2016-2017 Season

[juckerrules]

What? How can you give a PPG stat which shows how much more KJ is scoring on the road...and then I give one that shows that he actually shoots it worse...and then you say it proves your point even more? SMH

I have been saying I would start KJ anyway...at this point in the season...he's going to continue starting. The only thing to really debate is the minutes each one plays and when the first substitution comes.

I think his point was just that on offense, they're pretty much a wash (28 vs 30 nbd) - with KJ's better defense...an assumption - he's better on his man, but is he better switching onto a bigger player? I don't know..seriously asking. But similar offense and better defense would indicate KJ should play more as he indicated - the wording was awkward - the original point was disproved, as you said...so, you're both really on the same wavelength in the end

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Best-case is obviously finishing 9-0. I think 6-3 would be worst-case. I think we for sure win our 5 remaining home games + @ USF.

My only concerns are @ SMU, @ UCF, and @ UConn.
- UCF isn't a *big* worry, but I think we'll struggle there. Probably a slugfest, considering their defense is Top 25. Just gonna have to pull it out, like @ Tulsa.
- UConn will be bumpin' on senior day. They'll have atmosphere on their side.
- @ SMU is easily our toughest remaining game. Likely an L.

I think 7-2 or 8-1 is most likely. So 28-3 or 27-4 before the conference tourney.

Can't argue with your logic but Gosh I want to win the league title I had three goals for the season. Beat X, win the league and win the conference tourney. One down and 2 to go.

 

[waterhead]

I think his point was just that on offense, they're pretty much a wash (28 vs 30 nbd) - with KJ's better defense...an assumption - he's better on his man, but is he better switching onto a bigger player? I don't know..seriously asking. But similar offense and better defense would indicate KJ should play more as he indicated - the wording was awkward - the original point was disproved, as you said...so, you're both really on the same wavelength in the end

I know what he's trying to say. All else being equal on offense you play the guy better at D. However, I think the only thing holding Jarron back to this point was his confidence to take more shots. If he starts slow he tends to back off from being aggressive for the most part. Being the second highest EFG% on the team I would like to see him keep shooting. I was hoping the X and USF games gave him more confidence that he can change a game with his offense.

He has scored 6 points or less in 15 games and 11 points or more in 7 games. Nothing in between. He takes 3 shots on average in the 15 games and 8 shots on average in the 7 games. I have more confidence in Cumberland finding a rhythm if he just continues to be aggressive than I do with KJ whether at home or on the road. There is only one player lower than KJ in EFG% on the team and that is Moore. As I said Jarron is 2nd. Jarron has double the PER of KJ as well.

As a team we will be much better when he realizes he needs to do this for us. Our coach needs to tell him to keep shooting or driving no matter if the first one's fall. They will eventually go in IMO...and it will eventually be more valuable to us than KJ's D.

 

[waterhead]

I know what he's trying to say. All else being equal on offense you play the guy better at D. However, I think the only thing holding Jarron back to this point was his confidence to take more shots. If he starts slow he tends to back off from being aggressive for the most part. Being the second highest EFG% on the team I would like to see him keep shooting. I was hoping the X and USF games gave him more confidence that he can change a game with his offense.

He has scored 6 points or less in 15 games and 11 points or more in 7 games. Nothing in between. He takes 3 shots on average in the 15 games and 8 shots on average in the 7 games. I have more confidence in Cumberland finding a rhythm if he just continues to be aggressive than I do with KJ whether at home or on the road. There is only one player lower than KJ in EFG% on the team and that is Moore. As I said Jarron is 2nd. Jarron has double the PER of KJ as well.

As a team we will be much better when he realizes he needs to do this for us. Our coach needs to tell him to keep shooting or driving no matter if the first one's fall. They will eventually go in IMO...and it will eventually be more valuable to us than KJ's D.

I'm okay with the idea of KJ starting for several reasons. We can sub Jarron for Evans in foul trouble or for KJ whenever. If we play KJ first it also gives us a chance to bring in Cumberland to score after the opposing players are a little bit tired. As a frosh Cumberland is not in near as good of shape as KJ and he will likely get tired a little faster so Maybe he can't even play 30+ at this point. If we can get him to the point we can play him 25+ maybe that's a good number for him.

