Another Transfer

49ers Basketball Forum 🏀
81

Does make me curious how the staff sells the situation to these kids.[/quote]

Here’s how it was sold to Bryan:

Marcus if you come to Charlotte we feel like you could really help us and we are especially thin up front and we feel you could play right away. The was all absolutely true and thats how it worked out. [/quote]

Were you sitting in the room with them when they said this to Marcus and Denzel? Not saying that isn’t how it went down but obviously we all assume that is what was the coaches say. I would love to know what the staff told EVic and Darion and Luka - and there is no way to know what is really being said with out being in the room with them. My curiosity really is are they overselling what they can do and setting up unrealistic expectations for the players who then get pissed off or are they simply saying I am not going to promise you anything, come in work your butt off and best guy plays.

As for them not being an excuse - we heard it last year, well we just are too thin on the front line. You know why? Because guys transferred. So this season, when again we are thin in the post, people will say that again. I just think that the staff needs to do a better job managing expectations, team chemistry and succeed in spite of what transfers we do have. I know having high expectations for our program these days can be a punishable offense.[/quote]

How is Willie, Thorne, Blakely, and Sullivan thin in the post?[/quote]

4 kids for 120 minutes of PT is thin as hell… Consider Blakley has virtually no experience only adds to the depth issue. You can even call TWill a big and we’d still be thin.[/quote]

Willie = 30
Sully = 30
Mike = 30
T Will = 30
Total = 120

So will foul trouble there might be 10 mins for Marcus. Thus he transfers. This endith the lesson.[/quote]

82

Does make me curious how the staff sells the situation to these kids.[/quote]

Here’s how it was sold to Bryan:

Marcus if you come to Charlotte we feel like you could really help us and we are especially thin up front and we feel you could play right away. The was all absolutely true and thats how it worked out. [/quote]

Were you sitting in the room with them when they said this to Marcus and Denzel? Not saying that isn’t how it went down but obviously we all assume that is what was the coaches say. I would love to know what the staff told EVic and Darion and Luka - and there is no way to know what is really being said with out being in the room with them. My curiosity really is are they overselling what they can do and setting up unrealistic expectations for the players who then get pissed off or are they simply saying I am not going to promise you anything, come in work your butt off and best guy plays.

As for them not being an excuse - we heard it last year, well we just are too thin on the front line. You know why? Because guys transferred. So this season, when again we are thin in the post, people will say that again. I just think that the staff needs to do a better job managing expectations, team chemistry and succeed in spite of what transfers we do have. I know having high expectations for our program these days can be a punishable offense.[/quote]

How is Willie, Thorne, Blakely, and Sullivan thin in the post?[/quote]

4 kids for 120 minutes of PT is thin as hell… Consider Blakley has virtually no experience only adds to the depth issue. You can even call TWill a big and we’d still be thin.[/quote]

Willie = 30
Sully = 30
Mike = 30
T Will = 30
Total = 120

So will foul trouble there might be 10 mins for Marcus. Thus he transfers. This endith the lesson.[/quote][/quote]

Awesome… We will have no injuries and everyone save Twill will increase their time per game… I won’t even get into the point that TWill playing 30 MPG speaks volumes of our poor depth. Thanks for that lesson Jimmyhat.

83

Does make me curious how the staff sells the situation to these kids.[/quote]

Here’s how it was sold to Bryan:

Marcus if you come to Charlotte we feel like you could really help us and we are especially thin up front and we feel you could play right away. The was all absolutely true and thats how it worked out. [/quote]

Were you sitting in the room with them when they said this to Marcus and Denzel? Not saying that isn’t how it went down but obviously we all assume that is what was the coaches say. I would love to know what the staff told EVic and Darion and Luka - and there is no way to know what is really being said with out being in the room with them. My curiosity really is are they overselling what they can do and setting up unrealistic expectations for the players who then get pissed off or are they simply saying I am not going to promise you anything, come in work your butt off and best guy plays.

As for them not being an excuse - we heard it last year, well we just are too thin on the front line. You know why? Because guys transferred. So this season, when again we are thin in the post, people will say that again. I just think that the staff needs to do a better job managing expectations, team chemistry and succeed in spite of what transfers we do have. I know having high expectations for our program these days can be a punishable offense.[/quote]

How is Willie, Thorne, Blakely, and Sullivan thin in the post?[/quote]

4 kids for 120 minutes of PT is thin as hell… Consider Blakley has virtually no experience only adds to the depth issue. You can even call TWill a big and we’d still be thin.[/quote]

Willie = 30
Sully = 30
Mike = 30
T Will = 30
Total = 120

So will foul trouble there might be 10 mins for Marcus. Thus he transfers. This endith the lesson.[/quote][/quote]

Awesome… We will have no injuries and everyone save Twill will increase their time per game… I won’t even get into the point that TWill playing 30 MPG speaks volumes of our poor depth. Thanks for that lesson Jimmyhat.[/quote]

Well your breakdown leaves 80 minutes for Henry, Brax, Lester, Benny, Key and Dorin. I think we will be ok.

