I fully understand how people could put us last. All these teams ahead of us return a lot of players that outside of Tulane were all already Top 100 teams. Tulane seemed to add a lot of big proven D1 help as well in Lawson and Thomas.

LeDay's health is a question coming off ACL or even if he will be here, that said he and Gardner were both top 20 players in the AAC last year. Push back on that all you want but it's backed up by the stats and efficiency, and that's being conservative by the stats. They also had great pedigree's anyway being at Virginia Tech/JUCO's for LeDay and the kind of HS career Gardner had. The fact they did it on the #350th rated three point shooting team with no space made it more impressive.

If Dooley actually figures out how to play decent rotations and use 2 ALL AAC level players and incorporate the best of the newcomers this team could be a surprise sleeper.

Things that aren't debatable is

#1 our newcomers have elite size.
#2 the JUCO's shot the ball well which is about the most transferable stat.

These two things alone give us something to work with and pair with Gardner and perhaps LeDay if he's healthy and almost by default should be improved on D with the size at every position and shooting on offense. It's easy to see a path to being decent or even more.

LeDay wasn't a top 25 JUCO by any trash rankings but he had a great year. Neither was Maruice Kemp. I'm certainly not worried about their JUCO rankings. I'll look at their actual stats and see if there is anything to like there and with most there is.

(06-01-2019 02:40 PM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 12:51 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 11:34 AM)Doglando Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 10:48 AM)oasispirate Wrote:  To the people projecting us last. Have you actually analyzed our newcomers or just predicting us last based on our history?

I dont think a team full of subpar juco's will compete in this league.

Tremont robinson will be good but i bet 3 or 4 of the others will be complete busts. Juco is a total crapshoot beyond the top 25 or so players.

D1 transfers >>> Juco's outside of top 25

I'm not a big fan of what dooley is doing at all. We've seen recent aac coaches easily turn around programs with D1 transfers. Gregory with rideau, kiir, lang and now dawson. Dawkins with aubrey, allen, collin smith, banyard now doumbia, milon, and ingram. I think tulane's rebuild will be far quicker than ecu's for this reason

You realize ECU has guys that played at Washington and VT coming in?

That's great but the bar of this league is well beyond a couple P5 wash outs.

Yeah so whatever ECU does sucks no matter what got it

(06-01-2019 03:24 PM)mustangxc Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 12:51 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 11:34 AM)Doglando Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 10:48 AM)oasispirate Wrote:  To the people projecting us last. Have you actually analyzed our newcomers or just predicting us last based on our history?

I dont think a team full of subpar juco's will compete in this league.

Tremont robinson will be good but i bet 3 or 4 of the others will be complete busts. Juco is a total crapshoot beyond the top 25 or so players.

D1 transfers >>> Juco's outside of top 25

I'm not a big fan of what dooley is doing at all. We've seen recent aac coaches easily turn around programs with D1 transfers. Gregory with rideau, kiir, lang and now dawson. Dawkins with aubrey, allen, collin smith, banyard now doumbia, milon, and ingram. I think tulane's rebuild will be far quicker than ecu's for this reason

You realize ECU has guys that played at Washington and VT coming in?

So what? SMU has a Baylor transfer via juco, a Cal transfer, a Texas A&M transfer, a former Cal signee, and a semi-decent juco coming in. We were better than ECU last season, but still need one more elite PG to truly challenge the top 4 in the conference. For the most part every school in this conference has helped move this league up a notch so last place is not what it has been in the past. That said, good job but you still need more than that to truly move up in the standings.

So it literally is the opposite of what the guy I actually responded to said. So that.

(06-01-2019 05:44 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 02:40 PM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 12:51 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 11:34 AM)Doglando Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 10:48 AM)oasispirate Wrote:  To the people projecting us last. Have you actually analyzed our newcomers or just predicting us last based on our history?

I dont think a team full of subpar juco's will compete in this league.

Tremont robinson will be good but i bet 3 or 4 of the others will be complete busts. Juco is a total crapshoot beyond the top 25 or so players.

D1 transfers >>> Juco's outside of top 25

I'm not a big fan of what dooley is doing at all. We've seen recent aac coaches easily turn around programs with D1 transfers. Gregory with rideau, kiir, lang and now dawson. Dawkins with aubrey, allen, collin smith, banyard now doumbia, milon, and ingram. I think tulane's rebuild will be far quicker than ecu's for this reason

You realize ECU has guys that played at Washington and VT coming in?