 

[Emperor Snapper]

I'm okay with the idea of KJ starting for several reasons. We can sub Jarron for Evans in foul trouble or for KJ whenever. If we play KJ first it also gives us a chance to bring in Cumberland to score after the opposing players are a little bit tired. As a frosh Cumberland is not in near as good of shape as KJ and he will likely get tired a little faster so Maybe he can't even play 30+ at this point. If we can get him to the point we can play him 25+ maybe that's a good number for him.

I think this is very solid reasoning. Also, I think letting the senior start over the freshman is a sign of respect. Interpersonal things matter, too.

 

[Bearcat2016]

I'm okay with the idea of KJ starting for several reasons. We can sub Jarron for Evans in foul trouble or for KJ whenever. If we play KJ first it also gives us a chance to bring in Cumberland to score after the opposing players are a little bit tired. As a frosh Cumberland is not in near as good of shape as KJ and he will likely get tired a little faster so Maybe he can't even play 30+ at this point. If we can get him to the point we can play him 25+ maybe that's a good number for him.

We have to start Kevin in my opinion. Cumberland backs up both the 2 and the 3. If Mick were to start Jarron and Jacob together, and both were 2 get two fouls early, our 3 position would be a mess for that game. If Jacob gets in foul trouble with Jarron coming off the bench, you can fill Jarron at the 3 and then rotate the 1 between (Troy and Justin) and the 2 between (Kevin and Troy).

 

[juckerrules]

We have to start Kevin in my opinion. Cumberland backs up both the 2 and the 3. If Mick were to start Jarron and Jacob together, and both were 2 get two fouls early, our 3 position would be a mess for that game. If Jacob gets in foul trouble with Jarron coming off the bench, you can fill Jarron at the 3 and then rotate the 1 between (Troy and Justin) and the 2 between (Kevin and Troy).

I like your thinking...never really considered it in the fouling context - makes sense (as both you & waterhead said)

 

[juckerrules]

possible losses

Before the conference games started, I thought of our possible losses....I had away games : SMU, UCF, Tulsa, Temple, Houston, UConn - the only home game I thought we could lose was SMU

So, SMU home, check
Away: at Houston, check, Temple, check. Tulsa, check

I think the injuries at UConn eliminates them, I think SMU is a more than 50-50 chance at a loss, and at UCF a "lean UC" victory

A 17-1 conference record is a real possibility - Can SMU win out? I doubt it. If we don't get them down there, I have to think they will stumble at Tulsa, Temple or Houston

I'm glad we have Memphis at home, they could be dangerous.

 

[TheLongHaul]

We have to start Kevin in my opinion. Cumberland backs up both the 2 and the 3. If Mick were to start Jarron and Jacob together, and both were 2 get two fouls early, our 3 position would be a mess for that game. If Jacob gets in foul trouble with Jarron coming off the bench, you can fill Jarron at the 3 and then rotate the 1 between (Troy and Justin) and the 2 between (Kevin and Troy).

Whether you think KJ or JC is better is another story, but let's just assume in this case JC is better. Why would you not start your better player because you are concerned that two of your players get into early foul trouble? How often does that happen? Especially considering they aren't big men. Again, if you think KJ is better then so be it, but not starting someone because of the possible of two players getting into early foul trouble is asinine.

 

[Bearcat2016]

Whether you think KJ or JC is better is another story, but let's just assume in this case JC is better. Why would you not start your better player because you are concerned that two of your players get into early foul trouble? How often does that happen? Especially considering they aren't big men. Again, if you think KJ is better then so be it, but not starting someone because of the possible of two players getting into early foul trouble is asinine.

Agree to disagree. JC and JE are the only possible 3's on the team. It's just not an optimal situation to have them both in foul trouble in the 1st half imo. In the second half you have the flexibilty to play JC for extended minutes @ the 2 and that's exactly what Mick has done.

