MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: tower912 on April 14, 2024, 08:09:24 PM
-
Assume MU has one scholarship. Do you want a PG or size?
-
Big. No doubt. Kam can run point.
-
Tyler came in as a shooting guard. They'll get great guard play with what we return. Shooting and size are the priorities.
-
Assume MU has one scholarship. Do you want a PG or size?
Big.
-
Kam, Tre & eventually Sean have the point covered. We need shooting, size and rebounding.
-
It’s true that Kam “can” run the point, but I think he’s better suited for playing off the ball.
I think it comes down to who is available at PG or C and whether the staff feels Al or Caedan are ready to be solid back ups.
-
Go big.
-
2023-24 was an anomaly with 2 bigs really dominating the CBB scene, plus another couple who got a lot of press like Dickinson. Normally in CBB, guards win championships. You need bigs who can play good D and block a few shots and get out of the way when required. Probably MU has those, as well as 15 fouls worth of bigs. A nice combo guard who can shoot and plays point for 10 minutes per game would be great.
-
Tyler came in as a shooting guard. They'll get great guard play with what we return. Shooting and size are the priorities.
Ditto
-
I dont care if its a PG or a wing, but id love to add someone who can shoot and create a good shot when things break down on offense. Im totally comfortable with Kam running the point but I dont want him to be the only guy we can rely on to create something when the offense breaks down.
Im confident we'll get 40 mins of solid play at the 5 from some combo of the four centers we will have on the roster next year.
-
I dont care if its a PG or a wing, but id love to add someone who can shoot and create a good shot when things break down on offense. Im totally comfortable with Kam running the point but I dont want him to be the only guy we can rely on to create something when the offense breaks down.
Im confident we'll get 40 mins of solid play at the 5 from some combo of the four centers we will have on the roster next year.
Do we have enough rebounding?
-
Do we have enough rebounding?
Do we ever?
-
Do we ever?
It's always been a bit of a weakness, true. Didn't we dominate the glass back in the day?
-
I'd take a knockdown shooter over both.
-
Best available player that fits the culture.
-
I want a big (pawz)
-
Point guard.
-
Go big or go home
-
Big or shooter, preferably someone who can shoot off the dribble.
-
Extra shooter please.
-
Do we have enough rebounding?
No.
-
My instinct is guard. Sean likely won't be at 100% this season. Stevie and Kam are definitely gone this time next year. The injuries last season made me want guard depth. It is easier to play small than it is to play without guards.
But to me, it is like 51-49. I am not dug into this opinion.
-
BPA
-
I thought Oso when I first saw this subject.
That being said I choose Big — would free up more time and energy for Jop and Gold to drain threes.
-
I'd like to see a 7-ft, 3-pt-marksman aircraft carrier who can run the point. In a blender, if possible.
-
I'd like to see a 7-ft, 3-pt-marksman aircraft carrier who can run the point. In a blender, if possible.
^ This
-
I'd like to see a 7-ft, 3-pt-marksman aircraft carrier who can run the point. In a blender, if possible.
Right, my answer was point-center.
-
Are we talking about adding depth or taking minutes from our projected starters?
I would think a big would be good for depth.
Adding a starting pg would mean (most likely) Chase coming off the bench again. Adding a starting 4/5 would have a similar effect on Jop/Gold.
I am happy going into next year with what we have plus filling the last schollie available with size.
-
I'd like to see a 7-ft, 3-pt-marksman aircraft carrier who can run the point. In a blender, if possible.
I just don't get why Shaka didn't get Wemby.
-
I just don't get why Shaka didn't get Wemby.
Shaka cooled on him
-
Are we talking about adding depth or taking minutes from our projected starters?
I would think a big would be good for depth.
Adding a starting pg would mean (most likely) Chase coming off the bench again. Adding a starting 4/5 would have a similar effect on Jop/Gold.
I am happy going into next year with what we have plus filling the last schollie available with size.
Honest question-Are you suggesting that a transfer "with size" would be happy coming off the bench?
Your comments on Chase, Jop and Gold are valid.
Tower's question seems simple at first glance, but I am struggling with how to answer it. :-\
-
"Honest question-Are you suggesting that a transfer "with size" would be happy coming off the bench?"