That's great but the bar of this league is well beyond a couple P5 wash outs.

Yeah so whatever ECU does sucks no matter what got it

You are catching on.

(06-01-2019 05:18 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  I fully understand how people could put us last. All these teams ahead of us return a lot of players that outside of Tulane were all already Top 100 teams. Tulane seemed to add a lot of big proven D1 help as well in Lawson and Thomas.

LeDay's health is a question coming off ACL or even if he will be here, that said he and Gardner were both top 20 players in the AAC last year. Push back on that all you want but it's backed up by the stats and efficiency, and that's being conservative by the stats. They also had great pedigree's anyway being at Virginia Tech/JUCO's for LeDay and the kind of HS career Gardner had. The fact they did it on the #350th rated three point shooting team with no space made it more impressive.

If Dooley actually figures out how to play decent rotations and use 2 ALL AAC level players and incorporate the best of the newcomers this team could be a surprise sleeper.

Things that aren't debatable is

#1 our newcomers have elite size.
#2 the JUCO's shot the ball well which is about the most transferable stat.

These two things alone give us something to work with and pair with Gardner and perhaps LeDay if he's healthy and almost by default should be improved on D with the size at every position and shooting on offense. It's easy to see a path to being decent or even more.

LeDay wasn't a top 25 JUCO by any trash rankings but he had a great year. Neither was Maruice Kemp. I'm certainly not worried about their JUCO rankings. I'll look at their actual stats and see if there is anything to like there and with most there is.

1) top 20 would mean that they would have made a team if the conference had 4 "all-conference teams" (5 X 4 =20)
-- our conference released 3 all-conference teams (top 15)..your statement indicates they would have made a 4th team....yetna, galen robinson, nate pierre louis, keith williams, christain vital, and kyvon davenport would have all made 4th team over garden and 1000% over leday

2) elite size meaningless with out skill..houston came second n the league with a line up of 6'1, 6'1, 6'1, 6'6, 6'8..with the 6'8 player barely playing..and his backup 6'6..2 season ago
the one recruit i really like of yours doesnt have size

3) we talked about this, the 3pt shot is not always or even often translatable ..ricky torres shot 44% from 3 in juco (over 160 attempts)....at Wichita he shot last season he shot 8% (4 of 45 )... it doesnt always translate especially to a multiple bid league becuase the 3pt defense and talent is drastically different..you are wide open with 7 seconds to put up your shot in juco, or getting cleans looks after a screen..not here
temple, houston, wichita, cincy, usf and ucf were extremely good at contesting every 3

4) no one is saying outside the top 25 juco are for sure not good...just saying their chance of success , especially in the area of impacting winning are very low ..

(06-01-2019 06:53 PM)pesik Wrote:  1) top 20 would mean that they would have made a team if the conference had 4 "all-conference teams" (5 X 4 =20)
-- our conference released 3 all-conference teams (top 15)..your statement indicates they would have made a 4th team....yetna, galen robinson, nate pierre louis, keith williams, christain vital, and kyvon davenport would have all made 4th team over garden and 1000% over leday

All Conference is as much a team award as what you are individually doing. Did you see the crappy players and stupid rotations around Gardner and LeDay last year. The guys they had to play with transferred to Samford, Youngstown State, NC Central etc.


LeDay AAC Ranks
10th Player Efficiency Rating
14th True Shooting Percentage
16th Defensive Plus/Minus
14th Total Rebound percentage
5th Steals Percentage
10th Blocks Percentage


Gardner AAC Ranks
3rd Player Efficiency Rating
13th True Shooting Percentage
7th Total Rebound Percentage
19th Offensive Rating


These weren't empty stats, they were both producing in the worst of environments with no space (350th three point shooting)and literally working against each other for rebounds and space around the basket with no talent teamates and they still were dominate individual talents. I don't know what's so hard to buy that these are top 20 players, that's conservative IMO if you look at the actual tangible stats. LeDay was at Virginia Tech, Gardner had one of the best high school careers in NC and had some good offers. It's not like no one wanted them.

