One there has been discussion about tweaking the net.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Fan
Two, the net wasn’t a problem the year before when the big East got 5.
Printable View
One there has been discussion about tweaking the net.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Fan
Two, the net wasn’t a problem the year before when the big East got 5.
Another wrinkle....just occurred to me.
This is the last year of the covid exemption where we see these guys playing 5 years.
So after this year, we will be seeing TWO YEARS WORTH of guys that have exhausted their eligibility. That means there will be alot more roster openings, and kind of a typical number of players available to fill those spots. I suddenly realize that its very important to avoid having big holes to fill at the end of next year. i hope the remaining transfers we bring in will have at least 2 years remaining. Gotta be ahead of this....
Another wrinkle....just occurred to me.
This is the last year of the covid exemption where we see these guys playing 5 years.
So after this year, we will be seeing TWO YEARS WORTH of guys that have exhausted their eligibility. That means there will be alot more roster openings, and kind of a typical number of players available to fill those spots. I suddenly realize that its very important to avoid having big holes to fill at the end of next year. i hope the remaining transfers we bring in will have at least 2 years remaining. Gotta be ahead of this....
A different item that I have been seeing as it pertains to the portal. I see varying types of players in it.
1 - the player shopping themselves to the highest bidder.
2 - pushed out player who wasn't good enough for the team they are currently on most likely moving down or out of the sport.
3 - mid-major player looking to increase competition.
4 - good player on the outs with their current coach.
5 - good player whose coach left/fired and looking for a new venue.
Some of these guys you may not want on your roster unless you absolutely have to have them. I am sure coaches look at the same thing.
I find it hard to believe Miller promised any set number of mins be it big or small. Miller obviously expressed interest, stated a role he thought the kid could play, probably stated his philosophy on what it takes to play in his system, while the Furman kid saw what Miller has done with/for other mid major transfer guards.Quote:
Originally Posted by XUBison
I mean Boum increased his previous career assist average by 2 assists per game under Miller compared to what he had done previously. Coaching, system, new expectations can all contribute to better play even when stepping up in competition.
No you are doing two things seemingly purposely just to be negative.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
1. Completely ignoring the two previous seasons where the player shot 36% from 3. Last season seems to be the aberration and we have seen how Miller can help with shot selection and %'s.
2. Assuming Foster is the replacement (or sole replacement) for Quincy when we are a week into portal season. Let it play out before complaining about the lack of shooting.
No, the expectation is always to make the tournament. Obviously that wont always happen but it is the expectation at Xavier. It took a historic event of upsets for the BE to only get 3 teams and some down years from the middle teams. 3 teams is not going to be a regular occurrence in the BE.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Fan
Foster per Xpectation:
His 24.2% Defensive Rebounding percentage (DR%) is truly elite, even for a beast 5 man.
Nunge's DR% was 18.8% in his last season at X. Edey is 25.3%.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba.../keyshawn-hall
This guy would be awesome. 2/3 spot… 6’7 230 with a decent stroke. Yes please.
Creighton and gtown also after him.
Ok, I'll bite.Quote:
Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z
yes, Foster shot 36% as a soph and 35% as a junior. Thats it. end of story. No need to dig any further....
As a soph, Furman as a TEAM took 1054 3 pointers. 31 a game! Most in the Country. Foster was tied for 5th on the team with 81 total. he played 805 minutes of the teams 6950 total minutes (11.6%). But took only 81 of 1054 (7.7%) of the 3 pointers? Thats odd. In fact the TEAM collectively took .152 3 attempts per minutes played, and yet Foster took .101 attempts per minute. So he shot 3 pointers at a rate that was only 2/3rds the frequency of the rest of the team. Why is that? Was he not confident in his shot? Was the COACH not confident in his shot? Was he just never open? I dotn know the answer, but I DO KNOW that its interesting.
As a Junior.... He played 14.5% of the minutes and took....18.2% of the 3's. On a per minute rate, he was at .17 and the team was at .135. So last year he was taking his share of 3's and in fact was #2 on the team in attempts and makes. looking solid. To go a little further, 58% of his shots were from 3. I might have seen these stats and assumed we just recruited Nate Johnson.
And this last year..... he played 11.2% of the minutes and took 16.7% of the 3's. On a per minute rate, he was at .221 while the team was at .147. So now he's taking a dis proportionally high number of the shots. And he shot 29.7% while the rest of the team shot 32.9%.
So who knows? He certainly found the confidence to take more shots, but his percentage really suffered this year. If he was in the high 30s this year, I'd be singing a different tune. So which guy is he? The guy at 30% or the guy at 35%. Makes a huge difference.
btw, he led the team in total rebounds by 42 and only played in 24 of 33 games.