Both of which were higher than his usage rates at NC St. Saying he was even more of a shoot first player his junior year than as a senior does not mean Cronin took that away from him. I don't see how you can make that point when a guy takes about 10 shots per game in 24 minutes of action.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Future teams
- Thread starter WAITE HOYT 2
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
Patrick Bateman
Well-known member
I would agree with that, Mick would make condescending comments about Kyle and his defensive play, I think Kyle did enough to be a decent defender but we all knew Kyle was a scoring big not an interior defender. As for Cane I think he was kind of over hyped for being the leading scoring in the worst D1 conference. I also think Mick kind of hindered his scoring ability because if you miss a few shots or get beat once on defense you are pulled out of the game. IMO I firmly believe that effected Cane that he knew if he screwed up he was coming out.(FYI I really like Cane Broom and wish we had him for another year) We all also knew Cane was brought here to score not play lock down defense and like you said Mick tried to turn these players into something they weren't.
Funny Mick would say that, Kyle led the team in blocks last year
sirthought
Well-known member
I think possibly our most dominant lineup might be one with Cumberland PG, Williams SG, Scott SF, Nsoseme PF, Brooks C.
Scott will continue to improve his shot away from the basket, as well as driving. But even if he remains a high post guy, we could really get guys shots just by working on alley oops and drive/handoffs more. I could see Cumberland and Johnson really getting a lot of assists that way.
Scott will continue to improve his shot away from the basket, as well as driving. But even if he remains a high post guy, we could really get guys shots just by working on alley oops and drive/handoffs more. I could see Cumberland and Johnson really getting a lot of assists that way.
I think possibly our most dominant lineup might be one with Cumberland PG, Williams SG, Scott SF, Nsoseme PF, Brooks C.
Scott will continue to improve his shot away from the basket, as well as driving. But even if he remains a high post guy, we could really get guys shots just by working on alley oops and drive/handoffs more. I could see Cumberland and Johnson really getting a lot of assists that way.
Oops yes. Perimeter passing no.
cincyguy13
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 4,633
I think possibly our most dominant lineup might be one with Cumberland PG, Williams SG, Scott SF, Nsoseme PF, Brooks C.
Scott will continue to improve his shot away from the basket, as well as driving. But even if he remains a high post guy, we could really get guys shots just by working on alley oops and drive/handoffs more. I could see Cumberland and Johnson really getting a lot of assists that way.
How would this 5 score? Don't have to guard Nsoseme, don't have to guard Brooks or williams outside of 15 feet, Tre is an average shooter if he has time. I like these guys but not sure I want them on the court at the same time.
sirthought
Well-known member
How would this 5 score? Don't have to guard Nsoseme, don't have to guard Brooks or williams outside of 15 feet, Tre is an average shooter if he has time. I like these guys but not sure I want them on the court at the same time.
Williams and Scott both shot from outside regularly. I think they'll improve on that over summer.
Cumberland shot from everywhere.
You can have Brooks, Scott, and Nsoseme screen for slash and drives from both guards and big men to the hoop—from all kinds of movement and angles. Other teams do it all the time.
They are all much better screeners than Clark and Washington were. Utilize that and improve on the pick and roll. Brooks and Nsoseme are going to level up this summer, as will Williams.
I'm going to take a hard pass on throwing out Nsoseme with Brooks and Scott also on the court.
I am not sure Nsoseme will even be the primary backup for Brooks anymore. Diara looked to be passing him up late in season. Then you have to consider we will have much better potential to move Scott over when Brooks is out and play a little smaller. Last year our options to spell Scott were pretty much Moore or Fredericks and at times we ran really small with Jenifer, Broome, Williams, and Cumberland. This year we add Prince, Hardnett, Curtis, and Johnson into the mix. All of them play a lot bigger than Jenifer and Broome and it should not be hard to surpass what Moore or Fredericks gave us.
Ellie has a lot more competition for minutes now. He's a hard worker though and I like him a lot. He will need to improve to get on the court for anything more than spot minutes.
I am not sure Nsoseme will even be the primary backup for Brooks anymore. Diara looked to be passing him up late in season. Then you have to consider we will have much better potential to move Scott over when Brooks is out and play a little smaller. Last year our options to spell Scott were pretty much Moore or Fredericks and at times we ran really small with Jenifer, Broome, Williams, and Cumberland. This year we add Prince, Hardnett, Curtis, and Johnson into the mix. All of them play a lot bigger than Jenifer and Broome and it should not be hard to surpass what Moore or Fredericks gave us.
