Omega
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 564
Member is Online
|
Post by Omega on May 17, 2024 23:53:30 GMT -5
I don't know how to actually grade this transfer class, either in absolute terms or in relative terms to reasonable expectations. B/B- seems fine; I could see going a bit lower as well. My priorities ahead of the transfer season were: 1. A rim protecting big 2. A PG 3. Shooting (At least I think. I'm too lazy to look back). We have missed so far on #1. I think Cooley misread the market. I think a LOT of people misread the demand for centers and the amount of silly money out there. It's impossible to know if we had a chance to close a lesser option early before the market got insane or if we should have allocated more cash (and perhaps lost someone else). This isn't completely done here, though, because I think the depth was always more likely than big upside and in many ways, more important. Number 2 feels about as good as we could have expected. We obviously need to see everyone play, but that part is a check, an A, for now. I'd say we've missed so far on #3 as well. Mack can shoot, but color me skeptical on Williams as shooter for now. This feels like an area we could definitely still add but simply might now. The addition of Mack as a talented and second penetrator and distributor along with the progression of Fielder and Sorber should make us less 3 dependent next year, but it's still a gap. From there, you'd be hard pressed to give it a B. But while I had rested most of my defensive improvement on the center, Cooley went out and improved it in other ways. Peavy and Burks along with the freshmen really change the size and athletic profile of the team. It doesn't remove the need for a big, but it does attack some of the reasons I put a rim protector #1. Losing Styles mitigates the Peavy acquisition a bit, but when we deconstruct Styles, Peavy is a defensive upgrade, his offense can move to Mack, and the offensive rebounding can move to Burks and Co. I think the issue with next year's team is that the risk profile remains very high. Mack and Peavy are relatively low risk in terms of evaluation/production, but players like Burks, Williams and any freshmen ever comes with a significant amount of projection that often rests more on our natural dispositions than anything. What has me optimistic is this: One, my standard for success is lower than most. I think people got really hyped up that we'd be a good team in the BE next year. Despite the hype, I was never there. I want to be respectable. It'd be a raging success to honestly contend for a tourney spot. The % of teams that go from 2-18 to above .500 in conference in not high even if it is possible. Two, Cooley has a pretty good history of having teams like this perform. It's long, it's athletic, it's hopefully feisty. There's a team that makes sense there, and makes sense with Cooley. But man, if Fielder and Sorber ready ... it's going to be tough. Everything else kind of flips. When the starters are good, young backups become upsides. When they aren't, they become liabilities. Considering our last two years, what Cooley was able to bring in is surprisingly good. This! Don't understand why folks don't understand this.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on May 17, 2024 23:13:58 GMT -5
LA Grand Prix
8 Sabrina Southerland United States 2:03.86
|
|
madgesiq92
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,399
|
Transfers
May 17, 2024 21:56:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by madgesiq92 on May 17, 2024 21:56:26 GMT -5
Guess I'll just hold my breath for Onyenso or Miller. There really is no excuse. There were 3 dozen serviceable centers in the portal and we couldn't land one? They didn't go after 36 centers... They have gone after 5 that we know of. Certainly has not made it a priority.
|
|
madgesiq92
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,399
|
Post by madgesiq92 on May 17, 2024 21:22:40 GMT -5
I think Cooley’s offseason grade at this point is INC because he hasn’t finished the assignment. If I was his professor, I would hand the bluebook back to him and say get a Center and finish it.