84

Does make me curious how the staff sells the situation to these kids.[/quote]

Here’s how it was sold to Bryan:

Marcus if you come to Charlotte we feel like you could really help us and we are especially thin up front and we feel you could play right away. The was all absolutely true and thats how it worked out. [/quote]

Were you sitting in the room with them when they said this to Marcus and Denzel? Not saying that isn’t how it went down but obviously we all assume that is what was the coaches say. I would love to know what the staff told EVic and Darion and Luka - and there is no way to know what is really being said with out being in the room with them. My curiosity really is are they overselling what they can do and setting up unrealistic expectations for the players who then get pissed off or are they simply saying I am not going to promise you anything, come in work your butt off and best guy plays.

As for them not being an excuse - we heard it last year, well we just are too thin on the front line. You know why? Because guys transferred. So this season, when again we are thin in the post, people will say that again. I just think that the staff needs to do a better job managing expectations, team chemistry and succeed in spite of what transfers we do have. I know having high expectations for our program these days can be a punishable offense.[/quote]

How is Willie, Thorne, Blakely, and Sullivan thin in the post?[/quote]

4 kids for 120 minutes of PT is thin as hell… Consider Blakley has virtually no experience only adds to the depth issue. You can even call TWill a big and we’d still be thin.[/quote]

Willie = 30
Sully = 30
Mike = 30
T Will = 30
Total = 120

So will foul trouble there might be 10 mins for Marcus. Thus he transfers. This endith the lesson.[/quote][/quote]

Awesome… We will have no injuries and everyone save Twill will increase their time per game… I won’t even get into the point that TWill playing 30 MPG speaks volumes of our poor depth. Thanks for that lesson Jimmyhat.[/quote]

Well your breakdown leaves 80 minutes for Henry, Brax, Lester, Benny, Key and Dorin. I think we will be ok.[/quote]

2 true frosh, a kid off back surgery and a kid never to play a minute for us, we have 2 known quantities … After 10 years of crap, I’m done expecting things to work out for the best, I need to see it to believe it. I hope they are all great, but I’ve seen this movie before.

The moral of the story is that while having 20 bucks in my pocket might be enough, I’d feel better with 30.

85

[quote=“s9er, post:84, topic:28842”]2 true frosh, a kid off back surgery and a kid never to play a minute for us, we have 2 known quantities … After 10 years of crap, I’m done expecting things to work out for the best, I need to see it to believe it. I hope they are all great, but I’ve seen this movie before.

The moral of the story is that while having 20 bucks in my pocket might be enough, I’d feel better with 30.[/quote]

F’n D.O.B.A.!!!

86

You guys do realize it is 4 guys for 80 mins right? I’d still prefer a 5th myself, but just correcting the time frame.

87

3 F’s = 120 minutes… even if we play a 3 guard O, we still need to defend the oppositions front line for the whole game. This is just semantics I guess, but I just tire of the “well be fine” attitude. We haven’t been to the NCAA’s in 10 faking years, we are anything but fine.

88

We’ll be fine… eventually.

I want us to be fine NOW.

89

3 F’s = 120 minutes… even if we play a 3 guard O, we still need to defend the oppositions front line for the whole game. This is just semantics I guess, but I just tire of the “well be fine” attitude. We haven’t been to the NCAA’s in 10 faking years, we are anything but fine.[/quote]

We typically play a PG-WG-WG-F-F/C lineup. We only have two bigs on the floor at a time.

90

3 F’s = 120 minutes… even if we play a 3 guard O, we still need to defend the oppositions front line for the whole game. This is just semantics I guess, but I just tire of the “well be fine” attitude. We haven’t been to the NCAA’s in 10 faking years, we are anything but fine.[/quote]

We typically play a PG-WG-WG-F-F/C lineup. We only have two bigs on the floor at a time.[/quote]

Which we can debate the merits of. Is it because we want to or because we need to? At the end of the day, we haven’t had enough good players on the roster at one time to get us to the NCAA’s for far too long.
My argument isn’t with you sf it’s with the people who think this is a good sign. 10 kids who can give you minutes is better than 8 or 9 any day of the week.

91

Oh I’m not arguing just stating the lineup we have. I’d prefer to have 5 capable front court guys, even said so earlier. I do think we run our lineup the way we want too. You don’t see many if at all lineups with 3 bigs.

