Players auditioning for team?

[newshock1234]

http://www.shockernet.net/sn/viewtopic.php?t=2

[RoyalShock]

newshock, I appreciate that, but what is being discussed here is a little different.

What we definitely don't want are people saying "I heard so-and-so is transferring" or "so-and-so isn't making his grades".

The distinction is if it's being "reported" as actual/factual, without a supporting link to an official report, then it's not appropriate. If it's just hypothetical speculation, it's not a big problem.

[shockdawg]

Winthrop did just fine during the regular season against the big boys. the problem in the tournament was the seedings. when you are playing a 1 or 2 seed year after year see how your record is. i seriously doubt the mvc or 4th place teams from a bcs conference would fare any better in those circumstances. what really hurt the wu was the conference rating and the subsequent rpi. marshall did just fine coaching "hustle" (which i feel is an innate bit of temperament vs something gained in practice) or coaching up talent. Winthrop is a more talented team than WSU this year and arguably the same was true of last year. g needs athetes who can execute his style of play and attitudes that match his competitiveness. having watched stutz last summer, he's got the talent and i'll trust g has checked out his heart and not with a cardiologist.

[Maggie]

Shockdawg kind of beat me to it….but anyway:

Spangler – I don't know what your point is either. But I don't think you should judge Marshall's system on his success rate playing in the NCAA tournament and I don't think comparing the MVC success to his old conference is fair either.

Winthrop, despite its record, always had a very low seed. I am not going to look it up but I will bet they faced 1, 2 or 3 seeds in the first round each year. One of the reasons Marshall accepted the WSU job is the fact that no matter how many wins his Winthrop teams had – they still received crappy seeds. When MVC teams have had those types of seeds – they don't have a high success rate either. The MVC is obviously on a different level than the Big South. However, I think Marshall's Winthrop teams would have done very well in the MVC.

Many of the players on this team were recruited and signed by Turgeon for his system. Marshall has a completely different style. Some of the players may be having a hard time making the adjustment or they simply don't have the skill set required.

[SpanglerFan316]

Spangler, I'm not 100% sure what point you are driving at, but having watched Winthrop play in person twice (once in our Sweet Sixteen year when they should have beaten Tenn. and once in the USVI this year) I did not conclude that Marshall's teams lacked the athleticism or talent to compete in the MVC. They were a first round winner last year, beating a higher seeded ND team.

The seedings are often suspect; was ND that good? On the other hand, if Marshall's team had to play #1 or #2 seeds in the first round, this makes it difficult to win in the NCAA tourney.

I also think Marshall will be able to recruit a higher level, perhaps a much higher level, player to WSU than he could to Winthrop. He has a lot more to sell here, including, at least this year, playing time.

I agree. I just wonder what type of players he will recruit. Players who can shoot or players who are athletic? Players like Brandon Rush might not come to WSU. I think shooters (e.g. Paul Miller) are more valuable than players who are athletic (e.g. Wendell).

In regard to the half court offense, I think Marshall's system has those out the wazoo. If you are not seeing it this year, I think it's more of a factor of new players not running it yet. Frankly, I think that will also be a factor next year, given that we will probably have at least six new players, and perhaps more.

I look for the 09-10 year to be a good year for Shocker basketball.

I REALLY hope you are right. I think Marshall will be a fine coach for WSU but I have not been impressed by the team's play so far.

:goshocks:

[SpanglerFan316]

Shockdawg kind of beat me to it….but anyway:

Spangler – I don't know what your point is either. But I don't think you should judge Marshall's system on his success rate playing in the NCAA tournament and I don't think comparing the MVC success to his old conference is fair either.

I agree that playing #1-#2 seeds is tough. You still have to beat them if you want the national title.