Quote:2) elite size meaningless with out skill..houston came second n the league with a line up of 6'1, 6'1, 6'1, 6'6, 6'8..with the 6'8 player barely playing..and his backup 6'6..2 season ago
the one recruit i really like of yours doesnt have size

Sure, but size helps particularly on defense as a general rule. It also just gives us lots of options, and we can always play smaller and get more dynamic as well. I think Baruiti might be the most dangerous at PF infact and Gardner at center. Even if we go smaller we really aren't even that small. Baruiti is 6-7, 225 with a 6-11 wingspan. Miles is 6-7, 215 at SF, James, 6-6, 205 at SG.

Quote:3) we talked about this, the 3pt shot is not always or even often translatable ..ricky torres shot 44% from 3 in juco (over 160 attempts)....at Wichita he shot last season he shot 8% (4 of 45 )... it doesnt always translate especially to a multiple bid league becuase the 3pt defense and talent is drastically different..you are wide open with 7 seconds to put up your shot in juco, or getting cleans looks after a screen..not here
temple, houston, wichita, cincy, usf and ucf were extremely good at contesting every 3

Stop, you picked the most extreme ridiculous example. Hell Rob Gray shot better at Houston than in JUCO's lots of guys shoot better. The fact is you are typically going to shoot in a similar range as you did at a lower level. Hell even the guys going from high school to college (where the line is farther) and college to the pros (where the line is a lot farther) generally shoot just a few percentage points different in their first year. Kevin Pelton on ESPN tracks this $hit for his statistical translations and it's one of the safest statistical translations along with FT percentage and rebounding. If you can do those things at the lower level you will likely be able to do them solidly as you move up.

https://bustingbrackets.com/2019/05/17/n...n-2019-20/

He's not just one of the best players in the AAC he's one of the best in his class in the nation.

(06-01-2019 06:53 PM)pesik Wrote:  3) we talked about this, the 3pt shot is not always or even often translatable ..ricky torres shot 44% from 3 in juco (over 160 attempts)....at Wichita he shot last season he shot 8% (4 of 45 )... it doesnt always translate especially to a multiple bid league becuase the 3pt defense and talent is drastically different..you are wide open with 7 seconds to put up your shot in juco, or getting cleans looks after a screen..not here
temple, houston, wichita, cincy, usf and ucf were extremely good at contesting every 3

Also this is just wrong. Studys in the NBA suggest there is little correlation to how well you defend 3's from a percentage standpoint, and the NBA tracks the quality of shots and open looks and much of the time it's just pure luck as to how many actually go in even based on the looks and expected rate. Some teams giving up the worst looks still have some of the highest 3 point percentages on them and vise versa.

Where there is more of a correlation and what you can control on Defense is teams controlling how many 3's you actually get off in a game. They talk about it over an over on the Dunc'd on Podcast I listen to. I think the assumption is most guys aren't taking shots unless they are reasonably open anyway which is why you need to look at the volume too. These guys we are bringing in have a lot of size so getting their shot off shouldn't be nearly as much of a concern like it would be for a 6-1 guy either.

(05-31-2019 09:35 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Tier 1 (Likely Tournament Teams)
Cincinnati
Memphis
Houston

Tier 2 (Could be tournament teams)
Wichita State
UConn
Temple

Tier 3 (If things break right, tournament teams)
USF
UCF

Tier 4 (the better than usual bottom)
SMU
Tulsa
Tulane
ECU

winner

close the thread

(06-01-2019 09:02 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(05-31-2019 09:35 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Tier 1 (Likely Tournament Teams)
Memphis
Houston

Tier1A (Likely tournament team to lose first game)
Cincinnati

Tier 2 (Could be tournament teams)
Wichita State
UConn
Temple

Tier 3 (If things break right, tournament teams)
USF
UCF

Tier 4 (the better than usual bottom)
SMU
Tulsa
Tulane
ECU

winner

close the thread

FIFY

(06-01-2019 07:54 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  LeDay AAC Ranks
10th Player Efficiency Rating
14th True Shooting Percentage

Gardner AAC Ranks
3rd Player Efficiency Rating

Stop, you picked the most extreme ridiculous example. Hell Rob Gray shot better at Houston than in JUCO's lots of guys shoot better.