Ellie has a lot more competition for minutes now. He's a hard worker though and I like him a lot. He will need to improve to get on the court for anything more than spot minutes.
cincyalum2014
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 734
Prince is going to be a great talent. Much more athletic than Ellie and Diarra. I think Prince takes Ellies minutes and Diarra and Prince will spell Brooks and Scott. Laquill is still a year or two away from making an immediate impact IMO. I think we need to throw away the line up of putting Fredericks at the 4 and Tre Scott at the 5 and with the addition of Prince I don't see Fredericks playing the 4 that much.
I'm going to take a hard pass on throwing out Nsoseme with Brooks and Scott also on the court.
I am not sure Nsoseme will even be the primary backup for Brooks anymore. Diara looked to be passing him up late in season. Then you have to consider we will have much better potential to move Scott over when Brooks is out and play a little smaller. Last year our options to spell Scott were pretty much Moore or Fredericks and at times we ran really small with Jenifer, Broome, Williams, and Cumberland. This year we add Prince, Hardnett, Curtis, and Johnson into the mix. All of them play a lot bigger than Jenifer and Broome and it should not be hard to surpass what Moore or Fredericks gave us.
Ellie has a lot more competition for minutes now. He's a hard worker though and I like him a lot. He will need to improve to get on the court for anything more than spot minutes.
Agreed. If Nsoseme is part of our starting 5 next year we're going to be a garbage team. There's nothing he did this entire year to show me he's a high quality D1 player that should be starting on the caliber of team we should be putting out there.
People lauded his defense as being something amazing yet I watched him time and time again get beat off the dribble, be out of position, and repeatedly be the weak link of the defense when on the floor. This coupled with the fact that he brings almost nothing on offense is not a recipe for success.
I am going to assume we are getting better at all the positions we have returning starters for just because they are a year older and more experienced. Brooks, Scott, Williams, and Cumberland. The way Brooks and Scott finished the season leaves me feeling a lot more comfortable at the 4 and 5. I even expect each of our non starting return players to be at least slightly better. Fredericks, Moore, Diara, Nsosome, and Johnson. We should add some depth to the 3, 4, and 5 with Gillam and Hardnett potentially allowing us to play smaller at times with Scott moving to the 5 in case Diara and Nsoseme show no improvement to back up Brooks. That's all good although Williams kind of disappeared at the end but I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
So we lose Broome and Jenifer. I think we can replace what Broome gave us in terms of driving and shooting 3's. Johnson and Curtis can both drive and 30% is not a high bar for shooting and I think they can both accomplish that bar or come close. Perhaps his clutch shooting at times was something hard to replace. On defense I think Johnson will obviously be better and I would expect Curtis (even as a frosh) can do about as good if not better just due to his length over Broome although he will be behind in his understanding. Rebounding gets better either way.
Jenifer's shooting is going to be hard to replace but from a PG standpoint I don't think we are missing a lot there since we went with Cumberland a lot and he will likely get even more of the PG duties next year and we have Johnson too. Again on D we add a lot of athleticism and length over Jenifer. Rebounding gets better. Perhaps we lose a little bit of whatever calming presence Jenifer gave to the team with ball handling and his knowledge of the system over 4 years.
I really think the loss of these two could end up being a wash in some respect because we get better at rebounding and defense. We lose some shooting and experience. I think worst case here is a slight overall loss but when you think about it...our best recruits in the past two years are the one's filling the holes. Johnson brings energy and toughness. He gets steals and put backs. He's possibly our best on ball defender. Curtis forte is driving the lane and finishing and he already knows how to use his body and looks to create contact first rather than waiting for contact to knock him off balance. SK was a master at this.
If we have Cronin and Cumberland I really think this will be or could be a top 15 team. If we can find 1 or 2 shooters outside of Cumberland I think it could be even better. I am slightly less optimistic than Gary's Sr year but not far off. A grad transfer shooter would potentially put us in the top 8 teams IMO.
So we lose Broome and Jenifer. I think we can replace what Broome gave us in terms of driving and shooting 3's. Johnson and Curtis can both drive and 30% is not a high bar for shooting and I think they can both accomplish that bar or come close. Perhaps his clutch shooting at times was something hard to replace. On defense I think Johnson will obviously be better and I would expect Curtis (even as a frosh) can do about as good if not better just due to his length over Broome although he will be behind in his understanding. Rebounding gets better either way.
Jenifer's shooting is going to be hard to replace but from a PG standpoint I don't think we are missing a lot there since we went with Cumberland a lot and he will likely get even more of the PG duties next year and we have Johnson too. Again on D we add a lot of athleticism and length over Jenifer. Rebounding gets better. Perhaps we lose a little bit of whatever calming presence Jenifer gave to the team with ball handling and his knowledge of the system over 4 years.
