Yup, this off-season will tell a lot about the direction of the program IMO. This is the most unique and absolute best opportunity to change how the program is being constructed going forward. We need at least 4/5 guys coming back to build a strong nucleus. I’d be fine with the shitshow this year if that’s what needed to be done to tweak the philosophy going forward.
VMI Guard Greg Parham
- Thread starter RickyAllen19
- Start date
Yup, this off-season will tell a lot about the direction of the program IMO. This is the most unique and absolute best opportunity to change how the program is being constructed going forward. We need at least 4/5 guys coming back to build a strong nucleus. I’d be fine with the shitshow this year if that’s what needed to be done to tweak the philosophy going forward.
100% agree. There are a few things happening right now that will greatly help Cal change the culture and the transfer portal is one of them. The timing is perfect.
I don't see how he has much choice, the big fish recruits aren't going to college and the next tier of players are less skilled guys that you can't anchor your roster to. So now is the time to get program guys in here and build a legit college roster.
He can still add great freshman talent to it, if that option is available (Wagner), that is an advantage UK should have. Gonzaga is the perfect model for this. They have damn good veterans, added a transfer from Florida and reeled in Jalen Suggs, who is a lottery pick. If you put BJB on that roster, he would look a lot better. He wouldn't be carrying too much of the load.
Sorry for the long post.
Speculation about a guy from VMI transferring? In basketball? Do I need to say more?
Agree. That Murray guy sucked while he was here. Knight was definitely a better scorer. I kid, I kid, I know it was an over site.
I would even throw Booker in there. He didn't start and played on a lot deeper team. While Monk's team was very good, he was the or one of the main focal points (as well he should be).
Booker averaged 10 PPG and only played 21 minutes per game, and he only took 7.6 shoots per game. Compare that to Monk and you will see they where both very lethal.
Monk - 32 minutes per game, 14.7 shot attempts per game, 19.8 PPG. He took nearly twice as many shots and played 11 more minutes per game. Not to mention he was the main scoring option where as Booker came off the bench and they had several guys that got shots. Monk, Fox, and Bam was the main offensive options on Monk's team, where as Booker had the twins, KAT, WCS, Trey Lyles, and Dakari. hell Poythress almost as many minutes and took almost as many shots. Poythress played over 20 MPG and took 5.5 shots per game. Aaron harrison took the most shots, 9.5 per game, hell KAT only took 6.6 per game.
That 14-15 team had 6 players attempt over 5 shots per game.
Aaron Harrison 9.5
Devin Booker 7.6
Andrew Harrison 6.8
Trey Lyles 6.7
Willie Cauley-Stein 6.1
Alex Poythress 5.3
Compare that to the 16-17 Monk team you had :
Monk 14.7
Fox 12.4
Briscoe 9.6
Bam 7.5
Willis 5.4
Gabriel 5.3
You had three guys who attempted DD or near DD shots per game. Bam only taking 7.5 while Briscoe took nearly 10 was a huge problem on that team. I loved Briscoe's heart and determination, but NO WAY he should have taken more shots than Bam. More depth on Book's team or we would have averaged 17-20 PPG. IF he got Briscoe shot attempts he would have been close to Monk's output. Give him Monk's 15 shots per game, and good lord what could have been.
For comparisons sake, Murray's team looked like this :
Murray 15 shots per game
Ulis 12.6
Briscoe 8.9
Poythress 6.4
Willis 5.6
Skal 5.3
Mainly 3, maybe 4 guys took the bulk of the shots. Top heavy with the top 3, then a drop off to 4th most.
Monk 14.7
Fox 12.4
Briscoe 9.6
Bam 7.5
Willis 5.4
Gabriel 5.3
You had three guys who attempted DD or near DD shots per game. Bam only taking 7.5 while Briscoe took nearly 10 was a huge problem on that team. I loved Briscoe's heart and determination, but NO WAY he should have taken more shots than Bam. More depth on Book's team or we would have averaged 17-20 PPG. IF he got Briscoe shot attempts he would have been close to Monk's output. Give him Monk's 15 shots per game, and good lord what could have been.
For comparisons sake, Murray's team looked like this :
Murray 15 shots per game
Ulis 12.6
Briscoe 8.9
Poythress 6.4
Willis 5.6
Skal 5.3
Mainly 3, maybe 4 guys took the bulk of the shots. Top heavy with the top 3, then a drop off to 4th most.
