Caraher

Q

QueensBall

Member
Fan since the early-mid 90's born & raised in Queens, moved to the West Coast a few years back. Lurking on this site for the past year and a half has helped fill the void of not having anyone to talk SJU hoops with aside from when my poor wife lets me rant aloud about it during games. Hopefully less ranting and more praising in the near future.

Wanted to take a moment to talk about Caraher since I've heard so little about him. I know basing things off of highlight vids is often folly but I rewatched a couple of his (which is what hoop-starved lunatics do in the off-season, right?) and although he is certainly the slow-footed, white-guy 3 pt bombing cliche we probably all originally pegged him as, I wonder if he can be a little more?

He appears to be a good outside shooter with his feet set but he's also a much bigger guy than I realized. One of the things that was encouraging about his highlights is that he appears to understand spacing better than most young guys. He realizes his size allows him to space the floor in ways other than just camping out on the perimeter. He goes down to the block and although he isn't quick, he uses little faints, spins, up and under type moves to score down low. I wonder if his size and offensive intuition may allow him to be plugged into some interesting lineups and let him get more burn than I originally anticipated. I won't pretend to know anything about him other than watching a few videos so it's possible he's an atrocious defender or there's some other reason that will prevent him from seeing the floor much. Anyone more informed about the guy have an opinion? As you can see based on this post I'll also gladly accept wild speculation and theories backed up by very little knowledge :)

=322s
 
Nice post QB. Looks like Caraher will be our best pure shooter for sure. Always nice to have one of those and do like the fact that he has good size. Hoping he can be a contributor off the bench.
 
[quote="NCJohnnie" post=351466]Nice post QB. Looks like Caraher will be our best pure shooter for sure. Always nice to have one of those and do like the fact that he has good size. Hoping he can be a contributor off the bench.[/quote]

Nice welcome post, NCJ.
Lemme piggy-back on your sentiment and also welcome QB to Redmen.com-land!
FWIW, I agree about Caraher.
He may be a good 'deep' threat.
We shall see.
 
[quote="NCJohnnie" post=351466]Nice post QB. Looks like Caraher will be our best pure shooter for sure. Always nice to have one of those and do like the fact that he has good size. Hoping he can be a contributor off the bench.[/quote]

Word I have heard from several folks who have seen him is he is crafty and should help this year, but not the pure, dead eye shooter that has been portrayed. Hopefully those opinions are wrong. I do believe this staff can put him him in a position to succeed however.
 
[quote="Paultzman" post=351469][quote="NCJohnnie" post=351466]Nice post QB. Looks like Caraher will be our best pure shooter for sure. Always nice to have one of those and do like the fact that he has good size. Hoping he can be a contributor off the bench.[/quote]

Word I have heard from several folks who have seen him is he is crafty and should help this year, but not the pure, dead eye shooter that has been portrayed. Hopefully those opinions are wrong. I do believe this staff can put him him in a position to succeed however.[/quote]

Watching the tape, I saw a guy post, drive and shoot a little bit on the move. Nothing in that tape suggested he is just a 3 point specialist or that he can play at the BE level. But ditto playing at this level for the other 4 newcomers and last year’s 3 freshman.
 
[quote="Logen" post=351471][quote="Paultzman" post=351469][quote="NCJohnnie" post=351466]Nice post QB. Looks like Caraher will be our best pure shooter for sure. Always nice to have one of those and do like the fact that he has good size. Hoping he can be a contributor off the bench.[/quote]

Word I have heard from several folks who have seen him is he is crafty and should help this year, but not the pure, dead eye shooter that has been portrayed. Hopefully those opinions are wrong. I do believe this staff can put him him in a position to succeed however.[/quote]

Watching the tape, I saw a guy post, drive and shoot a little bit on the move. Nothing in that tape suggested he is just a 3 point specialist or that he can play at the BE level. But ditto playing at this level for the other 4 newcomers and last year’s 3 freshman.[/quote]

I'm hoping he can be a good 6th or 7th man. He has a nice shooting form and his percentages are better than Trimble and Simon. I question his foot speed and lateral defense at this level of competition but Mullin was slow but crafty and he did ok for himself.
 
Thanks guys. Sounds like he may not be the next Fletcher Magee but I've been slowly learning to temper expectations anyway. Hope for greatness, expect competence and be thrilled with anything above competence. If he can shoot anywhere between 35-40% from 3, values the basketball and play decent enough D that he can be on the court for 15 mins a game I'm going to call that a victory for us.
 
