prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 17, 2024 8:18:58 GMT -5
ATTENTION: DC native and Duke guard Jeremy Roach is in the portal What’s his NIL$ market value? Does a coach risk keeping that NIL$ around for just in case Roach is available instead of using it for another player? Bird in hand? The coach could be left holding the bag or giving something to some Plan C player left unsigned to fill roster spots.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Apr 17, 2024 8:21:17 GMT -5
The bigger issue is that if either of Mack or Epps gets a significant injury, you're likely starting a Freshman in Mulready or Hammond. It's risky. Hammond is a nice player. But a 5th year would make a lot more sense imo The 5th year route seems better in the abstract IMHO. I don't think you're getting a guy on his last year of eligibility who is BE caliber and who is willing to be the 4th guard in a 3.5 guard rotation for a team coming off of 2-18 in league. Maybe if you overpay it's possible, but the odds don't seem great. More likely you're getting someone in the Cam Bacote or Trey Dickerson mold who is transferring up from a low major and doesn't have any other high major options. Someone who is just happy to be playing at Georgetown, but who is not really the caliber of player who belongs in a Georgetown rotation. And that's OK with me if that's where it lands. But if a legitimate talent like Hammond is willing to come in and give it a shot, I think that's better. I know some will just see Hammond's 3 star rating and blow him off, but he's a better player than that ranking IMHO. I'd much rather have a high major-caliber talent like Hammond out there even if he's young than a seasoned player who is not a high major talent like Bacote part 2 (no offense to Bacote by the way, seems like a great guy). Does it make sense to bring in a freshman point guard to go with a sophomore point guard (Mack), a small junior 2 guard (Epps) and a freshman combo (Mulready), especially when we've made a huge push for Lewis in 2025 over the last year? Not really, not in the conventional sense. But all rosters are year-to-year at this point. I don't bank on a single person being back next year, you just never know. So to bring in a senior just to keep a seat warm for Acaden is not ideal. If Hammond knows the deal and wants to follow Kenny Johnson and take a crack at it, great. If it doesn't work, he will head back to the A-10 level this time next year. If it does work, great, and maybe one of the other guys takes off next April. I think in the current climate you just have to get the best players you can and see what happens. And Hammond is pretty good. Count me also in the 5th year camp. If this program wants to start shifting its sights upwards, we have to start planning to have guys off the bench who can hold their own and possibly even do some damage to opponents, vs. us just having to cover our eyes for a few minutes and hope the opponents' lead hasn't ballooned with our bench on the floor. I'm not saying Hammond can't eventually be that guy, but at this point I'd take the known quantity. I don't think it necessarily is a situation either where you're telling a potential 5th year PG that he's going to be limited to a 10 MPG role. There's 80 MPG to split at the 1 and 2 so there definitely is a way to ensure Epps, Mack (assuming he commits soon) and a guy like Roach are all playing ~25 MPG and staying relatively fresh throughout the course of a season vs. burning guys out through overuse (i.e. 35 MPG) and then actually having to worry about things like injuries.
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,102
|
Post by hoyas315 on Apr 17, 2024 9:03:40 GMT -5
|
|
bluegray79
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,099
|
Post by bluegray79 on Apr 17, 2024 9:09:09 GMT -5
Let's go!!!
