2017-18 Transfers

[quote="austour" post=284834][quote="NCJohnnie" post=284818]Room112 wrote: We really don't have the minutes to offer a grad transfer big, and if someone would do a minutes distribution for next season, you can see that. Figure there are 200 minutes in a game for 5 positions 40 minutes per. Ponds, Simon and Clark are all going to command 30+ minutes and maybe even up to 100 total per game. So off the bat, half of our minutes are gone. Someone want to fill in the rest realistically?

Room112, IDRAFT did just that yesterday on page 5 of the Roster thread. I agree that we don't have starter's minutes to offer a grad big at this point, but we really could use a backup big who can give us 10-15 meaningful mpg. May be too late to find at this point.[/quote]

Quick question to you guys. If there were 12 x 4 star G's and Wing's on the roster would the team need a big at all?[/quote]

Only if he was a 5 star big and took up the 13th roster spot.
 
The assumption that players want to play 30+ mpg is flawed. The high minutes players have higher percentage of injury and as we've seen when we have players doing iron man minutes they often suck wind after a few games of this. At the college level I am guessing that optimal minutes are in the 25 +/- mpg range for smaller players and less than that for bigs. Also likely that the optimal minutes are higher for upper classmen than freshmen and sophs. Stats also tend to go down for higher mpg players in terms of efficiency. Anyone who has been at the free throw line at the end of a long game and can barely lift their arms knows this. Efficiency stats are the big thing now not flashy raw scoring numbers.

At the NBA level this also has changed. Up to the "franchise player" days there was a different approach but when the NBA expanded rosters, mpg even for stars went down and I believe this was at the urging of players not owners about 20 years ago.

A smart big can see a good opportunity to play with our team if he has good hands and knows position and movement. We've got some great passers and we've got guys that get over-defended on both the perimeter and the drive so a big who can catch slick/hard passes will get plenty of higher efficiency opportunities and would be integral on both ends of the floor in creating a high octane offense.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Paul Massell" post=284839]The assumption that players want to play 30+ mpg is flawed. The high minutes players have higher percentage of injury and as we've seen when we have players doing iron man minutes they often suck wind after a few games of this. At the college level I am guessing that optimal minutes are in the 25 +/- mpg range for smaller players and less than that for bigs. Also likely that the optimal minutes are higher for upper classmen than freshmen and sophs. Stats also tend to go down for higher mpg players in terms of efficiency. Anyone who has been at the free throw line at the end of a long game and can barely lift their arms knows this. Efficiency stats are the big thing now not flashy raw scoring numbers.

At the NBA level this also has changed. Up to the "franchise player" days there was a different approach but when the NBA expanded rosters, mpg even for stars went down and I believe this was at the urging of players not owners about 20 years ago.

A smart big can see a good opportunity to play with our team if he has good hands and knows position and movement. We've got some great passers and we've got guys that get over-defended on both the perimeter and the drive so a big who can catch slick/hard passes will get plenty of higher efficiency opportunities and would be integral on both ends of the floor in creating a high octane offense.[/quote]

Great points, Paul. Last year was an aberration because of LoVett's defection.
Ideally, Ponds and our other starters have to be rested to perform at their best.
IMO, the primary reason for our dysfunctional offense last year was that our key guys were bedraggled by the 2nd half--out their 35 - 38 minutes and losing stamina and sucking wind late in games.
I agree that 25+ minutes for our key guys is the ideal. and that would definitely enable a Grad Big and others to get plenty of PT.
I hope our 'bench' is up to the task.
 
Last edited:
Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".
 
[quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote]

Simply not true. During the 2016 National Championship season, they had..........