 

[TheLongHaul]

Agree to disagree. JC and JE are the only possible 3's on the team. It's just not an optimal situation to have them both in foul trouble in the 1st half imo. In the second half you have the flexibilty to play JC for extended minutes @ the 2 and that's exactly what Mick has done.

There are plenty of lineups that you can play that would work IF both Evans and Cumberland are in foul trouble. Evans isn't in foul trouble very often. Both of them being in foul trouble is extremely rare. But that is a reason you don't start one of your 5 best players?

 

[justinhub2003]

There are plenty of lineups that you can play that would work IF both Evans and Cumberland are in foul trouble. Evans isn't in foul trouble very often. Both of them being in foul trouble is extremely rare. But that is a reason you don't start one of your 5 best players?

Why does starting matter so much? Especially if the current formula is working and JC starting to match minutes with KJ. KJ starts the game as a defensive presence. JC enters the game as an offensive spark. I mean KJ is playing with a rotation of offensive scorers, 4 other guys who start with him can score.

And yet, our bench is filled with guys who can't yet score. KJ on the bench actually weakens our bench.

JC is clearly the better player. But we don't need Jarron to be a super star in the starting lineup. We have Evans, Troy, Gary and Kyle already. We need him to provide actual valuable depth on the bench. Otherwise its just a bunch of guys who play hard and can't score.

 

[GoCats88]

After the games today the cats are now 1 of 5 teams with two or less losses.

1. Gonazaga (0)
4. Villanova (2)
14. Cincinnati (2)
18. St. Mary's (2)
NR New Mexico State (2)

 

[waterhead]

Why does starting matter so much? Especially if the current formula is working and JC starting to match minutes with KJ. KJ starts the game as a defensive presence. JC enters the game as an offensive spark. I mean KJ is playing with a rotation of offensive scorers, 4 other guys who start with him can score.

And yet, our bench is filled with guys who can't yet score. KJ on the bench actually weakens our bench.

JC is clearly the better player. But we don't need Jarron to be a super star in the starting lineup. We have Evans, Troy, Gary and Kyle already. We need him to provide actual valuable depth on the bench. Otherwise its just a bunch of guys who play hard and can't score.

I am not going to argue for Cumberland to start...just going to make a few points. Why do starters matter so much? As just one example if you look at Tulsa we were plus 19 when Cumberland was in with the other starters...and -1 with KJ. When you have 5 studs in all at the same time it's hard for the opposing D to guard ALL of them sufficiently. The more options you throw at them the harder it is for them to have defensive answers to.

As for KJ weakening our bench...the same can be said for any back up we have to Troy, Evans, Washington, or Clark. Why should Cumberland be any different? Well the only argument is defense really...but Washington is not a good defender but he is seen as a guy that can't be left off the court even though both Scott and Brooks defend better. Why? Because he scores in bunches. Well, don't look now but Cumberland is our second best scorer per 40 minutes (on the season and in conference) and the 2nd most efficient player on the team offensively on the season and 1st in conference.

 

[waterhead]

I am not going to argue for Cumberland to start...just going to make a few points. Why do starters matter so much? As just one example if you look at Tulsa we were plus 19 when Cumberland was in with the other starters...and -1 with KJ. When you have 5 studs in all at the same time it's hard for the opposing D to guard ALL of them sufficiently. The more options you throw at them the harder it is for them to have defensive answers to.

As for KJ weakening our bench...the same can be said for any back up we have to Troy, Evans, Washington, or Clark. Why should Cumberland be any different? Well the only argument is defense really...but Washington is not a good defender but he is seen as a guy that can't be left off the court even though both Scott and Brooks defend better. Why? Because he scores in bunches. Well, don't look now but Cumberland is our second best scorer per 40 minutes (on the season and in conference) and the 2nd most efficient player on the team offensively on the season and 1st in conference.

The problem as I see it with starting KJ for 5 minutes each half is that you have a total of 10 minutes per game (one fourth of the game's minutes) where your most effective lineup offensively is not on the court. When you sub Cumberland at 5 minutes you are likely going to be subbing 1-2 other guys at the same time which means you are effectively limiting EVEN MORE the opportunity for you best lineup to be on the court at the same time.