I don't know if it is possible, but I would think there is someone who would take the compromise of some NIL + being on a good team and making a contribution.
-
Jayce Johnson-ish contributor?
-
If we could get a 4-5 stud, then Jolpin could go back to sixth man where he excelled.
-
I would be tremendously surprised if Joplin comes off the bench regardless.
-
"Honest question-Are you suggesting that a transfer "with size" would be happy coming off the bench?"
I don't know if it is possible, but I would think there is someone who would take the compromise of some NIL + being on a good team and making a contribution.
I could see an under-the -radar, probably freshman transfer that Shaka sees as having potential. Mid major. The deal might be the guy has to prove himself off the bench for a season.
In the above case, I'll go with a big as my answer.
-
If we could get a 4-5 stud, then Jolpin could go back to sixth man where he excelled.
Give us your top-5 targets.
Thanks
-
A 7'4" giant.
-
PG.
Sean may not be ready and Kam is not a PG any more than Vander was. He can play capably for short stretches, but he is a MUCH better off-ball guard than a PG.
-
I think we need more depth deep. Ben may pick it up, but after him it's ?????
-
Assume MU has one scholarship. Do you want a PG or size?
Both are needed. So regrettably someone should go if our priority is to progress further. To assume any human can with 100% accuracy pick players that can perform at a high level and play team basketball is unrealistic. Mistakes are made by the best of us. Shaka is no exception.
-
How is having a stable roster a mistake?
-
Both are needed. So regrettably someone should go if our priority is to progress further. To assume any human can with 100% accuracy pick players that can perform at a high level and play team basketball is unrealistic. Mistakes are made by the best of us. Shaka is no exception.
Who should go?
Do you think Shaka will change his M.O.? (regarding "high level and team basketball")
What mistake(s) do you think Shaka made?
-
Who should go?
Do you think Shaka will change his M.O.? (regarding "high level and team basketball")
What mistake(s) do you think Shaka made?
I doubt he will change his M.O. but some adjustment given different circumstances would show some flexibility. It is never pleasant to let someone go but it is also unpleasant to sit on the bench except for minutes when the game is already decided.
As to who that should be is obvious to me at this point. I am confident, since you asked the question, you disagree which is fine.
-
A year ago, Keeyan and Emarion both left. I think it is clear that Shaka and the staff are optimistic about the 12 returning scholarship players. None have been shown the door. So, one scholarship. And the coaches are clearly out there kicking tires.
What strikes me is that the names we are hearing are almost exclusively guards. That gibes with the notion that the staff is pleased with Hamilton's development, that they think Gold is ready to start, and that they think Owens and Parham can contribute.
But, they have pulled surprises before, so I will sit back and watch with interest.
-
I doubt he will change his M.O. but some adjustment given different circumstances would show some flexibility. It is never pleasant to let someone go but it is also unpleasant to sit on the bench except for minutes when the game is already decided.
As to who that should be is obvious to me at this point. I am confident, since you asked the question, you disagree which is fine.
I feel like you would have been just fine with Oso leaving after his freshman year. What a mistake that would have been.
-
I doubt he will change his M.O. but some adjustment given different circumstances would show some flexibility. It is never pleasant to let someone go but it is also unpleasant to sit on the bench except for minutes when the game is already decided.
As to who that should be is obvious to me at this point. I am confident, since you asked the question, you disagree which is fine.
I'm not disagreeing with you or anyone here at all. I'm simply asking questions. Most of the posts here lead me to believe that scoopers are expecting a transfer who will be a starter so of course, someone currently on the team either has to go or be willing to come off the bench. A high-level P6 transfer is not coming to Marquette to come off the bench. If "someone should go", I think it is reasonable to expect that person to be named.
-
How is having a stable roster a mistake?
Stable rosters are often times very good, particularly in the current climate. That it works in all situations is questionable.
I expect Shaka will get every ounce of talent out of the team he selects. I think most will agree. If he finishes in the elite 8 or above next year not only am I wrong but it will be a historical season.
I hope I am wrong.