Daniel Ochefo 6'11" (23 mpg)
Darryl Reynolds 6'8" (17 mpg)
Mikal Briges 6'7" (20 mpg)
 
Last edited:
[quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote] Hopefully we learn to rebound like them because last year with that roster they ranked 71 in the country in rebounding margin and we ranked 335 which is flat out unacceptable

[URL][URL]https://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/team/151/p7[/URL][/URL]
 
[quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote]

Omari Spellman and Eric Paschall played major minutes and are 'listed' at 6'9", Mikal Bridges is listed at 6'7".
Nova had bulk and height.
 
Daniel Ochefu was like 6'9" or 10", a starter and seemed to play close to 30 min a game
 
Last edited:
Ochefu played 32 minutes in title game at 6'9" and Reynolds played 10 minutes at 6'9" and both were over 230 pounds. Ochefu was a starter and key rim protector.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Chicago Days" post=284847][quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote]

Omari Spellman and Eric Paschall played major minutes and are 'listed' at 6'9", Mikal Bridges is listed at 6'7".
Nova had bulk and height.[/quote]

Mea culps on the post. DIdn't notice the '2016' tag!
But JohnnyFan to the rescue! Thanks JF.
 
[quote="JohnnyFan" post=284845][quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote]


Daniel Ochefo[/quote]
Yes Daniel Ochefu 6’11” 23 min per game
and Darryl Walker 6’8” 17 min per game.
They also had 7 guys 6’5” or bigger to help with rebounding and post smaller guards.
BTW Donte D who I believe was a 4-star out of HS won the title game for them this year and will likely play in the NBA averaged 7 minutes as a Freshman! So who says Trimble and Williams and the rest of the bench have to get significant minutes in lieu of a viable grad transfer big?!
 
[quote="Chicago Days" post=284850][quote="Chicago Days" post=284847][quote="AlBovino" post=284844]Villanova won the 2016 National championship with no starter or reserve who played meaningful minutes being taller than 6' 6".[/quote]

Omari Spellman and Eric Paschall played major minutes and are 'listed' at 6'9", Mikal Bridges is listed at 6'7".
Nova had bulk and height.[/quote]

Mea culps on the post. DIdn't notice the '2016' tag!
But JohnnyFan to the rescue! Thanks JF.[/quote]

Yeah my bad also because I didnt notice the 2016 so apologies to Bovino on that

I stand by my sucking at rebounding will get us nowhere point though

Nova was 139 in 2016 which is still a far cry from our 335 this year

https://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/change_sport_year_div
 
Last edited:
In fact Ochefu was a significant enough part of that team to get drafted in the late first or early second round. Successful college teams w/o at least one key big are few and far between .
 
[quote="OLV72" post=284829][quote="Paultzman" post=284725][quote="OLV72" post=284716]Are we all so sure that the 6 foot 8 4 star guy with the leg problem is not ready to contribute next season?

I know we heard that he's not healthy yet. I'm hoping what we're hearing is wrong.[/quote]

From staf feedback, little is expected of him. Secondly he would have been guy nudged out if they needed roster spot. Lastly, he is raw, rail thin & a small forward. Take a look at the guys sitting out this year and it easy to see PT will be tough to get for him.[/quote]

Paultz,

Thanks for the response. It does seem to be a key decision the staff is making this off-season by sticking with him. I am thinking they prefer him for the long term over the remaining one year transfers or the ones that are coming out late. I am hoping we see him make it on the court - even if it takes till January when the real games start. He should be a key player down the road.[/quote]

NM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote="austour" post=284834][quote="NCJohnnie" post=284818]Room112 wrote: We really don't have the minutes to offer a grad transfer big, and if someone would do a minutes distribution for next season, you can see that. Figure there are 200 minutes in a game for 5 positions 40 minutes per. Ponds, Simon and Clark are all going to command 30+ minutes and maybe even up to 100 total per game. So off the bat, half of our minutes are gone. Someone want to fill in the rest realistically?