I really think the loss of these two could end up being a wash in some respect because we get better at rebounding and defense. We lose some shooting and experience. I think worst case here is a slight overall loss but when you think about it...our best recruits in the past two years are the one's filling the holes. Johnson brings energy and toughness. He gets steals and put backs. He's possibly our best on ball defender. Curtis forte is driving the lane and finishing and he already knows how to use his body and looks to create contact first rather than waiting for contact to knock him off balance. SK was a master at this.
If we have Cronin and Cumberland I really think this will be or could be a top 15 team. If we can find 1 or 2 shooters outside of Cumberland I think it could be even better. I am slightly less optimistic than Gary's Sr year but not far off. A grad transfer shooter would potentially put us in the top 8 teams IMO.
With the exception of one year I think we were a grad transfer away from having better March success. I guess you could even argue about that one year but we did get a 2 seed and that is good enough for me.
Just think if we had someone opposite Gates in the S16 year at the PF? Last year I don't think we use it because it was by most account supposed to be a rebuilding year. No reason to alienate the current players. In SK's senior year we could have probably used one although that was supposed to look more like a rebuilding year as well. We had to force Jackson into a new position (which he did very well) but why force that rather than pick up a grad transfer?
With Mick's style of recruiting getting one very good 4 star type of guy every year it's hard to put all of the pieces together to feel like you have anything better than a chance at a S16 except when stars align. If there is anyone in the coaching realm who is a very good coach that could use the grad transfer to push him to the next level I would think Cronin would be exhibit A. I understand why he doesn't do it...but I don't mind taking the chance of someone transferring out because they did not pan out. What exactly are we losing here? Signing a proven grad transfer for a guy that isn't cutting it?
Would we not be able to sign one 4 star guy every year because Mick uses grad transfers? That seems a bit of a stretch. I understand what he is selling. I have your back. I will not recruit over you. It's a 4 year program. give me your best and I will be happy with that.
But what player would rather just have guaranteed playing time (which is never guaranteed even if we don't use grad transfers) over the chance of playing on a team with top 10 potential? I would question their motives. Mick's system of putting out a team of 3 and 4 star guys (3 and 4 year program guys) is screaming for a proven player to fill holes every once in a while. It's the very nature of what and how he does things.
I guess if we could sell a 5 star HS recruit ala Dermarr Johnson etc to fill holes that is another option. But Mick has the same problem of telling a kid he won't recruit over them if they sign (assuming he does this and at this point I have to). I think a slight change of philosophy is in order...and if he can't recruit 4 star talent because he won't promise recruiting over them...maybe he's not the best recruiter or maybe we need a different recruit.
Just think if we had someone opposite Gates in the S16 year at the PF? Last year I don't think we use it because it was by most account supposed to be a rebuilding year. No reason to alienate the current players. In SK's senior year we could have probably used one although that was supposed to look more like a rebuilding year as well. We had to force Jackson into a new position (which he did very well) but why force that rather than pick up a grad transfer?
With Mick's style of recruiting getting one very good 4 star type of guy every year it's hard to put all of the pieces together to feel like you have anything better than a chance at a S16 except when stars align. If there is anyone in the coaching realm who is a very good coach that could use the grad transfer to push him to the next level I would think Cronin would be exhibit A. I understand why he doesn't do it...but I don't mind taking the chance of someone transferring out because they did not pan out. What exactly are we losing here? Signing a proven grad transfer for a guy that isn't cutting it?
Would we not be able to sign one 4 star guy every year because Mick uses grad transfers? That seems a bit of a stretch. I understand what he is selling. I have your back. I will not recruit over you. It's a 4 year program. give me your best and I will be happy with that.
But what player would rather just have guaranteed playing time (which is never guaranteed even if we don't use grad transfers) over the chance of playing on a team with top 10 potential? I would question their motives. Mick's system of putting out a team of 3 and 4 star guys (3 and 4 year program guys) is screaming for a proven player to fill holes every once in a while. It's the very nature of what and how he does things.
I guess if we could sell a 5 star HS recruit ala Dermarr Johnson etc to fill holes that is another option. But Mick has the same problem of telling a kid he won't recruit over them if they sign (assuming he does this and at this point I have to). I think a slight change of philosophy is in order...and if he can't recruit 4 star talent because he won't promise recruiting over them...maybe he's not the best recruiter or maybe we need a different recruit.
sirthought
Well-known member
Yep, I think it's a mistake not to go after the grad transfers more. They are there one year, so if there are chemistry issues it's not going to hurt the team long term.
Those kids know more of what's expected and will likely help Cronin's need for leadership amongst players.
And if an undergrad doesn't see the competition as healthy to win floor minutes against a grad transfer, well that might not be the sort of player the team needs. It's a competition from top to bottom.
