RiseAndGrind Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 6 minutes ago, 615Billiken said: Rashed Anthony visiting today...He did nothing at Seton Hall. Is it worth it to burn a scholarship just for depth at the position? For a year? Yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVBilliken Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 20 minutes ago, 615Billiken said: Rashed Anthony visiting today...He did nothing at Seton Hall. Is it worth it to burn a scholarship just for depth at the position? Grad transfer, so yes if the alternative is not using it......trust Ford & staff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 3 hours ago, 615Billiken said: Rashed Anthony visiting today...He did nothing at Seton Hall. Is it worth it to burn a scholarship just for depth at the position? He has committed, according to Stu Durando via Moytoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 On 5/15/2017 at 9:01 AM, Pistol said: Rashed Anthony - PF, 6-9, 240 - Orangeburg, SC (Seton Hall, NJ) Offers: SLU, Richmond, George Mason, UMass, Memphis, East Carolina, Niagara, Long Island. Latest News: Anthony is visiting SLU on 5/16. (5/15/17) Scouting Report: Anthony is a grad transfer from Seton Hall, eligible to play immediately. He took a redshirt in 2013-2014, played 8.8 minutes per game as a redshirt freshman the following season, and his minutes declined from there. His stats are too limited to draw much useful information from. Out of high school, he was scouted as "a bouncy forward with a crazy wingspan" who could dominate with rebounding and shot blocking at the defensive end and help with an offensive spark at the other end. He also reportedly had offers from Oklahoma, K-State, and BC out of high school. He grew 1-2 inches in college and added about 30 lbs. to his frame. There's no question we want a grad transfer big man for a one-year plug before doing some more work in the 2018 class. Anthony's lack of minutes at Seton Hall definitely raises some concerns, but he had the misfortune of starting his college career (after a redshirt season) the same time as Angel Delgado, who has been a monster for SHU for three seasons. The same class at Seton Hall has two other forwards, Ismael Sanogo and Desi Rodriguez, who round out the short 7-man rotation they use. So he's basically been stuck in Delgado's shadow, pushed to the end of the rotation by two other forwards with a more inside-out game, in a system that does not rely heavily on big men, coming off the bench for 4-10 minutes a game. He's a defensive player, primarily. Offensively, he's playing near the basket. I chalk up his lack of minutes to a combination of loaded class at his position, in particular one dominant big man in his way, and probably not the best fit. There's potential for a useful role player here. Don't expect 15 and 8, but he can be a useful contributor immediately. Sounds like a Dennis Rodman type (play, not quirkiness). He should add rebounding and defense and frontcourt depth, at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUBillsFan Posted May 18, 2017 Author Share Posted May 18, 2017 15 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: Sounds like a Dennis Rodman type (play, not quirkiness). He should add rebounding and defense and frontcourt depth, at least. I'm not really trying to knock the guy, but this is an insane comparison. Dennis Rodman is an NBA Hall of Famer and 2 time all-star and 8 time all-defensive team player. Rasheed Anthony barely got any PT in 3 years at Seton Hall. He is useful in that he is a big body who can likely contribute more / fill a need better than Gillmann would have. Anyone expecting him to defend or rebound at a level anywhere close to Rodman is going to be sorely disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 When I first suggested that a grad transfer big would be a good fit, a few people thought it was a crazy idea. Well now we can put to rest the idea that we never get grad transfers. Ford's recruiting makes sense. A 4th big to play some D and grab some rebounds was our biggest need. Might as well try to fill the last scholarship with one more grad transfer. There don't appear to be a lot of glaring needs, but if I were to identify one type of player who could fill a niche, it would be a sharpshooter. A player like Zeke would have filled a role next year. I have a mild concern about our 3-point shooting next year. It would be nice to be able to bring in a zone buster on a night when the shots are not falling. Could just be kind of one-dimensional catch and shoot guy, like the kid Xavier had a few years ago. And usually these kind of players can also shoot free throws, another area that might need to be strengthened a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, ACE said: When I first suggested that a grad transfer big would be a good fit, a few people thought it was a crazy