|
|
|
Post by hsaxon on May 17, 2024 20:51:51 GMT -5
Right, but nobody wants the stiff center who was a project at a low-major or even a mid-major. We already have Sorber/Fielder, both of whom have a lot of potential. Getting someone who is not as good as those two (arguably, Cook would be in that category too given his defensive woes) makes no sense unless it's purely a depth play (which most guys are not okay with). We need a very specific type of center to help us, and they do not grow on trees. To be fair, I am not trying to make excuses for the staff. I wanted them to have a good center locked down already, and hoping they pull someone out of their hat. But the idea that there were three dozen + guys we could have easily recruited/landed makes no sense. As I said, (1) it's not just a matter of getting a center, they need skills/athleticism, (2) some candidates will see Fielder/Sorber and will be worried about playing time and wouldn't come, and (3) some of them simply would never come to Georgetown for whatever reason (wanting to be close to home, not liking Georgetown, wanting to go to a bigger school, not liking DC, there are a lot of reasons). Unless we pull an unexpected big, my guess is that Cook ultimately stays, and we go into next year with Sorber/Fielder/Cook. Agree. The first year of the Cooley tenure was a major disappointment. That said he cannot be blamed for everything. Effort has not seemingly been a problem. Instead I suspect the biggest problem is that Cooley oversold the expectations and then discovered that despite the offer of playing time and NIL monies, there are not that many quality posts who are eager to spend their limited remaining eligibility on a team that is not even close to a tourney bid and on which there will be a highly touted Freshman post and a touted returning sophomore post, both of whom will expect playing time. Whatever happened to Judah Mintz, who was supposedly headed for GU? Judah Mintz declared for the NBA draft on April 11. --Admin
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,330
|
Post by tashoya on May 17, 2024 19:46:26 GMT -5
The problem when you make things up… Silly Dan. "Republicans" don't care about the truth or reality. In fact, they seem to prefer any alternative to either as they'll buy the stupidest shiite possible for no reason at all.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on May 17, 2024 18:09:45 GMT -5
Rudy! Rudy! Rudy! Grifter really knows how to pick "the best people." The judge overseeing Rudy Giuliani's bankruptcy case said he was “disturbed” so little progress has been made in sorting out his finances, and refused Tuesday to lift a legal barrier that has kept the former New York City mayor from appealing a $148 million defamation judgment. Giuliani declared bankruptc y in December after he was ordered to pay the staggering sum to two former election workers for spreading a false conspiracy theory about their role in the 2020 election. abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/giuliani-bankruptcy-judge-frustrated-case-rebuffs-attempt-challenge-110236427Poor Demented Rudy, unfairly maligned for telling the truth.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on May 17, 2024 18:02:42 GMT -5
We pursued and landed our top targets at SF and PG. Those were significant gets, and we have upgraded those two positions. We missed on our first target at PF (Stewart) but landed plan B in Jordan Burks. I'm not sure there's a huge delta between him and Stewart--they're both long, NBA-caliber athletes who couldn't crack the rotation at blue blood schools as freshman. Stewart just came with the seal of approval of having been a McD AA, but I'm happy with Plan B. Center has not been good though. Cliff was Plan A and he seemed like the exact right fit, but we lost him to a team coming off a Final 4. Can't be too upset about that, but we've scrambled and struggled and not been able to land a suitable Plan B. Seems at this point that barring a miraculous stroke of luck (something with Onyenso?) that our only addition at Center will be someone who is a "third big" behind Fielder and Sorber, and not a "first" big that we could slot into the starting lineup and let the younger guys develop behind. Which feels very similar to last year, when we pursued some high profile centers before eventually settling for Cook. It's disappointing to have it happen again, but, it's safe to say that the transfer market for quality big guys is intense, there are a lot of teams looking to make an addition which drives up prices and makes it tough for us to compete. Lesson learned after the last 2 offseasons is that we may not be able to count on the portal for a savior at the center position--if we want a good big man, we're probably going to have to "grow" our own. A lot will be on the shoulders of young Fielder and Sorber next year. Overall I think we're trending toward a B/B- transfer portal season. Solid upgrades at 1 and 3, retained a strong 2 and a promising 4/5. Missed our first portal target at the 4 but landed a promising soph who hopefully puts it together. Took a swing on a reserve wing in hopes he will find his shot in a better situation. And then pretty much s--t the bed at the center spot--we'll see how it finishes out, but that looks to be the direction at the moment. All things considered I'd say that's B/B- territory, and when you combine that with the very strong incoming class of McKenna/Sorber/Mulready/Williams, we are still most definitely improving our roster and moving in a positive direction. Still plenty of reason for optimism. But, certainly would have been nice to pull one of the top