MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: THEultimateWARRIOR on April 21, 2012, 12:58:50 PM
-
According to @MattWettersten Drake transfer Rayvonte Rice has visited Illinois and Xavier & hopes to see Marquette. Decision b4 June. #mubb
Averaged 16.5 points and 5.7 rebounds this past season for Drake, including eight games of at least 20 points.
He wants to visit Marquette. This would be a very good get for MU.
Possibility of someone else transferring? This is the 3rd SG we have been in on.
-
According to @MattWettersten Drake transfer Rayvonte Rice has visited Illinois and Xavier & hopes to see Marquette. Decision b4 June. #mubb
Averaged 16.5 points and 5.7 rebounds this past season for Drake, including eight games of at least 20 points.
He wants to visit Marquette. This would be a very good get for MU.
Possibility of someone else transferring? This is the 3rd SG we have been in on.
Against what kind of competition?
-
Against what kind of competition?
Just from looking at ESPN he did well vs ranked opponents.
23pts verse Creighton, 19pts vs Witchita State the first time, 18pts the second time. Both teams were ranked for the majority of the season.
Also noticed he dropped 23 on Winthrop who we played. (Crowder had 11 and DJO had 20)
-
Just from looking at ESPN he did well vs ranked opponents.
23pts verse Creighton, 19pts vs Witchita State the first time, 18pts the second time. Both teams were ranked for the majority of the season.
Also noticed he dropped 23 on Winthrop who we played. (Crowder had 11 and DJO had 20)
Works for me! Thanks for the stats.
-
Will all these names in the mix it really shows there's going to be more roster shakeup the next few weeks.
-
Will all these names in the mix it really shows there's going to be more roster shakeup the next few weeks.
I think so too. Vander Blue to the NBA?
-
Will all these names in the mix it really shows there's going to be more roster shakeup the next few weeks.
Not necessarily. I am sure Buzz is talking to several guys in case Lockett decides/decided to go elsewhere.
-
Not necessarily. I am sure Buzz is talking to several guys in case Lockett decides/decided to go elsewhere.
Valid point, but I find it hard to believe that Durley is the only one that won't be at MU next year out of the bunch.
-
Valid point, but I find it hard to believe that Durley is the only one that won't be at MU next year out of the bunch.
Why? Cause some people came on this board with vague, ambiguous unprovable information. I don't find it odd at all, especially considering all the guys we're interested in basically would play the same position/role.
-
Everyone laughs at Vander but he is NBA talent.
-
Everyone laughs at Vander but he is NBA talent.
Not until he can finish and consistently make a mid-range jumper.
-
Not until he can finish and consistently make a mid-range jumper.
He's already NBA talent. He doesn't yet have the skill (such as that jumper and finishing) but the raw ability is unquestionably there. In terms of NBA pedigree, he's probably our best looking prospect since Wade, and if he can polish his rough spots, he could be a very solid next-level player.
-
He is NBA prospect today, but would be foolish to try it. If he has solid year next year I have no doubt he is gone. If he happened to be in hot water at MU I could see him testing the waters. He has very big upside and will be paid to play ball when college career is over.
-
He is NBA prospect today, but would be foolish to try it. If he has solid year next year I have no doubt he is gone. If he happened to be in hot water at MU I could see him testing the waters. He has very big upside and will be paid to play ball when college career is over.
I agree with you once again Goose
-
Are there any transfers out there who don't have an interest in MU and we don't want also.
-
He is NBA prospect today, but would be foolish to try it. If he has solid year next year I have no doubt he is gone. If he happened to be in hot water at MU I could see him testing the waters. He has very big upside and will be paid to play ball when college career is over.
I'm not sure what you mean by a solid year. It's hard to envision him making the kind of jump that would get him into the first round. If he came out now there would be no interest from the NBA. Not just he wouldn't get drafted, he wouldn't get a tryout. If the NBA still has summer rookie league teams, I could see him getting a shot there.
-
Little Murs
Politely disagree with you. I am saying I think he is ready or close to ready but people that get paid to judge talent like him a lot. He is a raw talent and will play pro ball for a long time, either here or elsewhere.
-
Are there any transfers out there who don't have an interest in MU and we don't want also.