Winthrop, despite its record, always had a very low seed. I am not going to look it up but I will bet they faced 1, 2 or 3 seeds in the first round each year. One of the reasons Marshall accepted the WSU job is the fact that no matter how many wins his Winthrop teams had – they still received crappy seeds. When MVC teams have had those types of seeds – they don't have a high success rate either. The MVC is obviously on a different level than the Big South. However, I think Marshall's Winthrop teams would have done very well in the MVC.

Many of the players on this team were recruited and signed by Turgeon for his system. Marshall has a completely different style. Some of the players may be having a hard time making the adjustment or they simply don't have the skill set required.

With Turgeon and when he had the players, we knew his offensive system. Involve the center in the offense, play an inside-outside game and have good shooters. With the right players, his system can work very well. With Marshall, it seems like our offense is (i) shoot the three, (ii) get baskets in transition and (iii) use backdoor cuts and set plays which will work if the other team makes an error. Our current offense seems to rely on making threes or having the opponent make mistakes. Against a zone, I think we are in trouble. In Turgeon's offense, we had the shooters to feast on a zone defense. It will be interesting to see what type of player Marshall brings in.

[JVShocker_old]

See, this is exactly why players and family should stay away from message boards, that and what I am about to say. 8)

Clemente and Griskenas were/are short term solutions for this season. They'll provide a transition for next seasons "players". Read into that what you will, next season he will bring in players and probably starters, albeit young starters, not newcomers who are going to take back seats and fill roles behind the current group of whomever-they-may-be-remaining players. I'm not sure how many players on the current roster even fit the Marshall "mold". Ellis seems to fit, possibly Durley, but that's the end of it from where I sit.

I don't think PJ even falls into the category of type of player GM would recruit. Yes, PJ is a great team player and a good role player, but he's not a superstar, scorer or creator. Mo Evans (last WSU pro player?) was an incredible talent offensively and not-so-bad defensively, and he took the long, long road to the NBA. It won't happen for PJ, and until he accepts that and gets back to playing his role, I don't see how this team can compete well under whatever system they will employ to win this season. But this is all temporary.

Marshall seems to be looking for scorers and playmakers for his system, and there just isn't a wealth of that on the team right now sitting on the bench. Marshall is paid to win basketball games and that's what he's going to do, and I imagine he'll do it his way. He cannot do what he does best unless he's given the correct resources (or players). I happen to think that means changes for next season, even more than the 4 players we have currently signed. So I fully expect Ellis to return, Durley probably, and beyond that I don't have a clue. I support the current team, however, and will root for the Shockers until the final game horn sounds sometime next March. :goshocks:

[Maggie]

Spangler,

Yes, eventually you will have to beat a high seed to win a national title. I just have a problem judging a team, a program or a conference based up NCAA success if you do not put it in context. One of the arguments BCS schools make against conferences like the MVC is that the MVC does not deserve an additional at-large bid (or should not get a good seed) because the conference teams had not had "same" success in the NCAA tournament. Which I think is a bogus self-serving position.

Turgeon's system was very structured, which was part of the reason he had some success with "inferior" talent. I understand where you are coming from because there is a certain comfort level with Turgeon's system. It is a good solid offense and it is what you are used to seeing. The first time my buddy in Wichita saw it live – he called me from the game to tell me WSU is actually running an offense. I think Marshall's system, correct me if I am wrong, requires the players to make more decisions on the court. Which means the players need to have a high basketball IQ – which explains why MB picked up the system so quickly. In the future, I think one of the advantages of Marshall's system is that it will be easier to make adjustments during the game or at half time – something I think Turgeon's teams had a hard time doing. What you are seeing right now is probably an abridged version of what Marshall wants to do and/or players simply not executing for various reasons.

With regard to what kind of players Marshall will recruit just take a look at the recruiting page. They all seem to be pretty good shooters in addition to being athletic. He also seems to be going after taller guards Murry and Kyles are both listed at 6'3". Hannah is the exception at 6'0" (who knows how tall he really is) but from what I have read – the kid is a very good PG who can also score when asked to. And then you have Stutz who by all accounts is very skilled for his age and height. Looks good on paper to me.