idea. Well now we can put to rest the idea that we never get grad transfers. Ford's recruiting makes sense. A 4th big to play some D and grab some rebounds was our biggest need. Might as well try to fill the last scholarship with one more grad transfer. There don't appear to be a lot of glaring needs, but if I were to identify one type of player who could fill a niche, it would be a sharpshooter. A player like Zeke would have filled a role next year. I have a mild concern about our 3-point shooting next year. It would be nice to be able to bring in a zone buster on a night when the shots are not falling. Could just be kind of one-dimensional catch and shoot guy, like the kid Xavier had a few years ago. And usually these kind of players can also shoot free throws, another area that might need to be strengthened a bit. Personally, I'd fill the last scholarship with another big man grad transfer, but a sharpshooter makes sense too. Either way, we should be very good next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, ACE said: I have a mild concern about our 3-point shooting next year. It would be nice to be able to bring in a zone buster on a night when the shots are not falling. Could just be kind of one-dimensional catch and shoot guy, like the kid Xavier had a few years ago. And usually these kind of players can also shoot free throws, another area that might need to be strengthened a bit. if rumors are to hold water, (I haven't personally seen Henriquez play) Henriquez supposedly will bring back memories of Erwin claggett and h waldman. if he is halfway as good of a shooter I will be happy as we haven't really had that kind of a shooter for awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, kshoe said: Personally, I'd fill the last scholarship with another big man grad transfer, but a sharpshooter makes sense too. Either way, we should be very good next year. Wait, there is one scholarship left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, RiseAndGrind said: Wait, there is one scholarship left? Yes. Don't be surprised if it doesn't get used, though. Ford and his staff love the 2018 class. Then again, given the transfers every season, they might find a good use for it this spring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Pistol said: Yes. Don't be surprised if it doesn't get used, though. Ford and his staff love the 2018 class. Then again, given the transfers every season, they might find a good use for it this spring. I'd just follow Gordon and Thatch around and pick up a kid along the way for 18. Not much of a chance for an impact player with this last scholarship for 2017. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, RiseAndGrind said: I'd just follow Gordon and Thatch around and pick up a kid along the way for 18. Not much of a chance for an impact player with this last scholarship for 2017. Agreed we won't get an impact guy. But another 5th year transfer makes total sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 28 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: if rumors are to hold water, (I haven't personally seen Henriquez play) Henriquez supposedly will bring back memories of Erwin claggett and h waldman. if he is halfway as good of a shooter I will be happy as we haven't really had that kind of a shooter for awhile. I have only seen him shoot in practice but his quick release and form are exciting. He does remind me of a taller Erwin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 hours ago, ACE said: Might as well try to fill the last scholarship with one more grad transfer. There don't appear to be a lot of glaring needs, but if I were to identify one type of player who could fill a niche, it would be a sharpshooter. A player like Zeke would have filled a role next year. I have a mild concern about our 3-point shooting next year. It would be nice to be able to bring in a zone buster on a night when the shots are not falling. Could just be kind of one-dimensional catch and shoot guy, like the kid Xavier had a few years ago. And usually these kind of players can also shoot free throws, another area that might need to be strengthened a bit. 1 hour ago, billiken_roy said: if rumors are to hold water, (I haven't personally seen Henriquez play) Henriquez supposedly will bring back memories of Erwin claggett and h waldman. if he is halfway as good of a shooter I will be happy as we haven't really had that kind of a shooter for awhile. I think we'll be fine from 3. Henriquez will be our primary threat, but Roby was pretty darn good last year. I think he ended up shooting around 38% from 3, but was 41% in conference. And this year he'll have some playmakers who can set him up for open looks. JJ and Bishop have also clearly showed the ability to stroke it from deep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 21 minutes ago, SShoe said: I think we'll be fine from 