Separately I would not drop any of our remaining starters. We lost two starters. That should be enough incentive for two to come in to fight for those positions.
-
To answer the other responses.
Yes, I would not have gambled on Oso and I would have been wrong.
Concerning who I would let go, I will not respond. These are all fine young men who should not be singled out on a blog.
-
I think the team’s biggest need is some muscle up front, so the question is whether one of the current 12 scholarship players can provide it. The coaching staff knows that a lot better than any of us do.
If so, then target a sharpshooter. If not, then find someone to come in.
-
I think the biggest ? is backup C. Maybe Parham, Amadou, or Hamilton are ready bu next season but no way (for scoopers) to know.
You can address this via the portal either by finding a mid major guy who will be happy as bens backup. Or you can get a guy who can split time with Ben ala Oso/Kur.
I think we're too worried about having a designated PG. Most offenses these days feature multiple ball handlers and players that can initiate the offense. I see a 5 out lineup next season with 5 guys who can drive, shot from deep, and playmake fot others. I'm excited about it
-
You can address this via the portal either by finding a mid major guy who will be happy as bens backup. Or you can get a guy who can split time with Ben ala Oso/Kur.
Ben can play some at the 4 too. Maybe Jop earns 30 minutes per game next year but based on this year…
-
...probably 35.
-
...probably 35.
I’ll take the under.
-
Me, too. Hopefully because the freshmen are good. I doubt MU lands a 6'8 forward who did better than 10.8/3.9 and 35% from 3. But, if the freshmen don't pan out, I can see Joplin playing Oso/Kolek/Kam minutes.
-
Honest question-Are you suggesting that a transfer "with size" would be happy coming off the bench?
Sure. Theo John did it at Duke. Jayce Johnson did it at Marquette.
I don't anyone is expecting Hunter Dickinson or Oscar Tshbiewe. Just a guy who can provide some post presence for 15Ish minutes a night.
-
Me, too. Hopefully because the freshmen are good. I doubt MU lands a 6'8 forward who did better than 10.8/3.9 and 35% from 3. But, if the freshmen don't pan out, I can see Joplin playing Oso/Kolek/Kam minutes.
I don’t know if you’re suggesting Joplin is 6’8” - but he’s not. But he did play PF and averaged 20% fewer rebounds than our PG, almost never got an assist(.6 per game), had a high TO% and shot poorly (68%) from the line. He was improved defensively but still below average - by far the weakest link in the starting line up. I hope his game takes a big step up next year but if he’s basically the same guy he’s been for the last 2 years I hope his minutes go down from 28, not up.
-
I don’t know if you’re suggesting Joplin is 6’8” - but he’s not. But he did play PF and averaged 20% fewer rebounds than our PG, almost never got an assist(.6 per game), had a high TO% and shot poorly (68%) from the line. He was improved defensively but still below average - by far the weakest link in the starting line up. I hope his game takes a big step up next year but if he’s basically the same guy he’s been for the last 2 years I hope his minutes go down from 28, not up.
Agree with most of this but Jop didn't have a higher TO%. It was 12.8% which is very good. 4th best on the team behind Kam, Stevie, and Ben
-
Agree with most of this but Jop didn't have a higher TO%. It was 12.8% which is very good. 4th best on the team behind Kam, Stevie, and Ben
Fair enough, but when you average 1 assist every 2 games you should have a very low TO%. You’re not doing much with the ball when you touch it other than handing it back or shooting.
-
PG.
Sean may not be ready and Kam is not a PG any more than Vander was. He can play capably for short stretches, but he is a MUCH better off-ball guard than a PG.
Not sure how you define “short stretch,” but in his 6 games as the primary point when TK was out, K1 averaged 20.8 ppg on .505 shooting (.457 from 3), 4.5 assists, 2.2 turnovers, 4.7 rebs and 1.5 steals. We played Creighton even for 36 mins (without TK and Oso), were down 5 with the ball in the final minute vs UConn at home, and made it to the Big East title game by beating two desperate teams.
6 games was 1/6th of our season … and he was just thrown out there at PG with little time to prepare. So damn good performance IMHO.