Impossible. All transfers have to at least consider us. It's a rule.
-
He is NBA prospect today, but would be foolish to try it. If he has solid year next year I have no doubt he is gone. If he happened to be in hot water at MU I could see him testing the waters. He has very big upside and will be paid to play ball when college career is over.
We have all seen him him play for two years. Every game. All of us.
And by 'solid year' you certainly must mean a tough defender and improved free throw shooter. An NBA scout would be lucky to have a job if he happened to looked passed those qualities. Right Sultan, I mean Goose.
-
I personally don't think he's much of an NBA prospect unless he improves his shot or his handle. Not tall enough to be drafted just as a defender.
-
Little Murs
Politely disagree with you. I am saying I think he is ready or close to ready but people that get paid to judge talent like him a lot. He is a raw talent and will play pro ball for a long time, either here or elsewhere.
While it grieves me to disagree with an esteemed colleague, I must point out that the DNBA is full of "raw talents". On the other hand, the DNBA is "pro ball". I agree with Aughnanure, that until he "can finish and consistently make a mid-range jumper" the NBA is not going to happen. The majority of his drives on the basket end with embarrassment. I'm gonna repeat that; "The majority of his drives on the basket end with embarrassment." That don't cut it in the NBA. If by "a solid year" you mean he figures out how to finish at the rim and to become a go to scorer (which he has yet to show that he can be), then I agree that he is NBA bound. Big ifs that I would love to see come to pass. Maybe, this year he deferred to Jae and DJO. I hope so. He certainly improved his free throw shooting this year, and he's always been a quality defender, although Todd Mayo replaced him as the team's best perimeter defender this year. I believe that next year will tell. If he's not one of the guys that "the other team has to plan how to stop" next year as Jae and DJO were this year, I'm not gonna hold my breath for his senior year.
-
I personally don't think he's much of an NBA prospect unless he improves his shot or his handle. Not tall enough to be drafted just as a defender.
I "COMPLETELY" agree Goose.
-
While it grieves me to disagree with an esteemed colleague, I must point out that the DNBA is full of "raw talents". On the other hand, the DNBA is "pro ball". I agree with Aughnanure, that until he "can finish and consistently make a mid-range jumper" the NBA is not going to happen. The majority of his drives on the basket end with embarrassment. I'm gonna repeat that; "The majority of his drives on the basket end with embarrassment." That don't cut it in the NBA. If by "a solid year" you mean he figures out how to finish at the rim and to become a go to scorer (which he has yet to show that he can be), then I agree that he is NBA bound. Big ifs that I would love to see come to pass. Maybe, this year he deferred to Jae and DJO. I hope so. He certainly improved his free throw shooting this year, and he's always been a quality defender, although Todd Mayo replaced him as the team's best perimeter defender this year. I believe that next year will tell. If he's not one of the guys that "the other team has to plan how to stop" next year as Jae and DJO were this year, I'm not gonna hold my breath for his senior year.
I agree totally, Vander is about 20 lbs. light of muscle before he gets to the next level. His body is wirey thin so he has trouble finishing at the rim on drives. He basically does not have great form on his shot, and confidence wise, or demeanor on the court is along way from being a warrior. Not even sure Jae makes the NBA so how does Vander. Jae averaged around 18 a game, Vander about
8, does anybody really expect Vander to pick up his game and add 10 points a game, I doubt. I am hoping for 10-11 next year. Can he do better, it can only happen if he works his ass off this summer, and I still do not see it with his form from the outside. He can get to the rim, but he had 3 out of 4 shots knocked back in his face. Hope I am wrong.
-
Also, one more point. If Lockett does come to MU, he is slightly bigger than Vander. So Vander may not even start as competition at those spots will be strong. Mayo, TJ Taylor, Lockett,
Ferguson (lets not forget him) and Vander. His best chance for more time might be at the point. If he does not start, I see real problems chemistry wise. This is why a lot of the Top 10
teams play with 9-11 players. Try and keep 14 happy next year, that might be a story in itself.
-
I "COMPLETELY" agree Goose.
Okay, the person you were quoting was not Goose, nor did Sultan agree with what Goose was saying. What am I missing here?
