This forum is hosted for free by Boardhost. Create your own free forum!
1 of 1- Gwmayhem
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline - Registered: 7/22/2019
- Posts: 3,278
New Rules
I'm borrowing my thread title from Bill Maher but in reality, this post will be touching upon tendencies more so than iron clad rules. At least these are tendencies that I've noted in the past; your mileage may vary.
1) How does turning over practically an entire team impact scheduling? Going back decades when Karl Hobbs used to defend his cupcake schedules by repeatedly pointing out how "young" his teams were, what we (along with MANY schools across the country) will have isn't necessarily a youthful team but one that is not experienced playing together. Last year brought back a core of Castro/Johnson/Autry/Jones/Bevins and that seemed to allow for an upgrade to the OOC schedule (although let's not get carried away as KenPom ranked us #263, which is not 163 let alone 63, but is also a far cry from 363 which had resembled GW's neighborhood for a number of years). There's little question that CC understood the value of combining teams who you could easily beat by 20+ points with playing a number of tough tests as this was all borne out in GW's improved advanced metrics. My guess is that we play around the same caliber of OC schedule as last year despite having so many players who have never played together.
2) Playing time. No, I don't believe that CC promises or guarantees anyone playing time. And no coach would ever publicly say anything other than the obvious..that the players who give the team the best chance to win will play the most. Makes perfect sense. However, I do think that CC has shown tendencies to play incoming transfers more than they deserve (Brendan Adam's first year at GW comes to mind), and that "ties" will always go to the transfer in his final year of eligibility. Again, none of this is "across the board". Rafael Castro arrives here and of course he's going to play a lot because he should. And of course, the added experience factors into the thinking. That said, I wonder if younger guys like Frost, Witherspoon and even Rougier-Roane or N'Landu will be giving up minutes to more experienced players like Arceneaux or James because of waning eligibility concerns. Having experienced losing a redshirt freshman to a P4 school (or the player to be named in the Tyler Cavanaugh trade), will our deserving youth (if deserving) be given ample opportunity? The glaring exception to all of this was Tre Dinkins, someone who I'm sure played far less than anyone anticipated despite playing in his final college season.
3) Will the bench any deeper? Well, CC would point out that this has already happened dating back to his first season here when a not quite 100% Amir Harris served as the 6th man in a 7 man rotation. CC has shown that he will go with a 9 man rotation but that has appeared to be his limit to date. If this is warranted (and that's a big if because we don't know with most guys whether they were blocked by better players or if they shouldn't have been considered P4 talent to begin with), will CC go with an even lengthier bench?
- dmvpiranha
- Moderator
Offline
- Registered: 7/23/2019
- Posts: 1,610
Re: New Rules
For #2, I don't think being more experienced necessarily guarantees more minutes. Like you said, Tre is a prime example. I would add that how much a player is getting compensated would probably factor a bit into the equation. It was not cheap to land players like Frost and Witherspoon despite them being younger. I wouldn't be surprised to see them play more than a guy like James. Ultimately, everyone is on a one year deal these days anyways. You'd like to hold onto players but that is getting harder by the year absent a major rule change.
Who knows when it comes to Rougier-Roane's health. If the "5 in 5" rule ends up getting passed by the NCAA, he may be the final redshirt player ever at GW. Given the transfer additions, I feel like he's already been buried but hope he gets the chance. I'm personally high on N'Landu, and as of now CC has not really brought in point guards that would limit his opportunities. I'd expect Jean to get the starting nod, and Omari has some of those capabilities but that's about it. Of course, the roster isn't finished yet and I'd imagine at least one scoring guard will be added to the mix.
The 5 will be interesting. Perhaps a guy like James slides down to the 5 for stretches. Vukovic would probably be the favorite to start, but he has had issues staying healthy at Oklahoma State. Hopefully GW is not in a situation where Arrington is being asked to play big minutes. I see him as more of an emergency option but GW doesn't have true size outside of him and Vukovic as of now.