Yes, in an ideal world we’d have a proven PG next to him, but I’m pretty confident K1 can be a good to very good score-first PG at this level.
-
Not sure how you define “short stretch,” but in his 6 games as the primary point when TK was out, K1 averaged 20.8 ppg on .505 shooting (.457 from 3), 4.5 assists, 2.2 turnovers, 4.7 rebs and 1.5 steals. We played Creighton even for 36 mins (without TK and Oso), were down 5 with the ball in the final minute vs UConn at home, and made it to the Big East title game by beating two desperate teams.
Right. No one is expecting TK Part II, but Kam proved to be more than capable of being the primary ball handler out there. I am much more concerned if Tre can develop into a capable back up than I am with Kam.
This is why I said "big" from the beginning. Right now we have Ben Gold, then....who exactly?
-
Right. No one is expecting TK Part II, but Kam proved to be more than capable of being the primary ball handler out there. I am much more concerned if Tre can develop into a capable back up than I am with Kam.
This is why I said "big" from the beginning. Right now we have Ben Gold, then....who exactly?
I’m only mildly disagreeing. Kam is a baller. He can fill in quite capably for stretches, but he is a combo guard most of all.
As far as bigs, yes I ‘sorta’ agree with your point. But there are several options with the three young bigs. And I trust that if Shaka doesn’t have enough confidence in any of them, he will use the portal.
-
Right. No one is expecting TK Part II, but Kam proved to be more than capable of being the primary ball handler out there. I am much more concerned if Tre can develop into a capable back up than I am with Kam.
This is why I said "big" from the beginning. Right now we have Ben Gold, then....who exactly?
I'm also in the camp of adding a big, particularly as I think Gold can play alongside most other bigs, but the "then who" answer for now is Amadou and Hamilton. Which could be okay or could be a disaster. I think we probably need at least 15 minutes out of non-Gold players in the middle. Can Al go from minimal PT to a 10-15 mpg guy? If he adds 10-15 pounds, maybe he can be some approximation of sophomore year Oso. That along with Caedin being able to give spot minutes would potentially give us a serviceable front court, but it's definitely a lot of expectations from players who haven't done it yet.
-
I'm also in the camp of adding a big, particularly as I think Gold can play alongside most other bigs, but the "then who" answer for now is Amadou and Hamilton. Which could be okay or could be a disaster. I think we probably need at least 15 minutes out of non-Gold players in the middle. Can Al go from minimal PT to a 10-15 mpg guy? If he adds 10-15 pounds, maybe he can be some approximation of sophomore year Oso. That along with Caedin being able to give spot minutes would potentially give us a serviceable front court, but it's definitely a lot of expectations from players who haven't done it yet.
Isn't that what non-bluebloods face on an almost annual basis at one position or another?
Shaka has staked his claim on player development. He's been right most of the time, but the possibility of failure with unproven players is always there.
-
I think the biggest ? is backup C. Maybe Parham, Amadou, or Hamilton are ready bu next season but no way (for scoopers) to know.
You can address this via the portal either by finding a mid major guy who will be happy as bens backup. Or you can get a guy who can split time with Ben ala Oso/Kur.
I think we're too worried about having a designated PG. Most offenses these days feature multiple ball handlers and players that can initiate the offense. I see a 5 out lineup next season with 5 guys who can drive, shot from deep, and playmake fot others. I'm excited about it
We do not have 5 guys that can shoot from deep. (Accutately)
-
We do not have 5 guys that can shoot from deep. (Accutately)
How many players actually shoot accutately?
-
I think they need help at both PG and big man. To be honest, I hope they young boys are thrown into the fire early and often next year. Their growth is key to the future and hope they get ample playing time.
So, I’ll take a PG if I have to pick one or the other. Have to add, if Jop is playing 35 minutes a game next year, they need more than a PG and a big man.
-
I think they need help at both PG and big man. To be honest, I hope they young boys are thrown into the fire early and often next year. Their growth is key to the future and hope they get ample playing time.
So, I’ll take a PG if I have to pick one or the other. Have to add, if Jop is playing 35 minutes a game next year, they need more than a PG and a big man.
Agree with the first half, and feel the opposite about the 2nd half!