-
Vander has NBA upside? Unless he is given Novak's form, there's no way he gets there via draft. He'll have to go the FA/NBADL route.
Kid can't shoot, much less stop chucking the ball at the rim on fadeaway or drive-by layups!
Not sure about this Rice kid. Were we on him as a prepster?
-
Okay, the person you were quoting was not Goose, nor did Sultan agree with what Goose was saying. What am I missing here?
They are both alter-egos of Chicos.
-
They are both alter-egos of Chicos.
While Sultan claims to be from South Wayne, he seems to maintain a very nice tan throughout the winter, just like someone from southern California would.
While Goose... aww who gives a... about Goose.
-
He's already NBA talent. He doesn't yet have the skill (such as that jumper and finishing) but the raw ability is unquestionably there. In terms of NBA pedigree, he's probably our best looking prospect since Wade, and if he can polish his rough spots, he could be a very solid next-level player.
I'm just hoping Vander can be a very solid THIS-LEVEL player. I don't see anyway he makes the NBA, unless he can add about 20 lbs of muscle, and improve his perimeter shot tremendously. I've never seen Vander shoot a pull up jumper off the dribble...head fake..put the ball on the floor and pull up for a jumper...not that this is some skill required to get drafted..but just an example of a hole in his game right now.
If Jerel McNeal wasn't good enough to get drafted/make the NBA...how in the world can anyone see Vander getting there? What is Vander better at than Jerel was after their sophomore years? Hope I'm proven wrong, and would love to be...but just don't see it happening.
-
According to @MattWettersten Drake transfer Rayvonte Rice has visited Illinois and Xavier & hopes to see Marquette. Decision b4 June. #mubb
Averaged 16.5 points and 5.7 rebounds this past season for Drake, including eight games of at least 20 points.
He wants to visit Marquette. This would be a very good get for MU.
Possibility of someone else transferring? This is the 3rd SG we have been in on.
Clicking on Value Add above and punching him in, he was the best player in 2012 of any player who has been mentioned so far. His three years he has improved on both offense and defense very year - with his overall ranking going from 957 as a freshman to 490 to 364.
That gives him a higher ranking than any Marquette player except our two now graduation seniors and Davante (299th), and puts him ahead of even Rodney Hood (504th) as the best transfer to be mentioned. Of course, Lockett's ability to play this coming season would make him attractive as opposed to Rice tying up a scholarship as a redshirt next year just to give us one year - but Value Add is adjusted for every opponent so Rice does look like the biggest value of any transfer discussed so far. You can type up this link i mentioned on CS yesterday and type his name in to see exact numbers:
http://www.chromatic.us/ball.html
-
If Jerel McNeal wasn't good enough to get drafted/make the NBA...how in the world can anyone see Vander getting there? What is Vander better at than Jerel was after their sophomore years? Hope I'm proven wrong, and would love to be...but just don't see it happening.
Bingo! Great analogy.
-
Okay, the person you were quoting was not Goose, nor did Sultan agree with what Goose was saying. What am I missing here?
Yeah I must admit this has me confused.
-
If Jerel McNeal wasn't good enough to get drafted/make the NBA...how in the world can anyone see Vander getting there? What is Vander better at than Jerel was after their sophomore years? Hope I'm proven wrong, and would love to be...but just don't see it happening.
Vander is a better defender....but not marginally enough to make up for his lack of offense. Good analogy though.
-
Vander has far more upside that McNeal had and far more natural talent. I love the fact this is place where you can blasted for saying positives about a player. Funny thing is one of the naysayers stated Joe Nathen actually was a pretty good basketball player on here a couple of weeks ago. Anyone that thinks Joe Nathen was a pretty good player obviously has different standards for talent or knows nothing about basketball.
-
Vander has far more upside that McNeal had and far more natural talent. I love the fact this is place where you can blasted for saying positives about a player. Funny thing is one of the naysayers stated Joe Nathen actually was a pretty good basketball player on here a couple of weeks ago. Anyone that thinks Joe Nathen was a pretty good player obviously has different standards for talent or knows nothing about basketball.
I agree that Vander as an upside to him, but Jerel, despite the lack of upside, was WAY more polished of a player at this stage of his MU career.
