|
Transfers
Apr 17, 2024 19:20:59 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 19:20:59 GMT -5
Manhattan is one of the worst teams in an already horrible conference. Traore's offensive numbers aren't terribly impressive, either. I assume the angle here is defense? He was an excellent defensive rebounder (in MEAC), and got a bunch of blocks and steals (in MEAC). If so, that might make sense, but does it even translate to the Big East? It's just a big leap to go from MEAC to the Big East, especially for a player whose offense wasn't that good even at the MEAC level. But I haven't seen him play and looking at stats on a page. Any more insights? Good defensive instincts; Great rebounder; Belonged on the court vs. UConn; can get to the basket and create his own shot anywhere on the floor; frequently dribbled the ball up court and set the offense; athletic. I like his game a lot. he's different in some ways than anyone they have. and he's humbly confident. Thanks for the intel. And yes I meant MAAC not MEAC.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 16:25:12 GMT -5
Manhattan is one of the worst teams in an already horrible conference. Traore's offensive numbers aren't terribly impressive, either. I assume the angle here is defense? He was an excellent defensive rebounder (in MAAC), and got a bunch of blocks and steals (in MAAC).
If so, that might make sense, but does it even translate to the Big East? It's just a big leap to go from MAAC to the Big East, especially for a player whose offense wasn't that good even at the MAAC level.
But I haven't seen him play and looking at stats on a page. Any more insights?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 15:53:30 GMT -5
I get that. Answer this PR, was Cook overmatched physically on defense or was it the fact he couldn't recognize when to switch and/or help on defense? Our defense, including Cook, was overmatched the whole season. It was the worst defense I've seen from a GU team in my "decades of experience". That said, we were understaffed and we don't know if Cook was under instructions not to foul out. Until I hear (or read from) Cooley say otherwise, we don't need to discuss it because it would all be assumptions. Is Cook capable of reaching enforcer mode? Who knows. Would Cook play better defense with better defenders around him? Who knows. That said, Cooley shouldn't take the risk. He should get a proven rim protector to stop the lay-up line. I agree with this. I'll just say that after having attended a few games in person and watching Cook more, I think it has to be one of two things: (1) Cooley told Cook not to help or (2) Cook was supposed to help but simply is so slow to react that he didn't, leading to the worst rim defense in Division 1. After seeing him play in person and seeing more nuance than you see on TV, my sense is that Cook just isn't good at help defense and has slow defensive instincts. That's not only his play, but there are some instances where he tried to help and failed to do it. And Fielder usually helped much better when he was playing the 5. Cooley also looked exasperated many times when Cook stood there and the other team got an easy basket. So, I think it's unlikely he was told not to help. But that's my speculation.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 15:32:41 GMT -5
The more good players the better. If talented players leave because they aren't getting enough PT, thats a good problem to have. We need to have a rim protector at C. Sorber, Fielder, Cook, Mutombo (?) can fight over the remining minutes (along with probably some small ball 4...or Williams/McKenna, etc). 3 slots. Rim protector is a must. A shooter would be ideal but could also use a versatile 3/4. Backup PG. Lets go. Cook wasn't a good defender. He had less to do with his size than it does technique, IQ, etc. While I would like to retain Cook, if we could get a good big to supplement our roster, and Cook decides to leave, that is a still a net plus for us given how bad Cook is on defense.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 13:29:56 GMT -5
Amen. Would Cook play differently if we have other centers and he can foul at will? TBD. He would have to learn to understand help side defense enough to be in a position to foul. I am just skeptical that after 4 years of playing college basketball that Cook will learn better defense. He frequently is not even in the same vicinity as the offensive player with the ball, and his help defense is almost non-existent. I really don't think this is an ability probably as much of an instinctual/ball IQ problem. Some guys like Otto Porter come in Day 1 and have great court vision and defensive abilities and instincts. Cook does not have any of that. I say this really appreciating and liking what Cook did on offense, too. But even that is limited against the bigger bigs in the Big East. I do think Sorber will get a lot of run this year, but it would be nice to have a portal big with experience who is a strong defender. I just don't see Cook's defense improving enough.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 11:09:04 GMT -5
