He was a top 60 4*recruit but had a pedestrian career at Michigan.
He has a good chance to flourish in the A10 and VCU needs depth in the paint.
A high school gym is a high school gym is a high school gym.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 years agoWell you're wrong.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years ago Sorry, we don't need anymore high-school gym schools. Iona was nothing before Little Ricky, and will be nothing (and probably facing NCAA violations) after he leaves.
Look at what Tim Cluess did right before Rick got there.
2010-11 25–12 13–5 2nd CIT Runner-up
2011–12 Iona 25–8 15–3 1st NCAA Division I First Four
2012–13 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14 Iona 22–11 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2014–15 Iona 26–9 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2015–16 Iona 22–11 16–4 2nd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17 Iona 22–13 12–8 T–3rd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2017–18 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2018–19 Iona 17–16 12–6 1st NCAA Division I Round of 64
199-108 overall.
1 CIT appearance all time
7 NIT's
15 NCAA tournaments... 11 of those since the 97-98 season...
They've kinda had quite a bit of success
I'd take them in the A-10 no doubt. At least trade them for Fordham! Please!
Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoA high school gym is a high school gym is a high school gym.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 years agoWell you're wrong.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years ago Sorry, we don't need anymore high-school gym schools. Iona was nothing before Little Ricky, and will be nothing (and probably facing NCAA violations) after he leaves.
Look at what Tim Cluess did right before Rick got there.
2010-11 25–12 13–5 2nd CIT Runner-up
2011–12 Iona 25–8 15–3 1st NCAA Division I First Four
2012–13 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14 Iona 22–11 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2014–15 Iona 26–9 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2015–16 Iona 22–11 16–4 2nd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17 Iona 22–13 12–8 T–3rd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2017–18 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2018–19 Iona 17–16 12–6 1st NCAA Division I Round of 64
199-108 overall.
1 CIT appearance all time
7 NIT's
15 NCAA tournaments... 11 of those since the 97-98 season...
They've kinda had quite a bit of success
I'd take them in the A-10 no doubt. At least trade them for Fordham! Please!
A win is a win is a win...even in a high school gym.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoA high school gym is a high school gym is a high school gym.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 years agoWell you're wrong.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years ago Sorry, we don't need anymore high-school gym schools. Iona was nothing before Little Ricky, and will be nothing (and probably facing NCAA violations) after he leaves.
Look at what Tim Cluess did right before Rick got there.
2010-11 25–12 13–5 2nd CIT Runner-up
2011–12 Iona 25–8 15–3 1st NCAA Division I First Four
2012–13 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14 Iona 22–11 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2014–15 Iona 26–9 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2015–16 Iona 22–11 16–4 2nd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17 Iona 22–13 12–8 T–3rd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2017–18 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2018–19 Iona 17–16 12–6 1st NCAA Division I Round of 64
199-108 overall.
1 CIT appearance all time
7 NIT's
15 NCAA tournaments... 11 of those since the 97-98 season...
They've kinda had quite a bit of success
I'd take them in the A-10 no doubt. At least trade them for Fordham! Please!
What? Because they won their one-bid high-school gym league? BFD. Did they ever even get near an at-large NCAA berth?Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 years agoRhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoA high school gym is a high school gym is a high school gym.PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 years ago
Well you're wrong.
Look at what Tim Cluess did right before Rick got there.
2010-11 25–12 13–5 2nd CIT Runner-up
2011–12 Iona 25–8 15–3 1st NCAA Division I First Four
2012–13 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14 Iona 22–11 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2014–15 Iona 26–9 17–3 1st NIT First Round
2015–16 Iona 22–11 16–4 2nd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17 Iona 22–13 12–8 T–3rd NCAA Division I Round of 64
2017–18 Iona 20–14 11–7 4th NCAA Division I Round of 64
2018–19 Iona 17–16 12–6 1st NCAA Division I Round of 64
199-108 overall.
1 CIT appearance all time
7 NIT's
15 NCAA tournaments... 11 of those since the 97-98 season...
They've kinda had quite a bit of success
I'd take them in the A-10 no doubt. At least trade them for Fordham! Please!