Will we see Vander's upside partially realized over the next two years?
I hope so, but doubt it.
He lacks an outside shot (which Jerel kinda had) and needs to cut back on his left arm wards (meaning his dribbling skills need more work).
-
Vander is a better defender....but not marginally enough to make up for his lack of offense. Good analogy though.
Jerel was the Big East Defensive Player Of The Year as a sophomore.
-
Hands down McNeal is a better college player than Vander to this point and probably two years from now the same will hold true. Comparing a college career and what a kid can do next level is different thing. IMO McNeal exceeded all expectations and was a joy to watch. To date Vander has been frustrating to watch more than he has been entertaining. However, in the big picture I believe, from I have heard, that Vander has skills that translates to the next level.
I commented on here during the season that more than handful of times I heard announcers say Vander has NBA talent. Honestly over the last decade or so, Wade aside, I cannot remember any guy singled out by announcers more than Vander. Jae received a ton of props this year but only after an unreal run this season. I will not dispute anyone's claims that Vander has been a work in progress at best, but do listen and read what others have to say. By no stretch am I saying he is a lock at next level and think he has work ahead of him to get there.
-
Hands down McNeal is a better college player than Vander to this point and probably two years from now the same will hold true. Comparing a college career and what a kid can do next level is different thing. IMO McNeal exceeded all expectations and was a joy to watch. To date Vander has been frustrating to watch more than he has been entertaining. However, in the big picture I believe, from I have heard, that Vander has skills that translates to the next level.
Pretty much what everyone said about McNeal as he became MU's leading scorer.
-
Cancer is a far more complete player. He is unbelievably athletic. The last guy MU had that was this athletic was D-wade. Yes including Don James. Vander will get drafted, and he will play PG in the NBA. This year he will make a big leap, and silence a lot of his
-
Cancer is a far more complete player. He is unbelievably athletic. The last guy MU had that was this athletic was D-wade. Yes including Don James. Vander will get drafted, and he will play PG in the NBA. This year he will make a big leap, and silence a lot of his
Did Vander get auto-corrected to "cancer"?
-
Cancer is a far more complete player. He is unbelievably athletic. The last guy MU had that was this athletic was D-wade. Yes including Don James. Vander will get drafted, and he will play PG in the NBA. This year he will make a big leap, and silence a lot of his
Did Vander get auto-corrected to "cancer"?
And did you get sidetracked before you finished your post?
-
Jerel was the Big East Defensive Player Of The Year as a sophomore.
He was good, but he wasn't *that*good. Took way too many chances and that pumped up his defensive stats.
-
Vander is a better defender....but not marginally enough to make up for his lack of offense. Good analogy though.
Disagree. Jerel was a very good defender and better all around ballplayer.
-
If Avery Bradley can play in the association, so can Vander. Bradley has ZERO ability to make a shot, but is a phenomenal athlete, and very solid defensive player. He's basically the same size as Vander is. Vander has got another couple years to refine his jumper, get even BETTER as a defender--and the Cracked Sidewalks stats bear out how important he is when he's on the floor.
He has an NBA frame, too. 6'4" ish is pretty solid for a 1/2 combo in the NBA.
-
And did you get sidetracked before you finished your post?
No Androids keypad is buggy. Last word should be critics. Also yes Vander got autocorrected to cancer. Haha
-
Vander Blue has incredible upside. Don't underestimate his chances of making the show.
-
I'm just hoping Vander can be a very solid THIS-LEVEL player. I don't see anyway he makes the NBA, unless he can add about 20 lbs of muscle, and improve his perimeter shot tremendously. I've never seen Vander shoot a pull up jumper off the dribble...head fake..put the ball on the floor and pull up for a jumper...not that this is some skill required to get drafted..but just an example of a hole in his game right now.
If Jerel McNeal wasn't good enough to get drafted/make the NBA...how in the world can anyone see Vander getting there? What is Vander better at than Jerel was after their sophomore years? Hope I'm proven wrong, and would love to be...but just don't see it happening.
All of this +1.
-
Vander has far more upside that McNeal had and far more natural talent. I love the fact this is place where you can blasted for saying positives about a player. Funny thing is one of the naysayers stated Joe Nathen actually was a pretty good basketball player on here a couple of weeks ago. Anyone that thinks Joe Nathen was a pretty good player obviously has different standards for talent or knows nothing about basketball.