Also, don't forget about Ellis, Hawkins, Clemente and Mantas. Clemente has been solid. I still think Griskenas will contribute and Ellis is starting to come around. In addition, you will like Hawkins next year. Not a bad recruiting class on short notice.

[SpanglerFan316]

Maggie: There is no question that Marshall seems to be a good recruiter. KU, UNC, UCLA, etc. will get the extremely athletic players who are good shooters; Gregg may have to accept some players who have flaws. I'm curious about which types of flaws he will accept.

One criticism of Turgeon was his (apparently) poor in-game adjustments. I expected Marshall to make the best of his current group of players and I'm not sure this is happening. I should (and will) wait until the end of the season to judge but I expected more. For example, I believe Hatch is said to be a good shooter. Against UMKC's zone, why not accept reduced athleticism and use Hatch as a zone buster?

[DoubleJayAlum]

In regard to the half court offense, I think Marshall's system has those out the wazoo. If you are not seeing it this year, I think it's more of a factor of new players not running it yet. Frankly, I think that will also be a factor next year, given that we will probably have at least six new players, and perhaps more.

I think the bolded phrase in the above quote is a cop-out. We have only ONE returning starter this year and NINE players that are either freshmen or have never played at CU before, yet they are all seeing the court. And yes, we have a pretty complex offensive system. While I agree bigger guys need a little more time than guards to develop, its usually because they need to add size and muscle mass, not to "learn the system".

My outsider's view is the JV Shocker is right on (and I made that same prediction last summer). The current players are, in effect, auditioning for a spot next year. Marshall will probably bring in new guys (mainly JUCOs, but maybe a couple of frosh as well) to replace a lot of the existing guys. New guys that will play right away and that possess the skill sets he thinks are needed to succeed in his system. That doesn't mean that there is necessarily anything wrong with the current players; its just that they don't have the proper skill sets to run Marshall's system. I think Marshall is in a tough position because the switch-over from Turgeon's heavily controlled system to a more open system is like night and day and requires completely different player types.

PS - I also think some of you are giving up on this year a little early; it's only mid December.

[wu_shizzle]

For example, I believe Hatch is said to be a good shooter. Against UMKC's zone, why not accept reduced athleticism and use Hatch as a zone buster?

For the same reason you don't use Ryan Bradley and David King just because they're 6'10 250lbs, they are more of a liability than an asset.

[Maggie]

Spangler,

I'm sure the players Marshall has recruited have flaws. Like I wrote – they look good on paper but we have been excited about recruits in the past. However, it does appear that Stutz, Hannah, Kyles and Murry are of a higher caliber then recruits we inked in the past – I think (I hope) they will require less "seasoning" so to speak. Plus, I really like the size Marshall recruits – especially at the 2 and 3. I like big guards and I like the 3 to be 6'7" to 6'9". I don't know what flaws Marshall would accept in a player.

I think you may be right in that Marshall is not adapting his system to the players but requiring that they adapt to him. In the long run, I think this is a good thing but in the short term it may look sloppy. Everyone says Marshall runs a complicated system which I am sure is part of the problem right now. It also may be true that Marshall overestimated the ability of the current players to adapt – meaning they just don't have the skill set to play in his system. I am not willing to make that judgment just yet. Just like you, I will wait until the season is over.

I don't know why Marshall didn't play Hatch. I admit the thought of playing Hatch did cross my mind the past couple of games --- Hatch is a good shooter. Putting someone like Hatch in a tight game like that; however, is risky. It is possible that Marshall believed (as I did) that someone was bound to hit a shot. Frankly, I can't remember another team shooting as bad as WSU has the past couple of games. I still have to believe they are better than the stat line indicates.

[SpanglerFan316]

For example, I believe Hatch is said to be a good shooter. Against UMKC's zone, why not accept reduced athleticism and use Hatch as a zone buster?