It Boggles my mind that folks don't want to start Fielder & Sorber next season and by start I mean give them every chance to play 25+ minutes per game. To me the biggest issue is that Cook needs to play less than 10 minutes a game. He's way too much of a liability on defense to play any significant minutes. But yes, I think we need an upgrade at center in the portal of somebody who can log a lot of solid minutes.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2024 11:04:41 GMT -5
This is a great pickup. Welcome to Malik Mack.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 17:09:15 GMT -5
This is why a $4-$5 million NIL budget doesn't necessarily get you as far as one might imagine.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 15:40:34 GMT -5
2003, you can't have it both ways. You consistently point to Cooley's "success" at Providence as reason to believe he's going to be successful at Georgetown. Yet on the other side of your mouth, you say you can't look to history to evaluate the present because college basketball has changed so much. So which is it? Personally, I think Cooley's most likely going to have a modicum of success at Georgetown, and we'll be a middle of the road Big East team with some years that are slightly better than that. But it looks like he's pursuing a different route to that success than what he used at Providence. At Providence, he built tough teams over time that had players who developed within his system. 2 offseasons into his career at Georgetown, it looks like he's got a revolving door and will have only 2-3 players on next year's roster who have contributed for him previously. Whatever "culture" he's trying to build, he's lost a year already on that front. Actually, I can have it both ways. You are comparing apples and oranges. You are missing the context entirely. The post I was responding to was specifically about building a roster, and whether you can build a team like Marquette or Creighton. EtomicB asked why Cooley cannot do what he did at Providence. Specifically with respect to building a roster, my point is merely that you cannot simply look at how Cooley built a roster at Providence (in 2011-2012) and say he should do that here when one considers that the transfer and NIL rules are hugely different now (and NIL didn't even exist then). I think trying to use an older model (in which players were not able to leave easily) is silly when a new model (where players can leave very easily and get money too) is not going to work, especially for a team that has been as bad as ours. If you read the thread above you will see that. This is entirely different from evaluating a coach's ability. Recruiting has changed. The game itself on the court has not changed much, and so it's easier to take what a coach did 5-10 years ago and use it as an indicator of how that coach will coah now. Did he coach good offense? Did he coach good defense? Did he make the NCAA tournament? Does he have a consistent record of success? Simply because there is a transfer portal does not change that good defense is good defense. The same on offense. Sure, putting a roster in place is crucial, but so are the other elements (which is why I am worried about defense). Generally, a coach's prior success or failure is the best indicator we have of their future results. Will there be coaches who simply do not succeed in the NIL era simply because they cannot get rosters together at all? Probably. I have no evidence that will be Cooley, though. In fact, Cooley used the portal to bring in Hopkins and Carter, both of whom led Providence to the tournament, and very well likely would have again if Hopkins did not get hurt and Cooley stayed there.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 15:25:59 GMT -5
It's not 2011-2012 anymore when few players transferred, and NIL did not exist. Those two factors have drastically changed the ability to retain players. Back in the day players' major reason for not leaving despite some feelings of being unhappy was that they didn't want to sit on the bench a year. Now, not only do they not need to sit, but they can get paid to leave! There are a lot of players and the new "era" blaming going on in this post, It's my opinion that coaching staffs have a big say in many of these transfers as well. It is objective fact that 2011-2012 recruiting was significantly different than it is now. Transfers had to sit. The only transfers who could play immediately were graduates. There was no way to make money off basketball other than going abroad or making the NBA. Now, players do not need to sit--even if they transfer every year. And they can get NIL payments, too. I am not "blaming" anybody. The changes that have happened are not the faults of the players. I do not