Goose,
Several posters, myself included, disagree with you regarding Vander's pro potential. I don't believe that anyone has "blasted you" for having your own opinion. If you feel that I have, I apologize. I actually never skip over your posts because I always find something interesting, if not informative, in each one.
When Brewcity77 (in teal) called you and Sultan alter egos of Chicos, I probably gave the wrong impression with my "While Goose... aww who gives a... about Goose" comment." I'd already use my best bit on Sultan, and I didn't want to just skip over you, so I came up with that. I try to start some good natured zinging back and forth with guys I respect, like Forever does (particularly with ZiggysFryBoy), and I guess that one bombed.
As for Joe Nathen, well, he was no Joe Nethen, that's for sure.
-
LittleMurs
No problem. Nice finish!!! Wish Vander could close like that.
-
Clicking on Value Add above and punching him in, he was the best player in 2012 of any player who has been mentioned so far. His three years he has improved on both offense and defense very year - with his overall ranking going from 957 as a freshman to 490 to 364.
That gives him a higher ranking than any Marquette player except our two now graduation seniors and Davante (299th), and puts him ahead of even Rodney Hood (504th) as the best transfer to be mentioned. Of course, Lockett's ability to play this coming season would make him attractive as opposed to Rice tying up a scholarship as a redshirt next year just to give us one year - but Value Add is adjusted for every opponent so Rice does look like the biggest value of any transfer discussed so far. You can type up this link i mentioned on CS yesterday and type his name in to see exact numbers:
http://www.chromatic.us/ball.html
Thanks again for great information. One question though. He's only been out of HS for two years, so how does he have three numbers? Could the 957 be a projected number for his freshman year based on his HS performance?
-
Thanks again for great information. One question though. He's only been out of HS for two years, so how does he have three numbers? Could the 957 be a projected number for his freshman year based on his HS performance?
Great catch! That's one reason I put everyone in a database other people could see things.
Yes, if you click on it and look to the year column the years are 2011, 2012 and 2013, so the third figure was the 2013 projection.
So actually in 2012, he was ranked 490th, just 14 spots ahead of Hood at 504th, and since the jump from freshman to sophomore is usually be far the biggest, Hood would be pretty solidly the best player from all the possible transfers that have been discussed - though I believe our assumption is still that he is going to Lville. Rice looks like the second best, and since you caught my mistake obviously he would be with us for two years instead of one after redshirting next year. thanks for the catch.
http://www.chromatic.us/ball.html
-
He is NBA prospect today, but would be foolish to try it. If he has solid year next year I have no doubt he is gone. If he happened to be in hot water at MU I could see him testing the waters. He has very big upside and will be paid to play ball when college career is over.
I just don't get this. As a 6-3 kid and not a 7-3 kid, one would think a prerequisite for the NBA would be the ability to, you know, play basketball well. He is very athletic. He has no PG skills that translate to the NBA, is not an adept ball handler, passer, scorer or shooter. He is a plus defender at the college level, but nothing like a lock down defender. What on Earth is it about his game that makes people think he is an NBA player? That's he a good rebounder for a 6-3 guy? I agree he improved a lot this year, but only from wretched to not good. We watched McNeal here for 4 years and not get much NBA interest and Blue is not remotely near the ballplayer McNeal was. NBA after next season? You gotta be kidding!
-
I just don't get this. As a 6-3 kid and not a 7-3 kid, one would think a prerequisite for the NBA would be the ability to, you know, play basketball well. He is very athletic. He has no PG skills that translate to the NBA, is not an adept ball handler, passer, scorer or shooter. He is a plus defender at the college level, but nothing like a lock down defender. What on Earth is it about his game that makes people think he is an NBA player? That's he a good rebounder for a 6-3 guy? I agree he improved a lot this year, but only from wretched to not good. We watched McNeal here for 4 years and not get much NBA interest and Blue is not remotely near the ballplayer McNeal was. NBA after next season? You gotta be kidding!
It's no use reasoning with the Blue apologists.