For #3, hopefully the answer is no. I don't think there is any reason to go more than nine deep but no doubt the decisions are getting harder every year. I liked what Ty gave the team his freshman year but it was clear his tenure at GW was coming to an end during OOC play. CC tried to force him into the lineup as the tenth man but I'm not sure it was really useful or effective.
- H&R..71
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 6/13/2023
- Posts: 339
Re: New Rules
Following in the Bill Maher "New Rules" segment: Will somebody please tell me why everything has to come down to analytics? I get the OOC debate as it relates to KenPom, but can't a schedule be structured that makes sense geographically and also challenges a team with healthy competition. Now that all the NIL and recruiting issues are taking shape, the task at hand will be to take 14 different egos coming from 14 different schools plus a few other countries and 14 coaches. Can only imagine the first time all the players and coaches meet in the same room for their first meeting. Would love to hear each member give a few minute intro about where they're coming from to begin meshing together. For me, that's the most fascinating part of all this. Then get in the gym and find out who has the best shot, leaping ability, strength, quickness and competitive fire. The players usually know who should start after scrimmaging for hours at the direction of the coaching staff. If the players are clearly given specific roles after running with each other, the bench takes shape. And the best would be having CC ask: "so how did they do it at Houston, or Pitt, or ND, etc."
This promises to be a fascinating season with lots of talent and many new rules. Should be fun.
- Gwmayhem
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 7/22/2019
- Posts: 3,278
Re: New Rules
I went back and revisited the CC rosters over the past four years and the sample sizes to make my point are smaller than what I would have thought. The litmus test is to ask what I would have done differently and in most cases, there really wasn't an obvious better solution. So while 20 minutes per game may have seemed like a lot for Sean Hansen, there really weren't much better alternatives. I had forgotten that Brendan Adams started out playing for Jamion and that it was CC that got the most out of him. The one glaring example in support of my point was Gerald Drumgoole. Drumgoole played as much as he did (started every game) because that team desperately needed more perimeter shooting; however, Gerald had the worst effective FG % on the team that season (among rotational players).
It's impossible to get inside a coach's mind to determine how much a grad student or anyone in his final year of eligibility plays is due to experience vs. compassion over the player having so little eligibility left. Don't lose sight of the fact that CC is only human. If he recruits someone with one year left to play at GW, it's only natural to believe that he's going to want to give that player ample opportunities. At the same time, today's reality is that everyone is seemingly on one-year contracts. Tell someone to be patient and that they will get their turn carries the serious risk of losing that player at the end of the season.
- •
Thread Starter- GWRising
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 10/19/2019
- Posts: 2,525
Re: New Rules
Most coaches subscribe to one rule regardless of class, remaining years, pedigree, sentimentality, etc. Those that they believe can help the team win will play the most. Doesn't matter where you started. Practice and games reveal all.
The coaches who don't follow this rule usually get fired.
CC has been around a long time. I would bet a lot of money he is only interested in playing those who can help the team win. And minutes reflect that regardless of what he may have thought initially when recruiting someone. Example - Dinkins minutes declined because CC learned he couldn't guard a toll booth and was a mediocre ball handler/distributor. When he stopped hitting shots those became weaknesses that CC had to minimize..
- Gwmayhem
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 7/22/2019
- Posts: 3,278
Re: New Rules
Rising, some nuance ought to be applied to this discussion. It goes without saying that coaches are hired to win games and with this in mind, it's logical that the best players should play the most minutes. However, every roster differs with respect to who those players are as well as a coach's philosophy behind playing a long or short bench.
Whether it's a nod towards experience or a sense of obligation (though obligation is too strong a word) to play a transfer with one year of eligibility remaining more than a player with multiple years remaining, my sense is that CC is inclined to go with the former when the decision is close. This should not be misinterpreted as it does not apply to anyone with more experience over anyone with less experience. The players being compared need to be fairly close to one another in ability.
That said, I do hope this changes in light of today's transient nature of players to switch schools regardless of age or class year.
- •
Thread Starter