blame them for transferring, nor do I blame them for getting money they can get from NIL to transfer. Most of us would likely do the same thing in their shoes. But, the reality is that the recruiting landscape is far more tilted toward the players than it was in 2011-2012 when Cooley started at Providence. And coaches' jobs are way harder now in keeping a roster together. Do coaching staffs have a say in some of the transfers? Probably. But, keep in mind in 2011, a coach might have said, "we like you, but you're unlikely to start next year" and a player might have begrudingly stayed wanting to avoid sitting a year and thereby delaying playing professional ball. Now, that player can easily leave, go somewhere else immediately, and get paid to do it. The two situations are wildly different. It is no surprise that the guys who traditionally stayed for 4 years only to play as an upperclassman (after they matured/got better) are becoming rarer and rarer. I am thinking of guys like Aaron Bowen, Jabril Trawick, Henry Sims, Bradley Hayes, Moses Ayegba, etc. Because of the rules, those guys had one option--transfer and sit out, or suck it up, stay, and hope for better playing time later in your career. I am 100% confident that if the current rules existed then, one or many of those guys would not have made it past one or two years at Georgetown.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 13:09:11 GMT -5
We're told the donors like him so what's stopping him from following the path he took at PC? It's not 2011-2012 anymore when few players transferred, and NIL did not exist. Those two factors have drastically changed the ability to retain players. Back in the day players' major reason for not leaving despite some feelings of being unhappy was that they didn't want to sit on the bench a year. Now, not only do they not need to sit, but they can get paid to leave!
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 12:19:20 GMT -5
Speaking of ... any rumors on Big Men? It has been pretty quiet, but I saw this just now. This would be fantastic, but I feel like this is a stretch given the competition, even with a high NIL budget. He would be a great fit though as he only has 1 year of eligibility left, so it would give Sorber time to grow and develop, while giving us a really solid center at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 11:39:04 GMT -5
I'm not comparing rosters, I'm comparing the methodologies used by the coaches in building their rosters. The point is Cooley's methodology cannot be Hurley's or Shaka's right now. If we have success, and the rules haven't changed, I expect Cooley's methodology to be very similar to the other two. Two points: 1. Talking about historical teams, even a few years ago has less value than normal because this is literally the first college basketball year ever where it has been clear from the start that guys can transfer twice without sitting. Even at this time last year, this was up in the air, and not a given. 2. The worst team Hurley had at Connecticut was the first one in the AAC, ranked 98 (KenPom). His worse defensive team was the same year, ranked 129. Marquette may have surprised in 2022-2023, but that year they were ranked 56. The year before Smart took over, Wojo's team was ranked 83, with an 83rd ranked defense. In contrast, this year's Georgetown team was ranked 192, with defense overall ranked 321st. Ewing's last team was ranked 219, with 240 ranked defense. The type of rebuild facing Cooley (and yes, I give him responsibility for the poor season last year, it's not just Ewing) now is significantly different than the one faced by Hurley, Marquette, or anybody else in the Big East. Really, Holtmann at DePaul is the only situation even remotely comparable to our current one. We'll see how that goes.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 9:42:22 GMT -5
In my view, it's better because it deepens the talent pool and it also gives more kids chances to get their degrees. I am not so sure about this. The amount of scholarships available is fixed at 13 per team. If you have 5 years of guys competing for the same scholarships (instead of 4 years of guys), it essentially creates more competition for the same spots. So somewhere, guys are getting squeezed out (likely the lower level guys on the edge of getting scholarships). It does deepen the talent pool though, because some lower level guys just never get to play in college to begin with. Also, by the time a guy has been in school for 4 years, if he doesn't have his degree, the odds of getting it in a 5th year seem low considering that most of these 5th year players are on their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th school. I haven't seen stats on it, but I think the number of guys graduating after 4 or 5 years recently has to be lower than it used to be.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 9:36:38 GMT -5