For the same reason you don't use Ryan Bradley and David King just because they're 6'10 250lbs, they are more of a liability than an asset.

You can't really tell how a player will do until you see him in games. Remember how Mekel was tightly controlled by Turgeon until he was allowed to play his game in the MVC tourney? Considering how easily UMKC players were getting open or driving to the basket, it is hard to imagine Hatch as being a worse defender than the players on the court who could not seem to stop UMKC from scoring. If Hatch hits a few threes, WSU is in a better position to win. If he gets blocked or can't hit his shot, one learns something about his ability to contribute to the team.

Bottom Line: Do you know that Hatch is "more of a liability than an asset"?

[Ricky Del Rio]

This is an interesting conversation.

I am impressed that Coach Marshall has plugged the 5 hole problem with not one, but two recruits. I realize one could end up playing the 4, but nevertheless, we have size help on the way. In this regard, he has accomplish more in 6 months than Coach Turgeon accomplished in 7 years. In fact, I am not all together sure that Coach Turgeon should get high credit for recruiting Paul Miller.

If we had size help now, one hell of a lot of our problems would go away.

At this moment, we cannot take the ball inside and score with any high degree of certainty. We cannot stuff penetrators without fouling. We cannot get opponents in foul trouble as quickly, if we had a better inside game. We cannot effectively block shots by opponents' big men.

Clemente reminds me of Ryan Martin - gives physical presence and toughness inside, gets rebounds despite size, poor to below average shooter, poor free throw shooter. He struggles to get his shot off against size.

Remember, we only needed a few points in each of the last two games to win.

We have lost 4 games by the margin of 9, 9, 1, and 3.
The inside scoring for these games was as follows:
1. Clemente - 2, 2, 7, 2
2. Thomasson - 12, 16, 4, 7

Having said the above, for significant future success, we need more talented and athletic players. I believe help is on the way in this regard.

I have zero concerns about Coach Marshall's ability to recruit. I have zero concerns about Coach Marshall's lack of success in the Big Dance.

The future is so bright, I have to wear shades.

(I apologize for borrowing your line.)

[SpanglerFan316]

Ricky Del Rio: I'm happy to have Marshall as our coach. I am not "concerned" about Marshall but there are issues which we could discuss (if we wanted to do so).

Marshall may be taking the "tough love" approach. He may not care much about early losses but may want the team to learn his system. If fact, I hope this is true and we get the payoff at the MVC tourney.

Our team looks, to me, more like a low major team than like a high major team in its style of play and execution. We seem much more dependent on the three than in the past. I'm not as impressed with our screens and our passes as with previous teams; we often seem to pass trying to find an opportunity to score rather than as a deliberate effort to advance the offense with multiple screens and player placement. I could be wrong about this; what do you (in SN-land) think?

I do like our willingness to try back-door plays and to run. Our press needs lots of work in my opinion. Matt is shooting 41% from the three (I think), which is very good. I wish Gal would avoid the turnovers but the team is better with him than without him. I am worried about PT; I hope he doesn't get into a slump like last year. PJ needs to avoid the silly fouls. ETC.

http://www.mvc.org/mbb/stats/WSU.HTM

WSU is hitting 30.3% of its threes while opponents are hitting 39.5% of their threes. Other stats:

FOULS G No. Per/G
-----------------------------------
Couisnard, PJ....... 9 28 3.1
Thomasson, Phillip.. 9 27 3.0
Braeuer, Matt....... 9 18 2.0
Mekel, Gal.......... 9 15 1.7
Griskenas, Mantas... 8 15 1.9


TURNOVERS G No. TO/G
-----------------------------------
Couisnard, PJ....... 9 25 2.8
Mekel, Gal.......... 9 24 2.7
Braeuer, Matt....... 9 22 2.4
Clemente, Ramon..... 9 13 1.4
Durley, JT.......... 9 11 1.2