[quote="QueensBall" post=351477]Thanks guys. Sounds like he may not be the next Fletcher Magee but I've been slowly learning to temper expectations anyway. Hope for greatness, expect competence and be thrilled with anything above competence. If he can shoot anywhere between 35-40% from 3, values the basketball and play decent enough D that he can be on the court for 15 mins a game I'm going to call that a victory for us.[/quote]

Well, he shot 36% from 3 and 52% from 2-pt range at Houston-Baptist in the Southland Conference as a freshman.
I’d expect some fall-off from those levels but also depends how he’s progressed as a player and how he can adapt and is used in CMAs system.
We shall see.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=351472]I'm hoping he can be a good 6th or 7th man.[/quote]

I think 8th man is absolute highest he gets. And change that to 9th man if we land a PG.
 
[quote="L J S A" post=351481][quote="Class of 72" post=351472]I'm hoping he can be a good 6th or 7th man.[/quote]

I think 8th man is absolute highest he gets. And change that to 9th man if we land a PG.[/quote] i think you nailed it. If he becomes a quality 8 or 9 guy knowing how many players Anderson runs that’s enough for me and I think very realistic
 
I have been involved in basketball in one way or another for 50+ years and it still never ceases to amaze me, and makes me jealous, that some people can judge and rate players they have never seen play. :p :p :p
 
Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.
 
[quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351499]Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.[/quote]

We all know the game, rankings after the top 10-20 players are pretty useless. So are stars, even you’re very generalized comparison. Like you said it is all speculation until you see a player, which was my point. Especially when you are recruiting for a particular style of play, like Anderson. We were chock full of stars on our two last NCAA teams and tanked both years.
 
It’s all a jigsaw puzzle. The right players have the fit the right puzzle with the right coach leading them.

Who was Pascal Siakam coming out of HS as a recent example. Not highly rated. Two great years in school went to NBA. Did some time in G league and now look. I want players that will fit our puzzle. Will run thru wall for coach and teammates. That won’t cower and run first sign of adversity. We’ve had some top players as others have mentioned. And they have been polarizing because with their talents also came quite a few warts and headaches
 
[quote="QueensBall" post=351464]Fan since the early-mid 90's born & raised in Queens, moved to the West Coast a few years back. Lurking on this site for the past year and a half has helped fill the void of not having anyone to talk SJU hoops with aside from when my poor wife lets me rant aloud about it during games. Hopefully less ranting and more praising in the near future.

Wanted to take a moment to talk about Caraher since I've heard so little about him. I know basing things off of highlight vids is often folly but I rewatched a couple of his (which is what hoop-starved lunatics do in the off-season, right?) and although he is certainly the slow-footed, white-guy 3 pt bombing cliche we probably all originally pegged him as, I wonder if he can be a little more?

He appears to be a good outside shooter with his feet set but he's also a much bigger guy than I realized. One of the things that was encouraging about his highlights is that he appears to understand spacing better than most young guys. He realizes his size allows him to space the floor in ways other than just camping out on the perimeter. He goes down to the block and although he isn't quick, he uses little faints, spins, up and under type moves to score down low. I wonder if his size and offensive intuition may allow him to be plugged into some interesting lineups and let him get more burn than I originally anticipated. I won't pretend to know anything about him other than watching a few videos so it's possible he's an atrocious defender or there's some other reason that will prevent him from seeing the floor much. Anyone more informed about the guy have an opinion? As you can see based on this post I'll also gladly accept wild speculation and theories backed up by very little knowledge :)

=322s[/quote]

Queens Ball
Thanks for the insights and information -here’s a statement that strikes me as promising about C’s ability to contribute at the BE level:
“they (St. Johns) were able to beat out more nationally prominent programs such as Oklahoma State and Nevada for his services”
 
[quote="Moose" post=351507]It’s all a jigsaw puzzle. The right players have the fit the right puzzle with the right coach leading them.

Who was Pascal Siakam coming out of HS as a recent example. Not highly rated. Two great years in school went to NBA. Did some time in G league and now look. I want players that will fit our puzzle. Will run thru wall for coach and teammates. That won’t cower and run first sign of adversity. We’ve had some top players as others have mentioned. And they have been polarizing because with their talents also came quite a few warts and headaches[/quote]

Agree to some extent. Willard at the Hall has grabbed a lot of guys without gaudy numbers and rankings and done well. I’m ok with it if they are warriors.
 