Who gives a **** if a dude comes from VMI or podunk high school. If they can play, they can play.
I agree with Mike. Nothing wrong with a guy transferring from VMI or any other school. If a guy can play, that's all that matters. They guys we recruit don't typically stay long enough to get as good as some of these transfers from mid-major programs. Players develop with age and experience, and it isn't highly predictable.
Do any of you remember the high school teams before the mass consolidations? Those small schools would produce some really good players who didn't develop until late - and then they were some of the best players in a region as Seniors. These same players would likely have been overlooked or cut from the big high school teams before they had a chance to develop. Happened all the time, and that's the same type of thing going on with some of these better transfers. They just needed a little more time to develop and shine.
Clown emojis, huh? High level repartee from you, today. But, your arguments are usually a clown show.
Who gives a **** if a dude comes from VMI or podunk high school. If they can play, they can play.
We cracked on Louisville when Rick was pilfering kids from Wimp Tech and Podunk U. It's a hypocrite move and it hasn't proven successful for anyone who tries to fill a roster with these guys. Taking a Reid Travis type guy is different than this.
I disagree. Of course, they can help - maybe a lot. You're not going to bat .1000%, but you usually have a better idea about what you're getting with a transfer (who has at least played against grown men) than a high school kid. Moreover, if your high school kids are OAD, how often are you really getting better help in that one year than you would with a high level transfer?
I disagree with your disagreement. I think taking kids from mid-majors and below for one season is a huge gamble, especially if you have to rely on them to anchor your team. Our 2 worst teams under Cal? Both had mid-major grad transfers as major contributors. Each to their own, man. I'm not for it. I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is for rosters, these days, and nobody else is, either. K and Cal are having historically bad years. But I don't see how taking guys from VMI gets you to that answer. Not taking away from these kids, some are really good. A rare few are better than the name they play for. Those are the exception, not the rule. For every Damian Lillard, there's a million Julius Mayes'.
We knocked on Rick for taking grad transfers? When was this. Link?
And yeah, that was a clown take, and I don't even know who you are. Don't ever remember seeing you post. Don't care to ever see you post again, especially if this take is any indication of future posts.
Let me guess, you think we are too good for the kid at Oral Roberts too? Even though he dropped 37 on Oklahoma State. But I guess you'd rather see potential recruits scoring on kids at the high school level. A much better indicator of future college success.
And that's all you've got. Insults. You responded to me. And acted like an *** about it. I've seen a lot of your posts, and you never seem to have anything to back up your takes, and you don't usually know what you're talking about. You don't like what I say? You don't want to see my future posts? Don't quote me, and maybe think about ignoring me, clown boy. You went and made something out of nothing on this one. There was no need for any type of hostility. This isn't a hot-button topic.We knocked on Rick for taking grad transfers? When was this. Link?
And yeah, that was a clown take, and I don't even know who you are. Don't ever remember seeing you post. Don't care to ever see you post again, especially if this take is any indication of future posts.
Let me guess, you think we are too good for the kid at Oral Roberts too? Even though he dropped 37 on Oklahoma State. But I guess you'd rather see potential recruits scoring on kids at the high school level. A much better indicator of future college success.
I understand. Personally, I don't want either transfers or freshmen anchoring the team. I view them both as being best for plugging holes in a lineup. Not putting words in your mouth, but it seems like we mainly differ on the value of freshmen vs the value of upperclassmen transfers. But I will agree with you that there is no sure-fire way that's been proven to always work.
I’d love to get the Preston kid from Ohio University. Watched him a few times this season, 6’4 and silky smooth. Reminds me of Fox.
I agree. I don't want either freshmen or graduate transfers anchoring the team. I don't think one is really any better than the other. Unless you're talking Wall or AD type freshmen. Taking the occasional grad transfer? Certainly. Comprising a good portion of your roster with them? You're going to struggle, from what I've seen.
Abmas did perform well against Oklahoma State and solidly against Missouri and Oklahoma. He was a little off against Arkansas.
Isaiah Miller is a terrible shooting high volume scorer. He does seem to be a very capable defender though. 17 shots and 4 free throws a game. He does seem to grade as a good defender though. Still, hard pass.
Isaiah Miller is a terrible shooting high volume scorer. He does seem to be a very capable defender though. 17 shots and 4 free throws a game. He does seem to grade as a good defender though. Still, hard pass.