centers too and feel like we were a legitimate tournament possibility in Year 2. I don't know how to actually grade this transfer class, either in absolute terms or in relative terms to reasonable expectations. B/B- seems fine; I could see going a bit lower as well. My priorities ahead of the transfer season were: 1. A rim protecting big 2. A PG 3. Shooting (At least I think. I'm too lazy to look back). We have missed so far on #1. I think Cooley misread the market. I think a LOT of people misread the demand for centers and the amount of silly money out there. It's impossible to know if we had a chance to close a lesser option early before the market got insane or if we should have allocated more cash (and perhaps lost someone else). This isn't completely done here, though, because I think the depth was always more likely than big upside and in many ways, more important. Number 2 feels about as good as we could have expected. We obviously need to see everyone play, but that part is a check, an A, for now. I'd say we've missed so far on #3 as well. Mack can shoot, but color me skeptical on Williams as shooter for now. This feels like an area we could definitely still add but simply might now. The addition of Mack as a talented and second penetrator and distributor along with the progression of Fielder and Sorber should make us less 3 dependent next year, but it's still a gap. From there, you'd be hard pressed to give it a B. But while I had rested most of my defensive improvement on the center, Cooley went out and improved it in other ways. Peavy and Burks along with the freshmen really change the size and athletic profile of the team. It doesn't remove the need for a big, but it does attack some of the reasons I put a rim protector #1. Losing Styles mitigates the Peavy acquisition a bit, but when we deconstruct Styles, Peavy is a defensive upgrade, his offense can move to Mack, and the offensive rebounding can move to Burks and Co. I think the issue with next year's team is that the risk profile remains very high. Mack and Peavy are relatively low risk in terms of evaluation/production, but players like Burks, Williams and any freshmen ever comes with a significant amount of projection that often rests more on our natural dispositions than anything. What has me optimistic is this: One, my standard for success is lower than most. I think people got really hyped up that we'd be a good team in the BE next year. Despite the hype, I was never there. I want to be respectable. It'd be a raging success to honestly contend for a tourney spot. The % of teams that go from 2-18 to above .500 in conference in not high even if it is possible. Two, Cooley has a pretty good history of having teams like this perform. It's long, it's athletic, it's hopefully feisty. There's a team that makes sense there, and makes sense with Cooley. But man, if Fielder and Sorber ready ... it's going to be tough. Everything else kind of flips. When the starters are good, young backups become upsides. When they aren't, they become liabilities. I agree with all three of those priorities, except that I would have made improve the defense priority 1A, and despite not getting the rim protector, it appears that we have made enough strides in that direction (of course, we couldn't get worse) to warrant the B/B- rating, at least in my mind.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,603
|
Post by DanMcQ on May 17, 2024 17:48:49 GMT -5
The problem when you make things up…
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,603
|
Post by DanMcQ on May 17, 2024 17:41:01 GMT -5
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on May 17, 2024 16:36:29 GMT -5
Actually there more more than three dozen in the portal -- many more. For a program with supposed exemplary NIL, we definitely should've been able to land one. Right, but nobody wants the stiff center who was a project at a low-major or even a mid-major. We already have Sorber/Fielder, both of whom have a lot of potential. Getting someone who is not as good as those two (arguably, Cook would be in that category too given his defensive woes) makes no sense unless it's purely a depth play (which most guys are not okay with). We need a very specific type of center to help us, and they do not grow on trees. To be fair, I am not trying to make excuses for the staff. I wanted them to have a good center locked down already, and hoping they pull someone out of their hat. But the idea that there were three dozen + guys we could have easily recruited/landed makes no sense. As I said, (1) it's not just a matter of getting a center, they need skills/athleticism, (2) some candidates will see Fielder/Sorber and will be worried about playing time and wouldn't come, and (3) some of them simply would never come to Georgetown for whatever reason (wanting to be close to home, not liking Georgetown, wanting to go to a bigger school, not liking DC, there are a lot of reasons). Unless we pull an unexpected big, my guess is that Cook ultimately stays, and we go into next year with Sorber/Fielder/Cook. Agree. The first year of the Cooley tenure was a major disappointment. That said he cannot be blamed for everything. Effort has not seemingly been a problem. Instead I suspect the biggest problem is that Cooley oversold the expectations and then discovered that despite the offer of playing time and NIL monies, there are not that many quality posts who are eager to spend their limited remaining eligibility on a team that is not even close to a tourney bid and on which there will be a highly touted Freshman post and a touted returning sophomore post, both of whom will expect playing time.