When you throw in the possibility for foul trouble with our bigs or Evans you further limit your possibilities of playing your most effective lineup because you may have to keep some of them out of the game when you bring in Cumberland.

By not starting your best 5 players...you are likely limiting the opportunity to play them ALL together by potentially 50%. If you don't think that is significant...we will probably have to disagree.

 

[Emperor Snapper]

I am not going to argue for Cumberland to start...just going to make a few points. Why do starters matter so much? As just one example if you look at Tulsa we were plus 19 when Cumberland was in with the other starters...and -1 with KJ. When you have 5 studs in all at the same time it's hard for the opposing D to guard ALL of them sufficiently. The more options you throw at them the harder it is for them to have defensive answers to.

As for KJ weakening our bench...the same can be said for any back up we have to Troy, Evans, Washington, or Clark. Why should Cumberland be any different? Well the only argument is defense really...but Washington is not a good defender but he is seen as a guy that can't be left off the court even though both Scott and Brooks defend better. Why? Because he scores in bunches. Well, don't look now but Cumberland is our second best scorer per 40 minutes (on the season and in conference) and the 2nd most efficient player on the team offensively on the season and 1st in conference.

If "who starts" is largely a cosmetic thing, and the important point is who gets minutes & who finishes, then I think it makes more sense to start KJ because it is away of respecting the senior & making the freshman "pay his dues". These are people, after all, not chess pieces, and that sort of thing makes a difference. Rewarding the guy who has put in his time off the bench & knows how to model the right type of behavior is valuable, not just now but in the future.

Also, when we have a lead late, I would rather have KJ on the floor to shoot FT. My FT shooting lineup would probably be KJ/Caupain/Jenifer/Evans/Clark, because I really don't trust Washington or Cumberland at the line. Technically Washington has a better FT% than Clark at the moment, but it is close & Clark has the better form.

 

[waterhead]

The problem as I see it with starting KJ for 5 minutes each half is that you have a total of 10 minutes per game (one fourth of the game's minutes) where your most effective lineup offensively is not on the court. When you sub Cumberland at 5 minutes you are likely going to be subbing 1-2 other guys at the same time which means you are effectively limiting EVEN MORE the opportunity for you best lineup to be on the court at the same time.

When you throw in the possibility for foul trouble with our bigs or Evans you further limit your possibilities of playing your most effective lineup because you may have to keep some of them out of the game when you bring in Cumberland.

By not starting your best 5 players...you are likely limiting the opportunity to play them ALL together by potentially 50%. If you don't think that is significant...we will probably have to disagree.

There are about 10 guaranteed minutes in almost every game when you can play your 5 best players together. At the start of each half. Other than that it will be subject to foul trouble and other situations. You may never have the opportunity after that point to play them all together. That is why I am a proponent of starting the best 5...if that is KJ so be it. If that is Cumberland so be it.

 

[waterhead]

If "who starts" is largely a cosmetic thing, and the important point is who gets minutes & who finishes, then I think it makes more sense to start KJ because it is away of respecting the senior & making the freshman "pay his dues". These are people, after all, not chess pieces, and that sort of thing makes a difference. Rewarding the guy who has put in his time off the bench & knows how to model the right type of behavior is valuable, not just now but in the future.

Also, when we have a lead late, I would rather have KJ on the floor to shoot FT. My FT shooting lineup would probably be KJ/Caupain/Jenifer/Evans/Clark, because I really don't trust Washington or Cumberland at the line. Technically Washington has a better FT% than Clark at the moment, but it is close & Clark has the better form.

I don't see the starters as "cosmetic" at all. If it were you would just throw in any starters and then make sure you get your best guys the most minutes. However, imagine the strain it puts on the opposing D to have 5 guys who are tough to guard in the game at the same time? If you only have 3 like Xavier...you can maybe shut them down with 3 guys who can play great D...but who has 5 great defenders? NObody. Who has 3 great defenders? Maybe several teams do.

 

[[email protected]]

What a job the staff has done with this team. Give credit where credit is due.

 

[GarradJ21]

What a job the staff has done with this team. Give credit where credit is due.

Yup thank G no one left for Vegas. Would have involved some rebuilding.