-
NBA prospects are all about potential and how that potential fits within the needs of a particular team. Can the guy expand his abilities at the next level?
McNeal at Marquette got everything out of his limited physical talent -- NBA scouts rightfully saw that he had very little room left for growth. He is talented enough to play in the NBA, but his potential to fit within the needs of a particular team are low because there are lots of guys with more potential than him who can score.
Meanwhile, we could see that Wesley Mathews had more physical tools and potential than Jerel McNeal -- he just needed time and system to put everything together.
Vander does have more potential upside athletically than Jerel. Jerel was certainly the better basketball player of the two after two years, but you could see that Jerel's improvement primarily was going to come from experience, not from putting together all the parts of his natural ability. One thing to remember with any view of McNeal is that the Three Amigos did what they did because they had no real talent around them except for Novak for one year and Lazar for three. McNeal would have gotten Todd Mayo minutes if he was a frosh on last season's team.
Vander is still very raw, but we saw this year that with regard to team basketball and defensive basketball that the game slowed for him this year and he operated at a high level in those aspects of the game. Mathews was never the go-to scorer, but he did every little needed by the team to win. If Vander is to make money at the next level, he needs to emulate that approach, not pouring in points.
The question does remain of how will he continue to develop, but I think we can all agree that he has the potential to put it all together. If he can put in an efficient 14 a game next year, MU will be a very very good team. If he averages a very inefficient 18 a game, MU will suck.
UPDATE: I am not saying Vander will be Wesley. I am simply using Wesley within the comparison of Vander to McNeal.
-
I just don't get this. As a 6-3 kid and not a 7-3 kid, one would think a prerequisite for the NBA would be the ability to, you know, play basketball well. He is very athletic. He has no PG skills that translate to the NBA, is not an adept ball handler, passer, scorer or shooter. He is a plus defender at the college level, but nothing like a lock down defender. What on Earth is it about his game that makes people think he is an NBA player? That's he a good rebounder for a 6-3 guy? I agree he improved a lot this year, but only from wretched to not good. We watched McNeal here for 4 years and not get much NBA interest and Blue is not remotely near the ballplayer McNeal was. NBA after next season? You gotta be kidding!
The truth? It's because he was rated so highly out of HS. Had Vander been more appropriately ranked around 135 there wouldn't be any NBA talk. NONE. Instead, he was erroneously ranked in the 35 range and many are still caught up in that number and are blind to what they have seen with their own eyes for TWO YEARS!
He has a lot of potential because of his athleticism, but so do a lot of guys. The main problem is he doesn't seem to have "touch" from outside, inside, and everywhere in between. He misses a lot of close shots that good players hit. In his final 2 games he hit 2-13 shots and 5-22 TOTAL in the NCAA. Unfortunately, that was not an aberration...0-7 vs NSU...4-14 vs. UW...1-4 vs. LSU...0-6 vs. UWM...1-7 vs. Vandy...0-3 vs. GU...0-5 vs. UCONN...2-10 vs. RU...
How much better would have DJ been had he found his "touch?" Or Carlton Christian or Karon Bradley or any other athletic freak? The truth is "touch" is one of the hardest things to improve. The good-to-great ones are born with it. Vander was not born with it.
You can still get in the NBA without good "touch," but there are also other issues. At this point, he is unable to play PG even at the NCAA level. He is a TO MACHINE! He may get there by senior year, but probably won't have much for the scouts to evaluate on. So, he would likely get consideration on his ability at SG and he only has average length there. Scouts don't like average sized SG's that can't SHOOT!
Now that's not to say I don't like Vander or think he isn't an asset. I do. I just think NBA is a LOOOOONG shot and those that don't think that are IMO biased by his WAY overvalued HS rankings.
-
Wes could shoot....to this point Vander has not proven that he can.
Until that changes all the potential in the world means nothing.
-
The athletic ability is there for Vander. He was the most improved player this year and with another off season working with Buzz he could be scary good. He was a sophomore last year guys we have to remember that. Yea he was overrated out of highschool but that is no indication that he wont be successful at the next level. All he needs is one break out year. If he gets his spot up jumper down and raises his 3 point percentage where would the flaw in his game be? If he develops these tools to his game he will naturally be able to drive the lane better and not get stuffed like we saw this year. With Buzz being able to work with him all summer I see him making a dramatic leap on the stat sheet.