|
|
hoyariv71
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 124
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyariv71 on Apr 17, 2024 9:12:17 GMT -5
The more highlights I watched the more I like BIG TIME
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,134
|
Post by RBHoya on Apr 17, 2024 9:13:34 GMT -5
I don't think it necessarily is a situation either where you're telling a potential 5th year PG that he's going to be limited to a 10 MPG role. There's 80 MPG to split at the 1 and 2 so there definitely is a way to ensure Epps, Mack (assuming he commits soon) and a guy like Roach are all playing ~25 MPG and staying relatively fresh throughout the course of a season vs. burning guys out through overuse (i.e. 35 MPG) and then actually having to worry about things like injuries. I'm happy with a 5th year if it happens. But I'd rather have a freshman who is really talented than a 4th or 5th year guy who isn't. It's tough to say with any certainty because we don't know who the 5th year guy is that we're comparing to, it's all theoretical. My point is just that we all have an archetype in mind and it's likely difficult to find somebody who exactly fits that archetype, is good enough to play in the Big East and happy to join our 2-18 team to sit behind the guy we just gave a ton of NIL money to (Mack). Age and experience are important, no doubt. But talent is too. I don't think there's any chance we're in on a guy like Roach. I think Cooley will likely only have a 9 man rotation, and that's probably 3 guards/3 wings/3 bigs. If the next guard we bring in (after Mack) is going to get regular run he will likely have to outplay Mulready. Which I think will be hard, because Mulready is pretty good. As it pertains to Hammond, I can totally understand not seeing the fit. It's not a great one, tbh. But he can play. And for so long we've been wanting to keep top local players home. I'm ok with doing that even if it's not a perfect fit. I want the TTO and Paul VI pipelines. The best case for us might be for Hammond to go elsewhere for a year or two (say, George Mason) to get significant PT and then transfer to Georgetown in a couple years. But if he wants to come today and we need a backup point guard, I personally would not tell him no.
|
|
conshyhoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 809
|
Post by conshyhoya on Apr 17, 2024 10:03:21 GMT -5
I don't think it necessarily is a situation either where you're telling a potential 5th year PG that he's going to be limited to a 10 MPG role. There's 80 MPG to split at the 1 and 2 so there definitely is a way to ensure Epps, Mack (assuming he commits soon) and a guy like Roach are all playing ~25 MPG and staying relatively fresh throughout the course of a season vs. burning guys out through overuse (i.e. 35 MPG) and then actually having to worry about things like injuries. I'm happy with a 5th year if it happens. But I'd rather have a freshman who is really talented than a 4th or 5th year guy who isn't. It's tough to say with any certainty because we don't know who the 5th year guy is that we're comparing to, it's all theoretical. My point is just that we all have an archetype in mind and it's likely difficult to find somebody who exactly fits that archetype, is good enough to play in the Big East and happy to join our 2-18 team to sit behind the guy we just gave a ton of NIL money to (Mack). Age and experience are important, no doubt. But talent is too. I don't think there's any chance we're in on a guy like Roach. I think Cooley will likely only have a 9 man rotation, and that's probably 3 guards/3 wings/3 bigs. If the next guard we bring in (after Mack) is going to get regular run he will likely have to outplay Mulready. Which I think will be hard, because Mulready is pretty good. As it pertains to Hammond, I can totally understand not seeing the fit. It's not a great one, tbh. But he can play. And for so long we've been wanting to keep top local players home. I'm ok with doing that even if it's not a perfect fit. I want the TTO and Paul VI pipelines. The best case for us might be for Hammond to go elsewhere for a year or two (say, George Mason) to get significant PT and then transfer to Georgetown in a couple years. But if he wants to come today and we need a backup point guard, I personally would not tell him no. If we can find Terrell Allen 2.0 than 5th year guy for sure but I doubt that will happen so we probably will roll with what we have now or someone like Hammond. Like you said it would be preferable for him to get some PT elsewhere and then possibly transfer later but if he is willing to develop here with minimal PT than that is fine too.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal_Interjection on Apr 17, 2024 11:22:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Transfers
Apr 17, 2024 11:43:54 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 17, 2024 11:43:54 GMT -5
Unless he can shoot the lights on we have much greater needs.