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on May 17, 2024 16:09:58 GMT -5
Another possible big gone...
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on May 17, 2024 16:05:24 GMT -5
Were there really 36 "serviceable centers" in the portal that would have given us what we need? I have no doubt that there were 36 in the portal, but I am skeptical that there were 36 guys out there that would have met our needs or been people our fans would have been pleased with, especially when you consider that in any group of people there are always going to be some with no interest in us no matter what we do. Actually there more more than three dozen in the portal -- many more. For a program with supposed exemplary NIL, we definitely should've been able to land one. Right, but nobody wants the stiff center who was a project at a low-major or even a mid-major. We already have Sorber/Fielder, both of whom have a lot of potential. Getting someone who is not as good as those two (arguably, Cook would be in that category too given his defensive woes) makes no sense unless it's purely a depth play (which most guys are not okay with). We need a very specific type of center to help us, and they do not grow on trees. To be fair, I am not trying to make excuses for the staff. I wanted them to have a good center locked down already, and hoping they pull someone out of their hat. But the idea that there were three dozen + guys we could have easily recruited/landed makes no sense. As I said, (1) it's not just a matter of getting a center, they need skills/athleticism, (2) some candidates will see Fielder/Sorber and will be worried about playing time and wouldn't come, and (3) some of them simply would never come to Georgetown for whatever reason (wanting to be close to home, not liking Georgetown, wanting to go to a bigger school, not liking DC, there are a lot of reasons). Unless we pull an unexpected big, my guess is that Cook ultimately stays, and we go into next year with Sorber/Fielder/Cook.
|
|
bigskyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by bigskyhoya on May 17, 2024 15:59:21 GMT -5
We pursued and landed our top targets at SF and PG. Those were significant gets, and we have upgraded those two positions. We missed on our first target at PF (Stewart) but landed plan B in Jordan Burks. I'm not sure there's a huge delta between him and Stewart--they're both long, NBA-caliber athletes who couldn't crack the rotation at blue blood schools as freshman. Stewart just came with the seal of approval of having been a McD AA, but I'm happy with Plan B. Center has not been good though. Cliff was Plan A and he seemed like the exact right fit, but we lost him to a team coming off a Final 4. Can't be too upset about that, but we've scrambled and struggled and not been able to land a suitable Plan B. Seems at this point that barring a miraculous stroke of luck (something with Onyenso?) that our only addition at Center will be someone who is a "third big" behind Fielder and Sorber, and not a "first" big that we could slot into the starting lineup and let the younger guys develop behind. Which feels very similar to last year, when we pursued some high profile centers before eventually settling for Cook. It's disappointing to have it happen again, but, it's safe to say that the transfer market for quality big guys is intense, there are a lot of teams looking to make an addition which drives up prices and makes it tough for us to compete. Lesson learned after the last 2 offseasons is that we may not be able to count on the portal for a savior at the center position--if we want a good big man, we're probably going to have to "grow" our own. A lot will be on the shoulders of young Fielder and Sorber next year. Overall I think we're trending toward a B/B- transfer portal season. Solid upgrades at 1 and 3, retained a strong 2 and a promising 4/5. Missed our first portal target at the 4 but landed a promising soph who hopefully puts it together. Took a swing on a reserve wing in hopes he will find his shot in a better situation. And then pretty much s--t the bed at the center spot--we'll see how it finishes out, but that looks to be the direction at the moment. All things considered I'd say that's B/B- territory, and when you combine that with the very strong incoming class of McKenna/Sorber/Mulready/Williams, we are still most definitely improving our roster and moving in a positive direction. Still plenty of reason for optimism. But, certainly would have been nice to pull one of the top centers too and feel like we were a legitimate tournament possibility in Year 2. I don't know how to actually grade this transfer class, either in absolute terms or in relative terms to reasonable expectations. B/B- seems fine; I could see going a bit lower as well. My priorities ahead of the transfer season were: 1. A rim protecting big 2. A PG 3. Shooting (At least I think. I'm too lazy to look back). We have missed so far on #1. I think Cooley misread the market. I think a LOT of people misread the demand for centers and the amount of silly money out there. It's