-
The athletic ability is there for Vander. He was the most improved player this year and with another off season working with Buzz he could be scary good. He was a sophomore last year guys we have to remember that. Yea he was overrated out of highschool but that is no indication that he wont be successful at the next level. All he needs is one break out year. If he gets his spot up jumper down and raises his 3 point percentage where would the flaw in his game be? If he develops these tools to his game he will naturally be able to drive the lane better and not get stuffed like we saw this year. With Buzz being able to work with him all summer I see him making a dramatic leap on the stat sheet.
Vander is a tremendous athlete. I just don't know if that makes him a tremendous basketball player. I think he would have to really, really dedicate himself to becoming better before scouts would consider him ready for the next level.
-
Is it possible that many people may think (subconsciously) it's easier to get in the NBA right now because there has been a recent pipeline? I think that's highly possible. It's MF'N HARD to make it to the show!
I think if you swapped out the current pipeline with when MU didn't send a guy for 10 years, that there would be a much higher level of doubt.
There are SUPER talented guys EVERY year that don't make it. Hell, Wes barely got his chance.....didn't EVEN get drafted! I highly doubt Vander will be nearly as good as Wes was his senior year...
-
I'm betting you will see Vander move over to the point the next two years. He has definitely had flashes of capability at that position in IMHO, but wildly inconsistent. Plus there seems to be a jam of talent at the 2/3 over the next couple of years so it makes sense. He'll back up Junior this next season and be the lead his senior year while Duane gets up to speed. Plus physically he makes more sense at the 1 than 2 at the next level.
I do think he has the ability to play in the NBA. As someone said he had the biggest leap between seasons of anyone last year, assuming he at least does that again means he will really be something next season.
-
As far as the Vander debate...I get the impression that everyone is on the same page, but arguing it pretty much for the sake of it. Two points I see:
1) Vander has NBA-level athleticism, which is why some see him playing in the NBA.
2) Vander does not have NBA-level skills, which is why some do not see him playing in the NBA.
Whether he gets there or not, I think everyone would agree the raw ability is there, but the necessary skill development is not. If he tried to go now, he probably wouldn't get drafted. If he could reliably finish at the rim, consistently hit the 12-15 foot jumper, and be a 30% or better 3-point shooter, he would have a decent shot at getting drafted. So what it really comes down to is that he is not a NBA player yet, but it's not impossible that, given progress over the next two years, he could become one.
Just curious if anyone disagrees with that.
-
As far as the Vander debate...I get the impression that everyone is on the same page, but arguing it pretty much for the sake of it. Two points I see:
1) Vander has NBA-level athleticism, which is why some see him playing in the NBA.
2) Vander does not have NBA-level skills, which is why some do not see him playing in the NBA.
Whether he gets there or not, I think everyone would agree the raw ability is there, but the necessary skill development is not. If he tried to go now, he probably wouldn't get drafted. If he could reliably finish at the rim, consistently hit the 12-15 foot jumper, and be a 30% or better 3-point shooter, he would have a decent shot at getting drafted. So what it really comes down to is that he is not a NBA player yet, but it's not impossible that, given progress over the next two years, he could become one.
Just curious if anyone disagrees with that.
This sums up where Vander is today very well. Also agree with mu03eng that if Vander can tighten up his handle he has a future at the point.
-
This sums up where Vander is today very well. Also agree with mu03eng that if Vander can tighten up his handle he has a future at the point.
AND decision-making, but I agree his best potential for MU and the NBA is at PG. He has a long way to go, however, I think he can do it if Buzz sticks with him through the growing pains. I'm sure Buzz is well aware that there are only 2 PG's on board so far for 2013 & 2014, so Vander is probably already in the plans there......unless he views TJT or Mayo better in those minutes.
Brew, no disagreement from me. Nicely put.
-
This sums up where Vander is today very well. Also agree with mu03eng that if Vander can tighten up his handle he has a future at the point.
I agree completely.
I don't think he'll ever be a natural PG (like Travis), but his quickness with the ball and decent passing ability make him tough to guard up top in a 1-4 set. Plus, a penetrating PG doesn't need to shoot a lot of 3pters to be effective.