Until the program has some type of success, the coming and going of players will continue. Only to a point. There are other programs that are underperforming and don't see wholesale transfer carnage every year, but the code of silence of college basketball prevents players from ever acknowledging some combination of the following: 1) they didn't like the university, 2) they didn't like the coach, 3) they couldn't hack it academically, 4) they weren't developing as players, 5) they go where the NIL takes them, and/or 6) they don't want to be associated with a losing program. We don't know, and we won't. Since 2020, Georgetown has seen 14 undergraduate players leave after just one year or less. At some levels of the University, this needs a closer look. Putting the Ewing years aside, the amount of transfers so far is in line with our peers at other schools. I am not sure how much there is to examine. It's the changing college landscape, not something systemic at Georgetown (other than our putting a bad team out there). Even a school like Duke, which has had a LOT more success than us in basketball, has had at least three guys hit the portal so far.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 9:33:59 GMT -5
Styles was spotty at best. How many halves would he disappear? Next year, he would have gotten 10-15 minutes per game if he had been lucky. He saw the numbers and the competition. Time to move on. With the caveat that defensive stats are tough because defense involved 5 guys, Styles' defensive numbers weren't great. With Styles playing, our offensive efficiency was 107.4, and our defensive efficiency was 118.1. Obviously, that depends on the guys he is playing with too. Aside from team cohesion and retention, it's not a huge loss.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 16, 2024 9:26:39 GMT -5
I feel like part of the disconnect happening between some of us and player retention is the difference between (a) how we wished things happened, and (b) how things actually happened. First, when Cooley was hired, I (and I assume almost everyone on here) thought that it would mean immediate improvement. Not necessarily tournament team improvement, just a significant improvement over Ewing. And if you look at analytics, we actually did make some improvements that I think are often lost. For exmaple, our offense wasn't great, but our ranking went from 189 under Ewing to 96 under Cooley. But the big problem was the defense. It somehow got worse, even though Cooley's defenses have never been this bad. No, our roster wasn't great, and I think it was underwhemling, but it should have been better. The worst rim defense in Division 1? That's a big problem. Second, as a result of the disappointing and underwhelming Year 1, our team wasn't very good. The results were worse than I (and most of us, I think) expected. Third, in an ideal world, we would have improved on Ewing's last year a lot more. We would have then retained the core of players who got us there, added the freshman, added some transfers, and continued the upward trajectory. But that did not happen. I realize some people talked about our "core" players, and I may be guilty of that too, during the season or at the end of the season. But we really never had much of a core. Lastly, I think we were so bad that continuity matters a lot less than I would have said a year ago. What is the benefit of going back with the same group that was horrible on defense? Not a ton. Even if we had retained Brumbaugh/Styles/Epps/Cook/Fielder, most lineups we would have played this season would have had at least 2 freshman/transfers, if not more. And in Cook's case, he was really at the core of our defensive problems (and one of the reasons I think it's crucial we get a big to supplement Sorber in the portal). Bottom line--we need to get better quickly, and that's not happening on the backs of the "core." I do think Epps can be useful as an off-ball lower usage guard, and I think Fielder has a ton of potential. Outside that, it was more limited. Cook is a good offensive player who has such bad defense you basically cannot play him significant minutes. Styles was a solid player, but not nearly as good on defense as people are saying. Player retention matters to me, but I think prhoya keeps hitting the nail on the head. Until we get better, comparing us to the better teams like Marquette or Creighton on retention is silly. We aren't in the same place. And even really good teams like Duke are facing transfers. It's just an element of the game now.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 15, 2024 15:12:05 GMT -5