impossible to know if we had a chance to close a lesser option early before the market got insane or if we should have allocated more cash (and perhaps lost someone else). This isn't completely done here, though, because I think the depth was always more likely than big upside and in many ways, more important. Number 2 feels about as good as we could have expected. We obviously need to see everyone play, but that part is a check, an A, for now. I'd say we've missed so far on #3 as well. Mack can shoot, but color me skeptical on Williams as shooter for now. This feels like an area we could definitely still add but simply might now. The addition of Mack as a talented and second penetrator and distributor along with the progression of Fielder and Sorber should make us less 3 dependent next year, but it's still a gap. From there, you'd be hard pressed to give it a B. But while I had rested most of my defensive improvement on the center, Cooley went out and improved it in other ways. Peavy and Burks along with the freshmen really change the size and athletic profile of the team. It doesn't remove the need for a big, but it does attack some of the reasons I put a rim protector #1. Losing Styles mitigates the Peavy acquisition a bit, but when we deconstruct Styles, Peavy is a defensive upgrade, his offense can move to Mack, and the offensive rebounding can move to Burks and Co. I think the issue with next year's team is that the risk profile remains very high. Mack and Peavy are relatively low risk in terms of evaluation/production, but players like Burks, Williams and any freshmen ever comes with a significant amount of projection that often rests more on our natural dispositions than anything. What has me optimistic is this: One, my standard for success is lower than most. I think people got really hyped up that we'd be a good team in the BE next year. Despite the hype, I was never there. I want to be respectable. It'd be a raging success to honestly contend for a tourney spot. The % of teams that go from 2-18 to above .500 in conference in not high even if it is possible. Two, Cooley has a pretty good history of having teams like this perform. It's long, it's athletic, it's hopefully feisty. There's a team that makes sense there, and makes sense with Cooley. But man, if Fielder and Sorber ready ... it's going to be tough. Everything else kind of flips. When the starters are good, young backups become upsides. When they aren't, they become liabilities. Considering our last two years, what Cooley was able to bring in is surprisingly good.
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,365
|
46
May 17, 2024 15:51:04 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by hoyajinx on May 17, 2024 15:51:04 GMT -5
Remember when Republicans kept saying how great the economy was under Trump because the stock market was doing well? Why isn’t that the case for Biden? I can’t seem to keep all their hypocrisy and double standards straight.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,395
|
Post by SSHoya on May 17, 2024 15:39:31 GMT -5
"Patrick Ewing isn't walking through that door."
The Hoyas need another big so go get one, Coach!
|
|
|
Post by suicideslushpuppie on May 17, 2024 15:28:28 GMT -5
Guess I'll just hold my breath for Onyenso or Miller. There really is no excuse. There were 3 dozen serviceable centers in the portal and we couldn't land one? They didn't go after 36 centers... but they could have
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,395
|
Post by SSHoya on May 17, 2024 15:28:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by suicideslushpuppie on May 17, 2024 15:27:25 GMT -5
Guess I'll just hold my breath for Onyenso or Miller. There really is no excuse. There were 3 dozen serviceable centers in the portal and we couldn't land one? Were there really 36 "serviceable centers" in the portal that would have given us what we need? I have no doubt that there were 36 in the portal, but I am skeptical that there were 36 guys out there that would have met our needs or been people our fans would have been pleased with, especially when you consider that in any group of people there are always going to be some with no interest in us no matter what we do. Actually there more more than three dozen in the portal -- many more. For a program with supposed exemplary NIL, we definitely should've been able to land one.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,486
|
Post by hoyaboya on May 17, 2024 15:21:34 GMT -5
The class of 2025 guys have been recruited for awhile, so hopefully it doesn't effect people like Acaden Lewis and Cam Ward too much and they'll make their own decisions. That said, the Johnson hire does not HELP us with either of those guys, who we were in pretty good shape with prior to his hire. The Johnson hire DOES help us with Nyk Lewis who is Takeover's best 2025 player.
Johnson's hire helped us get Malick Mack and will help us get Jordan Smith (class of 2026). It probably hurts us with younger Team Durant players like the DeMatha kid who some believe is the best freshman in the country.
|
|