92

This was probably discussed in the shout box but I didn’t see it posted anywhere:

http://dubhub.blogs.starnewsonline.com/21923/hoops-m-uncw-poised-to-add-former-charlotte-f-marcus-bryan/

93

[quote=“Mr. Bojangles, post:92, topic:28842”]This was probably discussed in the shout box but I didn’t see it posted anywhere:

http://dubhub.blogs.starnewsonline.com/21923/hoops-m-uncw-poised-to-add-former-charlotte-f-marcus-bryan/[/quote]

Well their coach gets it:

“With the landscape of where college basketball is and because there are 500-some guys on the (Division-I) transfer list, you just can’t be blind-sided,” Keatts said. “I think you have to continue just to recruit, and you never know.”

94

Hey at least Marcus is still in the same school system. :))

95

Mountains (committed to App State)

City ( One year at Charlotte)

Beach (Transfer to UNCW)

96

i believe he was also committed to army at one point.

97

[quote=“ninerfan55, post:96, topic:28842”]i believe he was also committed to army at one point.[/quote]Correct. He committed to Army first I believe. Then App. Then us. Now UNCW.

Bryan seemed like a good kid though. I wish him well.

98

I subscribe to the 3 legit players for 80 minutes club. Clayton, Thorne and Sullivan play 25+ per game. Throw in a little T Will when you want to go small. Leave 120 for Brax, P, Shawn, T Will, Dorn and Woods. Think Ivan and Cam struggle to get much time.

99

[quote=“NinerJags, post:98, topic:28842”]I subscribe to the 3 legit players for 80 minutes club. Clayton, Thorne and Sullivan play 25+ per game. Throw in a little T Will when you want to go small. Leave 120 for Brax, P, Shawn, T Will, Dorn and Woods. Think Ivan and Cam struggle to get much time.[/quote] That works fine until you get foul trouble, an injury or two, or wear down over a season of heavy minutes (post players tend to have more trouble with heavy minutes due to the weight). It also changes how you play. Our team seems to play best when we are pressuring the ball on defense, but that requires post players that can run and can challenge easy baskets on the break. You can’t do that when you’re trying to conserve energy, without going small a lot which good teams will eventually figure out and exploit. And it’s harder to get out a run on offense when the post players need to conserve energy.

It’s also probably part of the reason our teams have often seemed so soft on defense, because guys are scared to foul too much (though I still think they over-adjusted to the early season whistles). Throw in the fact that our bigs are a little foul-prone, especially Clayton, who now has a reputation with refs, unfairly or not. We need better depth in the post to have good chances for success in my view and to mitigate any injuries.

Sometimes teams can scrape by with poor depth over a season, but usually it becomes a factor at some point, often in road games, tournaments, and later in the season as guys wear down or pick up injuries here and there. I’m not sure if the coaches could’ve done anything different to keep Bryan here, but I think losing him, Clark, not getting much from Blakley as a post guy, and missing on several other post players in recruiting will start to bite us next year. Hopefully it’s not really bad (like a season-ending injury to one of the post guys) and essentially sinks the season.

100

[quote=“9erken, post:99, topic:28842”][quote=“NinerJags, post:98, topic:28842”]I subscribe to the 3 legit players for 80 minutes club. Clayton, Thorne and Sullivan play 25+ per game. Throw in a little T Will when you want to go small. Leave 120 for Brax, P, Shawn, T Will, Dorn and Woods. Think Ivan and Cam struggle to get much time.[/quote] That works fine until you get foul trouble, an injury or two, or wear down over a season of heavy minutes (post players tend to have more trouble with heavy minutes due to the weight). It also changes how you play. Our team seems to play best when we are pressuring the ball on defense, but that requires post players that can run and can challenge easy baskets on the break. You can’t do that when you’re trying to conserve energy, without going small a lot which good teams will eventually figure out and exploit. And it’s harder to get out a run on offense when the post players need to conserve energy.

It’s also probably part of the reason our teams have often seemed so soft on defense, because guys are scared to foul too much (though I still think they over-adjusted to the early season whistles). Throw in the fact that our bigs are a little foul-prone, especially Clayton, who now has a reputation with refs, unfairly or not. We need better depth in the post to have good chances for success in my view and to mitigate any injuries.

Sometimes teams can scrape by with poor depth over a season, but usually it becomes a factor at some point, often in road games, tournaments, and later in the season as guys wear down or pick up injuries here and there. I’m not sure if the coaches could’ve done anything different to keep Bryan here, but I think losing him, Clark, not getting much from Blakley as a post guy, and missing on several other post players in recruiting will start to bite us next year. Hopefully it’s not really bad (like a season-ending injury to one of the post guys) and essentially sinks the season.[/quote]

I’m with you. We need another big who can at least give us defense, spot minutes, and fouls. I hope we haven’t stopped recruiting though I know the pickings are slim at this point.