You said they were nothing before Pitino, and were just proven 100% wrong.
One of those years they actually did receive an at large bid if I’m not mistaken. I remember them blowing a big lead to BYU in a First Four game.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoWhat? Because they won their one-bid high-school gym league? BFD. Did they ever even get near an at-large NCAA berth?
Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoWhat? Because they won their one-bid high-school gym league? BFD. Did they ever even get near an at-large NCAA berth?
Yeah winning your conferences tournament six times in less than a decade is no big deal. Not difficult at all.Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 years agoRhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoWhat? Because they won their one-bid high-school gym league? BFD. Did they ever even get near an at-large NCAA berth?
You said they were “nothing” before Pitino. That is just very false.
Tim Cluess made six NCAA tournaments in nine years.
If that is “nothing” then why have we been, along with the majority of other programs?
Oh and also, yes they very much were near an at large berth, seeing how they got one.
But keep trying man.
Good call I had to look it up 2012 they got an at large and played BYU in the first 4SimpleJack wrote: ↑2 years agoOne of those years they actually did receive an at large bid if I’m not mistaken. I remember them blowing a big lead to BYU in a First Four game.Rhode_Island_Red wrote: ↑2 years agoWhat? Because they won their one-bid high-school gym league? BFD. Did they ever even get near an at-large NCAA berth?
Adaway not returning.
Yes, I did. Thanks
I hear ya, 15. My patience gets easily tested when it comes to Rhody bb. It’s years of fandom with more down times than up in my case.
Maybe I end up being wrong, but feels like we could go into next year with a short roster.
You could be right in terms of leaving scholarships open, but in reality we have zero front court players right now and need shooters. I’m in the camp of thinking that Samb is going to just come out of nowhere and be a starter. Samb might be a guy that could earn some minutes and maybe averages 15 minutes a game on the upside. I guess we just to wait and be patient on both front court and shooting in the backcourt and on the wing. He could look to leave 1 scholarship open and he would also have Martin’s and whoever else leaves after next year to bring in for 2023.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoMaybe I end up being wrong, but feels like we could go into next year with a short roster.
Archie looks to pick up 2 more guard/wings. A big man or two, maybe some senior Jucos to fill the seats.
And then leave scholarships for next year and beyond when the staff has been on the trail and can actually get “their guys”. No sense in building a roster with the scraps. Prioritize long term over throwing the kitchen sink at spare parts for highest chance of success in year 1
I would think they need at least 2 bigs plus maybe a stretch 4 and/or PF.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoMaybe I end up being wrong, but feels like we could go into next year with a short roster.
Archie looks to pick up 2 more guard/wings. A big man or two, maybe some senior Jucos to fill the seats.
And then leave scholarships for next year and beyond when the staff has been on the trail and can actually get “their guys”. No sense in building a roster with the scraps. Prioritize long term over throwing the kitchen sink at spare parts for highest chance of success in year 1
I see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymoreJersey77 wrote: ↑2 years agoI would think they need at least 2 bigs plus maybe a stretch 4 and/or PF.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoMaybe I end up being wrong, but feels like we could go into next year with a short roster.
Archie looks to pick up 2 more guard/wings. A big man or two, maybe some senior Jucos to fill the seats.
And then leave scholarships for next year and beyond when the staff has been on the trail and can actually get “their guys”. No sense in building a roster with the scraps. Prioritize long term over throwing the kitchen sink at spare parts for highest chance of success in year 1
Always injury concerns and foul issues.
At this point it is very difficult to count on Samb and Ileri (if he will even be here).
That isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoI see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymoreJersey77 wrote: ↑2 years agoI would think they need at least 2 bigs plus maybe a stretch 4 and/or PF.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years ago
Maybe I end up being wrong, but feels like we could go into next year with a short roster.
Archie looks to pick up 2 more guard/wings. A big man or two, maybe some senior Jucos to fill the seats.
And then leave scholarships for next year and beyond when the staff has been on the trail and can actually get “their guys”. No sense in building a roster with the scraps. Prioritize long term over throwing the kitchen sink at spare parts for highest chance of success in year 1
Always injury concerns and foul issues.