Vander has a ton of potential, and just needs to get little better at everything.
If he can be a serviceable shooter, and get stronger around the rim, I think he's an all-conf. player, especially from the PG spot.
-
I think the frustrating part for everyone is that all see something special in Vander. Everyone here a different slant on his skill set but most agree he has high upside potential. IMO he is a PG and his ability to get to rim his greatest strength. My biggest frustration is at the rim he always makes it harder than needed. My wife bitches about him every game and she only notices the miss, not the unreal ability to get where he should be at on the court. In addition, he can dish the ball and at higher level better guys to dish to.
-
Whether he gets there or not, I think everyone would agree the raw ability is there, but the necessary skill development is not.
I think it depends on your definition of ability. Quickness and jumping are certainly abilities and Vander has them in spades. But hand-eye coordination is an ability, too. So is being able to see the floor and how a play will develop. I think ball handling is an ability and shooting too. I don't agree that given athleticism all you have to do is work really hard and you'll get good enough at those other things to play in the NBA, where you probably need to be one of the best 500 or so players in the world. Vander has been playing basketball all his life and hasn't developed those tools yet. I don't know that we can take it for granted that he will suddenly get good at them in the next two just because Buzz is coaching him.
-
Vander has been playing basketball all his life and hasn't developed those tools yet. I don't know that we can take it for granted that he will suddenly get good at them in the next two just because Buzz is coaching him.
This is a great point. There are a lot of freaky athletes who coaches drool over who are never that good at basketball.
However, on the flip side, Vander is having to refine his skills now simply because he can't out-athletic guys anymore. In this scenario, it is plausible/possible that he could get better as he learns the finer points of the game.
It would actually help him to learn to slow down. Wade was the best I've ever seen at going slow and then bursting when he needed it. Changing speeds is probably more important than top end speed.
From rim to rim, vander can fly... but that doesn't mean the ball is going in the hoop. Needs more refinement.
-
I hear what a lot of you are saying about potential, but Vander hasn't even shown the ability to finish at point blank range. Sorry, but unless that drastically improves his physical gifts/athleticism/potential will not get him drafted. No chance.
-
Are there any transfers out there who don't have an interest in MU and we don't want also.
:D All these players, so few (if any) openings for them. Unless, that is, unless we do some creaning. Looks like that is going to happen. Will it be 1, 2, 3?
-
:D All these players, so few (if any) openings for them. Unless, that is, unless we do some creaning. Looks like that is going to happen. Will it be 1, 2, 3?
Hiroshima II, baby!
-
Everyone laughs at Vander but he is NBA talent.
True.
-
Appears to be heading to Illinois.
-
Appears to be heading to Illinois.
CHAMPAIGN - Rayvonte Rice is returning to his hometown.
Rice, the former Centennial star and the leading scorer in C-U boys basketball history, committed to Illinois this morning, he said today. The 6-foot-4, 235-pound guard is transferring after two seasons at Drake.
"With a new coach (at Illinois, John Groce) I just see it as a new opportunity. It's a fresh start for me," Rice said by phone from Des Moines. "And he recruited me at Ohio so I knew him."
Rice said he chose Illinois over Xavier. He was initially scheduled to visit Marquette this coming weekend but called coach Buzz Williams and canceled the visit. Memphis was also in the mix.
Rice would be eligible for the 2013-14 season after sitting out next season due to NCAA transfer rules. He has two seasons of eligibility remaining.
"I don't mind (sitting out one season)," he said. "I think it will give me a chance to get better and work on what I need to work on."
As a sophomore at Drake, he averaged 16.5 points and 5.7 rebounds and was the third-leading scorer in the Missouri Valley Conference.
Rice was named the 2010 News-Gazette State Player of the Year. He remains the leading scorer in Champaign-Urbana boys basketball history and averaged 23.9 points, 6.4 rebounds, 1.8 assists and 2.9 steals as a senior at Centennial. He holds the school's single-season records for points (814) and the career records in scoring (1,810 points).
"I went to all the games (at Illinois) when I was younger," said Rice, who grew up in Champaign.
-
Further cementing the Lockett pick up.