The hidden problem with a lack of depth.

[NYCorange]

Is that it makes players far more likely to turn pro before the program is ready for them to go. Think about it. Let's say Dion and Scoop aren't there MCW's freshman year. What's the chance that he tears it up, goes pro and leaves us without a pg (or with redshirt freshman TC as our only sg, since Triche is at the pg). And conversely, if MCW had stayed for his junior year, we would have had Ennis for an extra year, maybe all 4. If Richardson doesn't get the 38 minutes a game this year because of lack of depth at the 3 and pg spot, maybe he doesn't go pro, and maybe he stays all 4 because he's now older and has less chance. We dodged a bullet with Lydon staying. Cmac turning pro gave him a perfect platform to potentially do so as well.

All of this is to say that Andrew White is immensely important, partly because we need him next year, but also because it could easily be the difference between Tyus Battle leaving next year and him staying for 2017-2018. I'm happy for all the SU players who have made it to the NBA, but that, coupled with our scholarship situation creates a vicious cycle.

 

[Dave85]

Is that it makes players far more likely to turn pro before the program is ready for them to go. Think about it. Let's say Dion and Scoop aren't there MCW's freshman year. What's the chance that he tears it up, goes pro and leaves us without a pg (or with redshirt freshman TC as our only sg, since Triche is at the pg). And conversely, if MCW had stayed for his junior year, we would have had Ennis for an extra year, maybe all 4. If Richardson doesn't get the 38 minutes a game this year because of lack of depth at the 3 and pg spot, maybe he doesn't go pro, and maybe he stays all 4 because he's now older and has less chance. We dodged a bullet with Lydon staying. Cmac turning pro gave him a perfect platform to potentially do so as well.

All of this is to say that Andrew White is immensely important, partly because we need him next year, but also because it could easily be the difference between Tyus Battle leaving next year and him staying for 2017-2018. I'm happy for all the SU players who have made it to the NBA, but that, coupled with our scholarship situation creates a vicious cycle.

We have a good chance to get White. A lot of good pieces are in place for a really good team.

In today's CBB game, I think Battle is going to be 1-and-done. I think he's a better player than Malachi. We shall see.

 

[jordoo]

The NBA drafts on potential. If you are on a stacked team but look great in your 12-15min a game as a frosh you still go. If anything the more they see you the more they question if you can improve the weaknesses. Mal put it together on the big stage, great for him.

 

[Townie72]

So the answer to keeping players with NBA potential (or even current skills and abilities) is not to play them or play them less?

If we had teams loaded with similar and very high talent levels, would this dissuade players from coming to SU knowing their chances to go to the NBA at the earliest possible point would be reduced by the fact that they wouldn't get the exposure because they were sitting on the bench sharing PT?

Sound crazy to me. But the craziest part of this is the assumption that we could recruit that many very good players.

 

[PeteCalvin]

So the answer to keeping players with NBA potential (or even current skills and abilities) is not to play them or play them less?

If we had teams loaded with similar and very high talent levels, would this dissuade players from coming to SU knowing their chances to go to the NBA at the earliest possible point would be reduced by the fact that they wouldn't get the exposure because they were sitting on the bench sharing PT?

Sound crazy to me. But the craziest part of this is the assumption that we could recruit that many very good players.

Jim Calhoun put a couple of players in his dog house as freshman which led to them basically having to come back the next year, so that strategy does work sometimes. The most notable I remember was Charlie Villanueva. Calhoun limited his playing time the latter half of his freshman season, basically because he could. CV was looked at as draft pick that year (2003-2004) due to his accolades coming into college.

 

[Townie72]

Jim Calhoun put a couple of players in his dog house as freshman which led to them basically having to come back the next year, so that strategy does work sometimes. The most notable I remember was Charlie Villanueva. Calhoun limited his playing time the latter half of his freshman season, basically because he could. CV was looked at as draft pick that year (2003-2004) due to his accolades coming into college.

Let's be clear here.

Are you saying that Calhoun restricted the playing time of CV, not because he wanted to put play his best players and win that year, but because it would mean CV MIGHT be back the following year because his exposure had been limited? Or that UConn was so stacked, Calhoun could sit his best players and still win?

That might have been the way things worked out, but that as a conscious strategy seems to me to be way beyond the pale.

And do you think the NBA scouts could be fooled by this ploy? Or are they sitting home selecting NBA prospects by reading UConn box scores on minutes played and key stats?

C'mon. The hole premise of this is dizzy. The solution to players leaving early is to sit them down? And the way that you do that is to recruit so many good players that you can sit these NBA-potential players down and still win games?

It's actually not an uninteresting question. But when you think it through, its impractical.

 

[NYCorange]

Let me be clear, I am not saying (although maybe others are) that you should sit kids to keep them off the NBA radar. But sometimes, a lack of depth gives kids exposure that allows them to jump earlier than expected. I think MCW is a good example. If he'd played 30 min a game his freshman season, I think there's a pretty good chance he jumps. Same with Ennis, if MCW is in front of him and Ennis plays 10 min a game, none in crunch time, there's NO WAY he jumps. Ennis didn't get drafted on flashes of potential, he got drafted for his savy, measured, pure point guard play, little of which would have been noticed by the NBA if he was just playing the backup spot. Battle may be gone after next year, but to me (and I could be wrong) he doesn't project as an "overwhelming potential" sort of player. Instead, he's a skilled guard who's got good measurables. 25 min a game as your team's 3rd option might not get you drafted, especially if you're not asked to show all of your skills. 35 min a game as your teams main shot creator might.

 

[Townie72]

NYCOrange, my reading comprehension skills must be failing.

Because what you say you are not doing --- "Let me be clear, I am not saying (although maybe others are) that you should sit kids to keep them off the NBA radar" --- is exactly what you are saying.

The argument seems to be the more good players you have the less exposure any of them get and the less likely they will go really early to the NBA.

I guess that might be possible. But exactly how do you get all these ACC level players? Your underlying complaint is the number of quality players on the roster, is it not?

 

[NYCorange]

NYCOrange, my reading comprehension skills must be failing.

Because what you say you are not doing --- "Let me be clear, I am not saying (although maybe others are) that you should sit kids to keep them off the NBA radar" --- is exactly what you are saying.

The argument seems to be the more good players you have the less exposure any of them get and the less likely they will go really early to the NBA.

I guess that might be possible. But exactly how do you get all these ACC level players? Your underlying complaint is the number of quality players on the roster, is it not?

I'm not saying you should sit them when they should be playing, I'm saying that ideally, you have the players to keep freshman who aren't that good (but have lots of potential) from getting the exposure necessary to leave before actually contributing to the program. And yes, my underlying complaint (well, more of an observation since I don't fault the staff--it's just the intersection of kids leaving and the NCAA sanctions) is that we don't have enough quality kids, namely developed upperclassman, to keep from having to play less-ready-but-full-of-NBA-potential freshman/sophomores. It's a vicious cycle that feeds itself--kids leave, so we have to play freshman who then leave, so we have to play freshman that leave, etc...