1) torres is an extreme example???
lets look just at other top juco JUST from last year
brian halums: 45% from 3 in juco, 16% at ole miss
Charles Jones Jr: 45% from 3 in juco, 31% at utah
Andres Feliz: 42% from 3 in juco, 27% in illinois
marlon taylor: 45% from 3 in juco, 25% in LSU
Shane Gatling: 45% from 3 in juco, 31% in colorado
as stated earleir: Rick Torres 44% from 3 in juco, 8% in wichita

this is EVERY single top juco guard last year *who had a good percentage in juco, and went to a multiple bid league...except for 1, devenate bandoo (who dropped 5% but was still 40% ..which is still good)

1b) also noting rob gray dropped from 36% to 34% his 1st year ...he didnt shoot better when he got to UH.. not a big drop but he didnt get better

2) im about to say something that you might not like or might take offense to... but after talking to you last season ive come to realize something....im not that high on "star" players with super efficent stats on really bad teams ... after our long debate last season, i thought i might not be giving him enough credit so i watched a few of your games more closely...and i noticed he ONLY shoots the ball in favorable situations irregardless of game situation..there were situations were ecu desperately needed a basketball..teams would tighten up on gardner seeing him as the threat..and gardner just wouldnt shoot it (Despite being passed the ball) even when ecu desperately needed a shot to go up ...and it would end up being passed back out to Williams who would take the shot

if you are playing to win, and you are on a less talented team, you are going to have to take a lot of low probability shots if you are the star player and you are indeed playing to win

(06-01-2019 09:29 PM)pesik Wrote:  1) torres is an extreme example???
lets look just at other top juco JUST from last year
brian halums: 45% from 3 in juco, 16% at ole miss
Charles Jones Jr: 45% from 3 in juco, 31% at utah
Andres Feliz: 42% from 3 in juco, 27% in illinois
marlon taylor: 45% from 3 in juco, 25% in LSU
Shane Gatling: 45% from 3 in juco, 31% in colorado
as stated earleir: Rick Torres 44% from 3 in juco, 8% in wichita

Good god. 45 shots isn't much of a sample but now you are literally posting guys that took as few as 6 freaking shots and trying to prove a point. Small sample size theater much?

Quote:this is EVERY single top juco guard last year *who had a good percentage in juco, and went to a multiple bid league...except for 1, devenate bandoo (who dropped 5% but was still 40% ..which is still good)

1b) also noting rob gray dropped from 36% to 34% his 1st year ...he didnt shoot better when he got to UH.. not a big drop but he didnt get better

You can find whatever examples you want, i'm not searching through them. I'm telling you there are people that track this for a living and there is almost no difference once you get past the noise of small ass 45 shot samples.

A guy that shoots whatever in high school or college in the aggregate shoots with in 2-3% of that as they level up to College and the pros and the level up is more intense and the 3 point line farther at both stops on top of it than JUCO's. This is just the facts. You can search out these weak examples all you want but in the aggregate it is a transferable stat proven out over years of data by guys like Kevin Pelton.

Quote:2) im about to say something that you might not like or might take offense to... but after talking to you last season ive come to realize something....im not that high on "star" players with super efficent stats on really bad teams ... after our long debate last season, i thought i might not be giving him enough credit so i watched a few of your games more closely...and i noticed he ONLY shoots the ball in favorable situations irregardless of game situation..there were situations were ecu desperately needed a basketball..teams would tighten up on gardner seeing him as the threat..and gardner just wouldnt shoot it (Despite being passed the ball) even when ecu desperately needed a shot to go up ...and it would end up being passed back out to Williams who would take the shot

if you are playing to win, and you are on a less talented team, you are going to have to take a lot of low probability shots if you are the star player and you are indeed playing to win

Usage (the percentage of plays used by a player when he's on the floor)

27.6% Gardner (5th in the AAC)
24.4% LeDay (16th in the AAC)
18.9% Williams


Again you have no clue what you are talking about. Gardner had the 5th highest usage in the AAC and was still efficient despite having zero space and having to work in the same areas as our other high usage only talented player LeDay. Every team he played knew exactly what we were going to do and they both still were highly efficient some of the best True Shooting percentages in the conference.