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,102
|
Post by hoyas315 on Apr 17, 2024 12:01:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Apr 17, 2024 13:03:09 GMT -5
I don't think it necessarily is a situation either where you're telling a potential 5th year PG that he's going to be limited to a 10 MPG role. There's 80 MPG to split at the 1 and 2 so there definitely is a way to ensure Epps, Mack (assuming he commits soon) and a guy like Roach are all playing ~25 MPG and staying relatively fresh throughout the course of a season vs. burning guys out through overuse (i.e. 35 MPG) and then actually having to worry about things like injuries. I'm happy with a 5th year if it happens. But I'd rather have a freshman who is really talented than a 4th or 5th year guy who isn't. It's tough to say with any certainty because we don't know who the 5th year guy is that we're comparing to, it's all theoretical. My point is just that we all have an archetype in mind and it's likely difficult to find somebody who exactly fits that archetype, is good enough to play in the Big East and happy to join our 2-18 team to sit behind the guy we just gave a ton of NIL money to (Mack). Age and experience are important, no doubt. But talent is too. I don't think there's any chance we're in on a guy like Roach. I think Cooley will likely only have a 9 man rotation, and that's probably 3 guards/3 wings/3 bigs. If the next guard we bring in (after Mack) is going to get regular run he will likely have to outplay Mulready. Which I think will be hard, because Mulready is pretty good. As it pertains to Hammond, I can totally understand not seeing the fit. It's not a great one, tbh. But he can play. And for so long we've been wanting to keep top local players home. I'm ok with doing that even if it's not a perfect fit. I want the TTO and Paul VI pipelines. The best case for us might be for Hammond to go elsewhere for a year or two (say, George Mason) to get significant PT and then transfer to Georgetown in a couple years. But if he wants to come today and we need a backup point guard, I personally would not tell him no. Totally see your point re: freshman vs. 4th/5th year. I probably am a little bit more pessimistic in my view when it comes to bringing on fringe freshman. 5 years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed. But now, with the current NIL/transfer rules, the chances of your investment in freshmen, especially if they don't project to being a major contributor right away, is exceedingly low in being paid back. If they can't immediately contribute to wins, they don't help the team. If they don't develop right away, they're probably going to leave in a year to find a level that better suits their ability and any effort you may have put into their development is wasted. In a perfect world, the player exceeds expectations and outplays their ranking, develops quicker than expected, and helps you to win. Then you have to figure out how pay the kid enough the following spring so that he doesn't leave. Just a ton of headaches that don't come with taking on seniors/grad transfers. Agree that the most important thing here is developing that relationship with TTO/PVI. Honestly wouldn't have even given a player like Roach a 2nd thought except for the fact that he did go to PVI too. As much as we want to prove that we should be a preferred destination for their top-level players going forward, they need to hold up their end of the bargain and demonstrate that they'll steer their top-level players towards us too and not just anybody.
|
|
bluechi
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 646
|
Transfers
Apr 17, 2024 14:00:00 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by bluechi on Apr 17, 2024 14:00:00 GMT -5
I'm confused one for 150 is this person saying that this is a valid scoop maybe I'm missing something thanks
|
|
bluechi
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 646
|
Post by bluechi on Apr 17, 2024 14:47:16 GMT -5
I'm confused one for 150 is this person saying that this is a valid scoop maybe I'm missing something thanks I would take Troare in a heartbeat and have a good problem
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Apr 17, 2024 15:16:41 GMT -5
I'm confused one for 150 is this person saying that this is a valid scoop maybe I'm missing something thanks I would take Troare in a heartbeat and have a good problem Leverage that supposed NY Lightning connection to get Omoruyi too while they're at it.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal_Interjection on Apr 17, 2024 15:31:48 GMT -5
|
|
bluechi
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 646
|
Transfers
Apr 17, 2024 15:54:20 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by bluechi on Apr 17, 2024 15:54:20 GMT -5
Uh-oh Ed is starting to cook. GU is already a faster and more athletic team and better defense is coming. He has a vision for a filled arena 👀👀👀
|
|
|
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?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 17, 2024 16:30:45 GMT -5
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,878
|
Transfers
Apr 17, 2024 16:34:57 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 17, 2024 16:34:57 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? *MAAC, not MEAC
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on Apr 17, 2024 17:13:22 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? *MAAC, not MEAC
|
|