Room112, IDRAFT did just that yesterday on page 5 of the Roster thread. I agree that we don't have starter's minutes to offer a grad big at this point, but we really could use a backup big who can give us 10-15 meaningful mpg. May be too late to find at this point.[/quote]

Quick question to you guys. If there were 12 x 4 star G's and Wing's on the roster would the team need a big at all?[/quote]

I know you are tyring to be cute but I will answer seriously anyway.

Yes we would, and nobody is saying we would not. And I will also say (as I do every single time I post about this, every time) that it is a handicap to play without a backup big man this year. But what keeps getting glossed over is how bad a perimeter shooting team this was last year and how that also needed to be addressed. Figueroa was brought in to help with that and he won't be able to do that unless he plays. Ditto for Dixon.

The team didn't come in 9th because of one issue, there were multiple issues. I agree they are not all fixed, and big man depth is one. That's why I'm not picking them to win the National Championship.
 
[quote="Paul Massell" post=284839]The assumption that players want to play 30+ mpg is flawed. The high minutes players have higher percentage of injury and as we've seen when we have players doing iron man minutes they often suck wind after a few games of this. At the college level I am guessing that optimal minutes are in the 25 +/- mpg range for smaller players and less than that for bigs. Also likely that the optimal minutes are higher for upper classmen than freshmen and sophs. Stats also tend to go down for higher mpg players in terms of efficiency. Anyone who has been at the free throw line at the end of a long game and can barely lift their arms knows this. Efficiency stats are the big thing now not flashy raw scoring numbers.

At the NBA level this also has changed. Up to the "franchise player" days there was a different approach but when the NBA expanded rosters, mpg even for stars went down and I believe this was at the urging of players not owners about 20 years ago.

A smart big can see a good opportunity to play with our team if he has good hands and knows position and movement. We've got some great passers and we've got guys that get over-defended on both the perimeter and the drive so a big who can catch slick/hard passes will get plenty of higher efficiency opportunities and would be integral on both ends of the floor in creating a high octane offense.[/quote]

Before I posted a rough estimate of how minutes could be divied up in 2018 I looked at the Big East teams that made the NCAA tournament last year and checked what they did.

Villanova - 2 players over 30 MPG, 2 at 29, one at 28, one at 27
Seton Hall - 4 over 30 MPG
Xavier - 3 over 30 MPG
Providence - 4 over 30 MPG
Butler - 3 over 30 MPG
Creighton - 2 pver 30 MPG

That led me to my conservative estimate of Ponds and Simon at 33, Clark at 30, and Keita at 25. And as the averages above are based on the entire season it stands to reason that you would be pushing your best players for more minutes in closer games against better competition. The two teams in the Big East that came the closest to your proposal was Creighton and Xavier. The other eight all had tight rotations and many players near, at, or over 30 MPG.

I: agree 25 MPG sounds optimal, and I was surprised how many good teams have to ride a tight rotation, but that's what I found. My best guess on why is how much more roster churn there is now, not just at SJU but within the sport overall.
 
[quote="OLV72" post=284829][quote="Paultzman" post=284725][quote="OLV72" post=284716]Are we all so sure that the 6 foot 8 4 star guy with the leg problem is not ready to contribute next season?

I know we heard that he's not healthy yet. I'm hoping what we're hearing is wrong.[/quote]

From staf feedback, little is expected of him. Secondly he would have been guy nudged out if they needed roster spot. Lastly, he is raw, rail thin & a small forward. Take a look at the guys sitting out this year and it easy to see PT will be tough to get for him.[/quote]

Paultz,

Thanks for the response. It does seem to be a key decision the staff is making this off-season by sticking with him. I am thinking they prefer him for the long term over the remaining one year transfers or the ones that are coming out late. I am hoping we see him make it on the court - even if it takes till January when the real games start. He should be a key player down the road.[/quote] I don’t read it that way. I think if we can get a grad transfer big, he would be gone. Sadly, we did not:(
 
any juco big guys still on the board ? They'd be able to get very solid minutes the first year and huge minutes the following year with clark graduating
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top