At this point it is very difficult to count on Samb and Ileri (if he will even be here).
Haven’t we learned our lesson with having too many traditional bigs with the Twins?RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoThat isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoI see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymore
Everyone on this board is always so worried about depth. We’ve been over conditioned by our rotations the last 4 years to think you need 10 guys getting minutes every night.RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoThat isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoI see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymore
Which is great, but you need shooters to make that plan work and I’m not in that camp of don’t worry about it we have Carey. He isn’t even close to a guy that I would go into the season feeling confident about. They don’t need the Mitchell type setup, but if you don’t have big guys you need to have shooters which we don’t currently. I’m sure that will all change, but cmon on Carey.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoEveryone on this board is always so worried about depth. We’ve been over conditioned by our rotations the last 4 years to think you need 10 guys getting minutes every night.RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoThat isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years ago
I see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymore
The national championship game just featured two teams that essentially played 6 guys each.
You aren’t recruiting a good backup big to come here and barely get minutes. You want the best guy you can get to be here and be on the floor as much as possible. Surround him with shooters and play makers. Height only matters so much.
I’m not saying role out 4 guards who are 6 feet tall or shorter. But Malik is 6’6, Carey is one of the most athletic guards I’ve seen play at any school, get another wing or two and you’re fine
Never said I want 3 6-11 guys, but you need power forwards or some guys that can rebound. I also don’t want the Mitchell setup from last year.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑2 years agoHaven’t we learned our lesson with having too many traditional bigs with the Twins?RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoThat isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years ago
I see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymore
I’m with Lane. Give me one traditional center and a mix of athletic 4s that can run and hit the 3.
The Carey comment was in regards to height/rebounding.RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoWhich is great, but you need shooters to make that plan work and I’m not in that camp of don’t worry about it we have Carey. He isn’t even close to a guy that I would go into the season feeling confident about. They don’t need the Mitchell type setup, but if you don’t have big guys you need to have shooters which we don’t currently. I’m sure that will all change, but cmon on Carey.KingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years agoEveryone on this board is always so worried about depth. We’ve been over conditioned by our rotations the last 4 years to think you need 10 guys getting minutes every night.
The national championship game just featured two teams that essentially played 6 guys each.
You aren’t recruiting a good backup big to come here and barely get minutes. You want the best guy you can get to be here and be on the floor as much as possible. Surround him with shooters and play makers. Height only matters so much.
I’m not saying role out 4 guards who are 6 feet tall or shorter. But Malik is 6’6, Carey is one of the most athletic guards I’ve seen play at any school, get another wing or two and you’re fine
Yes you need a rim protector and preferably a stretch 4 on the floor.steveystuds06 wrote: ↑2 years agoHaven’t we learned our lesson with having too many traditional bigs with the Twins?RamStock wrote: ↑2 years agoThat isn’t enough for the front court. We would get murdered on the boards and down low. We have barely seen Samb play and no chance are we relying on him for that kind of production this yearKingstonLane wrote: ↑2 years ago
I see us getting 1 true big and some stretch guys along with more guards. Samb in the true backup big role. Game has changed. Don’t need all these trees down low anymore
I’m with Lane. Give me one traditional center and a mix of athletic 4s that can run and hit the 3.
Maybe didn't want to play behind Moore, Crosswell, and Castro.
Legend Geeter just entered the Portal from PC too.
Yes saw that Ramster.ramster wrote: ↑2 years agoLegend Geeter just entered the Portal from PC too.
Hopkins from Kentucky will announce his destination at noon today. Assume it’s Friartown.
Don't see any connection with us anymore since TJ must have been the lead recruiter on him.Jersey77 wrote: ↑2 years agoYes saw that Ramster.
As I said in the recruiting thread, I preferred Samb over Geeter.
But yeah, maybe take another look at him, we have needs
We don't, but we have to start fresh anyway. and there is room.Billyboy78 wrote: ↑2 years agoDon't see any connection with us anymore since TJ must have been the lead recruiter on him.
Shocking news. I don’t think he’s NBA capable. Also, the NBA physicality could possibly injure him seriously.
I did post several days ago that I heard he may not be returning.