at and go, "Hey, he could be something!" I feel like it's pretty boom or bust though - he could be a great player, or he could be absolutely awful and never sniff the court at a D-1 program.

[RamStock]

How many 6'11 shooters do you know? Thats why hes getting offers.

Yeah - it's the kind of body and skill set you can squint at and go, "Hey, he could be something!" I feel like it's pretty boom or bust though - he could be a great player, or he could be absolutely awful and never sniff the court at a D-1 program.

Mading will be a complete bust in my opinion. What has he done? Either played against terrible competition and didn’t do much or didn’t do anything against good competition to lift his teams that were getting beat by 50 points before he came to UR. He would be so outmanned at Kansas it wouldn’t even be funny. I am much happier with the recruits we have coming in this year over him. I have seen him play and am not impressed at all.

[Rhody83]

How many 6'11 shooters do you know? Thats why hes getting offers.

Yeah - it's the kind of body and skill set you can squint at and go, "Hey, he could be something!" I feel like it's pretty boom or bust though - he could be a great player, or he could be absolutely awful and never sniff the court at a D-1 program.

Mading will be a complete bust in my opinion. What has he done? Either played against terrible competition and didn’t do much or didn’t do anything against good competition to lift his teams that were getting beat by 50 points before he came to UR. He would be so outmanned at Kansas it wouldn’t even be funny. I am much happier with the recruits we have coming in this year over him. I have seen him play and am not impressed at all.

This.
I saw him play a lot. Even against weak prep teams he wasn’t impressive. I would take Long, Hammond, Toppin, Sheppard and Johnson over Mading.