[quote="Logen" post=351505][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351499]Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.[/quote]

We all know the game, rankings after the top 10-20 players are pretty useless. So are stars, even you’re very generalized comparison. Like you said it is all speculation until you see a player, which was my point. Especially when you are recruiting for a particular style of play, like Anderson. We were chock full of stars on our two last NCAA teams and tanked both years.[/quote] I’m referring to the average fan, not you nor staff. That is all we have to use to judge players , plus the opinions of people like you and info from those close to the program. But generally speaking I’d rather get a player ranked 50 than 200. The stars system isn’t an exact science but it is done by recruiting evaluators.Of course Keita was a top 100 3rd year player plus Freud and Yakwe were also 4 stars and look how that turned out. It is also important to have complimentary pieces and good chemistry. Hopefully MA got us hard working diamonds in the rough. Other factors include attitude, discipline, work ethic and going to classes.But you still need skill.
 
Last edited:
[quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351513][quote="Logen" post=351505][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351499]Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.[/quote]

We all know the game, rankings after the top 10-20 players are pretty useless. So are stars, even you’re very generalized comparison. Like you said it is all speculation until you see a player, which was my point. Especially when you are recruiting for a particular style of play, like Anderson. We were chock full of stars on our two last NCAA teams and tanked both years.[/quote] I’m referring to the average fan, not you nor staff. That is all we have to use to judge players , plus the opinions of people like you and info from those close to the program. But generally speaking I’d rather get a player ranked 50 than 200. The stars system isn’t an exact science but it is done by recruiting evaluators.Of course Keita was a top 100 3rd year player plus Freud and Yakwe were also 4 stars and look how that turned out. It is also important to have complimentary pieces and good chemistry. Hopefully MA got us hard working diamonds in the rough. Other factors include attitude, discipline, work ethic and going to classes.But you still need skill.[/quote]

All good, understand and generally agree. My comment was somewhat tongue in cheek to those who choose to give more detailed opinions based on,IMO, nothing of substance.
 
[quote="Logen" post=351517][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351513][quote="Logen" post=351505][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351499]Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.[/quote]

We all know the game, rankings after the top 10-20 players are pretty useless. So are stars, even you’re very generalized comparison. Like you said it is all speculation until you see a player, which was my point. Especially when you are recruiting for a particular style of play, like Anderson. We were chock full of stars on our two last NCAA teams and tanked both years.[/quote] I’m referring to the average fan, not you nor staff. That is all we have to use to judge players , plus the opinions of people like you and info from those close to the program. But generally speaking I’d rather get a player ranked 50 than 200. The stars system isn’t an exact science but it is done by recruiting evaluators.Of course Keita was a top 100 3rd year player plus Freud and Yakwe were also 4 stars and look how that turned out. It is also important to have complimentary pieces and good chemistry. Hopefully MA got us hard working diamonds in the rough. Other factors include attitude, discipline, work ethic and going to classes.But you still need skill.[/quote]

All good, understand and generally agree. My comment was somewhat tongue in cheek to those who choose to give more detailed opinions based on,IMO, nothing of substance.[/quote]

I admit that with this new staff and players I don't know much to offer good opinions and that is a relief in a sense. Finally we can just root for the home team.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=351547][quote="Logen" post=351517][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351513][quote="Logen" post=351505][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=351499]Judging incoming players are done by looking there HS rankings and performance at previous schools. Generally speaking a 5 star player is better then a 3 star play. But it’s still speculation.[/quote]

We all know the game, rankings after the top 10-20 players are pretty useless. So are stars, even you’re very generalized comparison. Like you said it is all speculation until you see a player, which was my point. Especially when you are recruiting for a particular style of play, like Anderson. We were chock full of stars on our two last NCAA teams and tanked both years.[/quote] I’m referring to the average fan, not you nor staff. That is all we have to use to judge players , plus the opinions of people like you and info from those close to the program. But generally speaking I’d rather get a player ranked 50 than 200. The stars system isn’t an exact science but it is done by recruiting evaluators.Of course Keita was a top 100 3rd year player plus Freud and Yakwe were also 4 stars and look how that turned out. It is also important to have complimentary pieces and good chemistry. Hopefully MA got us hard working diamonds in the rough. Other factors include attitude, discipline, work ethic and going to classes.But you still need skill.[/quote]

All good, understand and generally agree. My comment was somewhat tongue in cheek to those who choose to give more detailed opinions based on,IMO, nothing of substance.[/quote]

I admit that with this new staff and players I don't know much to offer good opinions and that is a relief in a sense. Finally we can just root for the home team.[/quote]

Generally, neither do I, although if a player is from or has a connection to Jersey, I can generally get pretty good info. I agree with the rooting mind set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top