Fine with me if you like the odds of working with an ever-revolving team of players. I'd prefer to go the Marquette, Creighton & Uconn and the route Cooley took at PC of developing players within the system & then supplement with portal pick-ups Would love to be in Marquette's, Creighton's and UConn's position or even Cooley's way at Providence. Until we become a winning program, we cannot hope to build like those teams under the current NCAA rules. Remember when Cooley said how hard it was to attract top talent with all the losing? Current players who want to make the '25 NCAAT will not risk coming to GU this coming season. Cooley has lost 2 of the 5 players he recruited to GU. Remember when some here were referring to those 5 as the "core" to rebuild around? The program has to win NOW. The only way to do it under the current rules is to buy talent and age. Then, with winning, Cooley will have an easier time to recruit, retain and get donor NIL$. I agree with this completely. We need to win now. In a collegiate system where there is no guarantee anybody on your roster will return, you simply cannot hang your hat on developing players and retaining them--at least not when you are a program in decline/already declined, and you need to make things better, and fast. When you have already instilled a culture of winning, it's easier to retain players. For example, might somebody like Styles be more likely to stay if he thinks the team is going to contend for the Big East title again? Likely. Would Brumbaugh have left if he had to sit a full year before playing? Much less likely. Because we follow things so closely, it is easy to forget how quickly things have changed. At this point last year, the NCAA rule was one transfer without sitting and that's it. The assumption when we got guys like Epps and Styles was that they were essentially locked in. But, with that lawsuit that basically made free transfers into the rule, it totally upended any leverage coaches/universities had to retain players, other than NIL money. In the bigger scheme of things, this is very new. Two years ago (even last year at this time), one could try to build and develop a team by getting freshman transfers who then couldn't transfer away easily. That's no longer a valid strategy.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 15, 2024 14:40:55 GMT -5
Your concept of NIL math is consistently problematic. Even if we have a $4 million to $5 million budget, that doesn't mean we can simply retain anybody we want. For example, if Styles demanded $1 million, would you give it to him? Would you be able to justify that to the donors giving the money? Highly unlikely. I would venture to guess that Peavy and Mack (assuming we are getting him) are getting very sizeable amounts of NIL simply to come to Georgetown. We need them, and because we stink, we likely needed to overpay for both of them. Let's also assume that Sorber is getting some NIL money, and I bet the other three freshman are getting something too. On top of that, assuming Fielder stays, he's likely getting a good sum, along with Epps. And Cook is almost surely getting something, even if it's not a huge amount. Even under this scenario, we now have 4-5 scholarships to fill, and you better believe that anybody in the portal is going to demand NIL money. And the hope would be that among the portal transfers out there, we will get at least 1, maybe more, players that are at or above the Mack/Peavy level. So, you'd have to spend a lot of NIL money on that too. To be clear, I have no idea what Styles wanted in NIL, what he was offered, etc. But neither do you, unless you have some inside information, and it seems pretty clear you do not, given your own previous predictions that have never happened (like Ewing resigning after his 0-20 season). And you seem to think that you can use the "Georgetown has $4-5 million in NIL" line as a baton against Cooley whenever you want to score a shot against him (which is a daily thing for you). Real simple - if you believe the rumors that are being posted in the "Transfers" thread on the Recruiting board, you should prioritize paying/keeping Styles over Epps. Especially if you're bringing in a 6'1", 170 pound point guard who shoots a lot. You conveniently ignore some of the points above, but that's fine. I get it. You do not like Epps, and I understand why. But I have a strong feeling the coaching staff feels differently. Personally, I would rather keep Epps--who actually scores points--over Styles, not to mention Epps has 2 years left, not one. While I am hopeful the staff finds a better player than Styles to replace his slot, even if they do not, I think Peavy would end up getting most of the minutes Styles would have gotten anyway.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 15, 2024 14:39:09 GMT -5
Well, hell, it's all happening now. There must have been some real reckoning among staff & players for them to be watching the portal, hearing what we're hearing -- and more -- and to get real with the whole NIL reality to be jumping off the Hoya ship. Not easy -- for players or fans -- to get used to this brave, new world. Money freaking changes (read: ruins) everything. TO BE CLEAR, this is a false report. It is based on a Providence troll account. Epps is not in the portal.
|
|