Those kids know more of what's expected and will likely help Cronin's need for leadership amongst players.
And if an undergrad doesn't see the competition as healthy to win floor minutes against a grad transfer, well that might not be the sort of player the team needs. It's a competition from top to bottom.
cincyalum2014
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 734
Micks philosophy of not wanting to hurt players feelings because they "put there time in" is complete BS and is completely idiotic.That's like owning a company and telling someone when they start that you wont bring someone in to replace them regardless of there job performance, which would be a terrible business model to follow. ANYONE is replaceable and should drive you to work harder if you lose your minutes to a grad transfer. If you don't like it transfer somewhere else IMO. I obviously don't think a grad transfer solves all of our problems but if it means we don't have to rely on Moore and Fredricks as our wings I am all for it.
Last edited:
Queens_NYC
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2017
- Messages
- 1,655
My question for those of you who are pro-grad transfer for next year's team is which available grad transfers out there do you think 1) could provide a significant improvement over the current talent on our roster and 2) would realistically consider us an option.
Aside from the PG position, we have very little to offer in terms of guaranteed playing time. We're not in what is nationally considered a power conference and we do not have a history of success in March.
With this past season nearly officially behind us, I think there were less than 5 18-19 grad transfers who could've actually helped us out last season. My best guess is that there will be a limited amount this offseason as well.
Aside from the PG position, we have very little to offer in terms of guaranteed playing time. We're not in what is nationally considered a power conference and we do not have a history of success in March.
With this past season nearly officially behind us, I think there were less than 5 18-19 grad transfers who could've actually helped us out last season. My best guess is that there will be a limited amount this offseason as well.
My question for those of you who are pro-grad transfer for next year's team is which available grad transfers out there do you think 1) could provide a significant improvement over the current talent on our roster and 2) would realistically consider us an option.
Aside from the PG position, we have very little to offer in terms of guaranteed playing time. We're not in what is nationally considered a power conference and we do not have a history of success in March.
With this past season nearly officially behind us, I think there were less than 5 18-19 grad transfers who could've actually helped us out last season. My best guess is that there will be a limited amount this offseason as well.
I don't really know who is all out there but I don't want the grad transfer option to just automatically be off the list every year and that is my main point. If there isn't a sharp shooter out there that can help us this year we don't need a grad transfer.
I am not really worried about positions. Cumberland can play PG or wing. I am worried that whoever fills the 5th spot (and probably 6th spot) won't be able to shoot and Williams can't shoot either. They can obviously do other things well...but shooting will be our weakness.
We can get a shooter minutes and still mix in the other guys for plenty of minutes. Between the 1, 2, and 3 spots there are 120 minutes. Cumberland is going to get 35. Between Williams, Curtis, Johnson, and (shooter)...you can get all of them 20+ minutes if you want. Or you can give 2 guys 25 minutes and 2 guys 15. Is Johnson or Curtis ready for more than 15? Maybe maybe not. Williams was fading at the end. They can all play though...no big deal. I can find minutes for a shooter and keep the other important guys happy at the same time.
They'll be happier winning than getting a few less MPG.
Patrick Bateman
Well-known member
My question for those of you who are pro-grad transfer for next year's team is which available grad transfers out there do you think 1) could provide a significant improvement over the current talent on our roster and 2) would realistically consider us an option.
Aside from the PG position, we have very little to offer in terms of guaranteed playing time. We're not in what is nationally considered a power conference and we do not have a history of success in March.
With this past season nearly officially behind us, I think there were less than 5 18-19 grad transfers who could've actually helped us out last season. My best guess is that there will be a limited amount this offseason as well.
James Bolden
sirthought
Well-known member
Daniel Utomi from Akron
Daniel Utomi from Akron
Went to an Akron game this year. Liked his game.
Queens_NYC
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2017
- Messages
- 1,655
James Bolden
There doesn't appear to be interest from either side.
Daniel Utomi from Akron
He'd be able to help us, but again, what do you we have to offer him? He's being recruited by schools like UNC, Michigan, and Virginia - schools with better pedigrees that could certainly guarantee him a bigger role within next year's squads.
There doesn't appear to be interest from either side.
He'd be able to help us, but again, what do you we have to offer him? He's being recruited by schools like UNC, Michigan, and Virginia - schools with better pedigrees that could certainly guarantee him a bigger role within next year's squads.
I don’t think there are any guarantees. We obviously have Cumberland can play guard or wing. But we have a frosh coming in. A soph who only got spot minutes as a frosh. And a junior who made strides but is not irreplaceable by any means. We have two wing/guard positions with no sure fire stud and two of the options have either not played or not played much. One of them hasn’t even seen our D scheme yet. You can’t think of a way to sell minutes to a proven commodity?