If anything being on a team together that had the 350th ranked 3 point shooting and no talent around them makes it more impressive to do what they did, especially as bigs who can't dictate play nearly as well as a wing or guard since they don't have the ball in their hands most of the time.

(06-01-2019 09:29 PM)pesik Wrote:  1b) also noting rob gray dropped from 36% to 34% his 1st year ...he didnt shoot better when he got to UH.. not a big drop but he didnt get better

Rob Gray

in his one year of JUCO's...

18.6ppg (27 games)
36.1% from 3 (43-119)

Rob Gray ....in his career at Houston
18.8ppg (91 games)
36.2% from 3 (172-445)

Actually he did and that's beside the point. It' looks pretty damn transferable which was the point.

1. ECU
2. Wichita
3. Houston
4. Memphis
5. Temple
6. UCONN
7. USF
8. Tulsa
9. Tulane
10. UCF
11. Pony
12. Cincy

(06-02-2019 09:40 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 09:29 PM)pesik Wrote:  1b) also noting rob gray dropped from 36% to 34% his 1st year ...he didnt shoot better when he got to UH.. not a big drop but he didnt get better

Rob Gray

in his one year of JUCO's...

18.6ppg (27 games)
36.1% from 3 (43-119)

Rob Gray ....in his career at Houston
18.8ppg (91 games)
36.2% from 3 (172-445)

Actually he did and that's beside the point. It' looks pretty damn transferable which was the point.

why are you using career stats like samspon didnt develop him..you compare the 1st year if its truly translatable...and in specifically this conversation we are talking about next year

you entire support for your point of view is one juco who went from 36 to 34..ignoring 85% of all juco in a multibid league took a huge step back

(06-02-2019 09:51 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 09:40 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 09:29 PM)pesik Wrote:  1b) also noting rob gray dropped from 36% to 34% his 1st year ...he didnt shoot better when he got to UH.. not a big drop but he didnt get better

Rob Gray

in his one year of JUCO's...

18.6ppg (27 games)
36.1% from 3 (43-119)

Rob Gray ....in his career at Houston
18.8ppg (91 games)
36.2% from 3 (172-445)

Actually he did and that's beside the point. It' looks pretty damn transferable which was the point.

why are you using career stats like samspon didnt develop him..you compare the 1st year if its truly translatable...and in specifically this conversation we are talking about next year

you entire support for your point of view is one juco who went from 36 to 34..ignoring 85% of all juco in a multibid league took a huge step back

Again, NO THEY DON'T. Look at Kevin Pelton's work on stat translations from level to level. He's studied it over years, that's his job at ESPN to project draft prospects stats translations and he studies their entire statistical history. Guys going from high school or college to college and the pros typcially shoot 2 to 3% worse from 3 and that's with a farther line at both places and bigger leaps in competition than JUCO's.

Gray is actually a typical example in the aggregate. A guy moves up shoots with in 1.7% of what he did in JUCO's in his first year. That's what you would expect. That's hardly a "huge" step back, hell he stepped back more than that his senior from what he established his Jr year with all the "developing" when he's should have been at his best anyway as most older players get better duh. The fact is this is shooting there is a lot of variance but in the aggregate it works itself out with large enough samples.

My whole point is we can expect our JUCO's to shoot with in 2 or 3 percent as a whole of what they did in JUCO, at worst from 3 point range if not better based on the data studied over years, and all were solid respectable 3 point shooter in JUCO's.

I wish people would take things like this seriously. Here's mine:

1. Wheat People
2. UConn
3. Houston
4. UC
5. USF
6. UCF
7. Tulsa
8. Temple
9. Tulane
10. SMU
11. ECU
12. Memphis

(06-02-2019 09:25 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  now you are literally posting guys that took as few as 6 freaking shots and trying to prove a point. Small sample size theater much?

Again you have no clue what you are talking about. Gardner had the 5th highest usage in the AAC .

1) why are you acting like i specifically chose guards who "shot as low as 6" or nitpicking..this is EVERY top rated juco guard now in a p7....EVERY...when you put a chart for "every" you will get some low numbers

if you dont like the small sample size for them as individual players combine all of them into 1 player..if its a debate about translate-able and not a debate where individualized matter..we can refer to them as 1 group "good shooter in juco".."now in high major"..then meshing all their stats would be fine..it would be a huge drop still

dear StillJonesing, you are very smart, but while in the middle of debates, you will ignore clear points being made ..just to keep your idea alive ..you say 3pt shot is translatable, i post every single top juco showing that 90% took a huge drop...but you are still saying its translate-able....
me and you both know that this point of your has died, even though you will be willing to debate till the end of days..i wont address the 3point number anymore because we both know its settled


2) now to a debate-able point: usage doesnt address anything ..no one every denied gardner got minutes, no one denied gardener didnt get shots...

my point: no one with that high a PER should be on a bad team..because if the game is on the line and your making the critical buckets, you wouldnt be a bad team.
He doesnt shoot in unfavorable situations at all...like at all..he attacks in specific situations but only if that situation is available.
i remember when gardner was doing like 22pt a game and yetna was doing like 8pt a game midseason, and yet numerous aac coaches confidently said yetna was the the freshman of the year...yetna was affecting winning and losing ...

if your team is bad, and you are indeed playing to win you are taking alot of bad shots with low probability if you are trying to carry your team to victory

1. Memphis
2. Houston
3. Cincy
4. UConn
5. WSU
6. USF
7. Temple
8. UCF
9. Tulsa
10. SMU
11. Tulane
12. ECU ( Way too many jucos to actually make any noise this year. Might take the following year to see how they pan out.)

(06-02-2019 10:24 AM)pesik Wrote:  1) why are you acting like is specifically chose guard who "shot as low as 6" or nitpicking..this is EVERY top rated juco guard now in a p7....EVERY...when you put a chart for "every" you will get some low nuumbers

if you dont like the small sample size for them as individual players combine all of them into 1 player..if its a debate about translate-able where and an not individualized date..we can refer to them as "good shooter in juco".."now in high major"..then meshing all their stats would be fine

dear StillJonesing, you are very smart, but while in the middle of debates, you will ignore clear points being made ..just to keep your idea alive ..you say 3pt shot is translatable, i post every single top juco showing that 90% took a huge drop...but you are still saying its translate-able....
me and you both know that this point of your has died, even though you will be willing to debate till the end of days..i wont address the 3point number anymore because we both know its settled

Only one of those guys shot more than 59 three pointers. Those are noise samples that don't prove much of anything. I've listened to Kevin Pelton on various ESPN and Dunc'd on Podcast for almost a decade talking about his stat translations. He's tracked thousands of prospects and even historical ones back prior to the last decade to get the best frameworks in place for translating stats and he's as accurate as anyone out there with expectations.

He said verbatim his finding multiple times that you can expect a prospect to shoot with in 2 to 3% when going from high school to college and from college to the pros which both have longer lines and steeper learning curves than JUCO's would. This is a guy that's studied thousands, that's his words not mine.

Quote:2) now to a debate-able point: usage doesnt address anything ..no one every denied gardner got minutes, no one denied gardener didnt get shots...when

my point: no one with that high a PER should be on a bad team..becuase if the game is on the line and your making the critical buckets, you wouldnt be a bad team.
He doesnt shoot in unfavorable situations at all...like at all..he attack in specific situations but only if that situation is available
i remember when gardner was doing like 22 a game and yetna was doing like 8 a game midseason, and yet numerous aac coaches confidently said yetna was the the freshman of the year...yetna was affecting winning and losing ...

if your team is bad, and you are indeed playing to win you are taking alot of bad shots with low probability if you are trying to carry your team to victory

It is what it is. Gardner and LeDay were our highest usage players by a mile FACT, and highly successful despite the worst of basketball ecosystems you could have created to have success in.

It's pretty obvious to have guys doing what they were doing and still be as terrible as our team was Dooley did a terrible job last year, especially with another good player like Fleming as well. He should have been able to win more and his rotations pretty clearly cost us about 5 close games LeDay and Fleming didn't play enough in behind walk ons and crap. It was the worst coaching job I've ever seen infact.

If you play Shawn Williams 35 minutes a game and Spas/Obashan 25 minutes Zion Williams would have a hard time dragging those bums to any real success though. Not to mention all the filler players headed to Samford, Youngstown State etc we had. That's one of the reasons I'm so vocal about getting Shawn Williams the heck away from our roster because if he's playing I expect to be underachievers at best and bad again at worst.