3. Henriquez will be our primary threat, but Roby was pretty darn good last year. I think he ended up shooting around 38% from 3, but was 41% in conference. And this year he'll have some playmakers who can set him up for open looks. JJ and Bishop have also clearly showed the ability to stroke it from deep. And Graves who was around 36-37% from 3 point range last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUBillsFan Posted May 18, 2017 Author Share Posted May 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, SShoe said: I think we'll be fine from 3. Henriquez will be our primary threat, but Roby was pretty darn good last year. I think he ended up shooting around 38% from 3, but was 41% in conference. And this year he'll have some playmakers who can set him up for open looks. JJ and Bishop have also clearly showed the ability to stroke it from deep. Career NCAA 3pt% Foreman - 40.0% (6/15) Henriquez - 37.7% (114/302) Welmer - 37.1% (33/89) Roby - 37.0% (110/297) Johnson - 36.5% (35/96) Graves - 36.4% (12/33) Bishop - 33.8% (44/130) Bess - 18.2% (2/11) Anthony - 0% (0/0) I'd agree w SShoe. I think having 5 shooters above 35% (not counting Foreman for lack of attempts) compares favorably or beats any team in SLU history. If we're still talking about needing a shooter potentially, man, it would've been nice if Bartley just stuck around. He'd be a senior next year and if that due was on he was money (3rd all time in SLU career 3pt % at 41.5%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFord and TRavs Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 SHooting wasn't our issue. Our issue was rebounding and defense in the paint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 4 hours ago, RUBillsFan said: I'm not really trying to knock the guy, but this is an insane comparison. Dennis Rodman is an NBA Hall of Famer and 2 time all-star and 8 time all-defensive team player. Rasheed Anthony barely got any PT in 3 years at Seton Hall. He is useful in that he is a big body who can likely contribute more / fill a need better than Gillmann would have. Anyone expecting him to defend or rebound at a level anywhere close to Rodman is going to be sorely disappointed. Forgive my bluntness, but this seems rather dense. "Dennis Rodman TYPE." That is, someone who is more adept at rebounding and defense but provides little on offense aside from putbacks. Nowhere in that does it suggest the ability or performance will come anywhere close to that of Dennis Rodman. Nowhere. Certain players become archetypes to whom players who come later can be compared based on (playing) style. Rodman is such an archetype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUBillsFan Posted May 18, 2017 Author Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Quality Is Job 1 said: Forgive my bluntness, but this seems rather dense. "Dennis Rodman TYPE." That is, someone who is more adept at rebounding and defense but provides little on offense aside from putbacks. Nowhere in that does it suggest the ability or performance will come anywhere close to that of Dennis Rodman. Nowhere. Certain players become archetypes to whom players who come later can be compared based on (playing) style. Rodman is such an archetype. I understand and I apologize if my reply was overly harsh. I just think people are going to see your Rodman - type comment and assume you're expecting more from him than being a backup big who receives limited minutes. In general, I'm not a big fan of making comparisons to hall of fame players. I think others expecting Cory Remekun type contributions from him is much more fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zink Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 25 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said: Career NCAA 3pt% Foreman - 40.0% (6/15) Henriquez - 37.7% (114/302) Welmer - 37.1% (33/89) Roby - 37.0% (110/297) Johnson - 36.5% (35/96) Graves - 36.4% (12/33) Bishop - 33.8% (44/130) Bess - 18.2% (2/11) Anthony - 0% (0/0) I'd agree w SShoe. I think having 5 shooters above 35% (not counting Foreman for lack of attempts) compares favorably or beats any team in SLU history. If we're still talking about needing a shooter potentially, man, it would've been nice if Bartley just stuck around. He'd be a senior next year and if that due was on he was money (3rd all time in SLU career 3pt % at 41.5%. Yeah, I tend to believe that Bishop will be more efficient with a lower usage rate (most players are). We should have enough shooting on next year's squad to be competitive, but I am somewhat concerned that Welmer, Roby, Bishop, and Johnson won't see that many minutes. Ford will have to be careful with rotations, so as to avoid lineups with only one shooter on the floor. Goodwin, X, Bess, French, Foreman could be a pretty common foursome, but they seem to lack sufficient outside threat to keep defenses honest, even if those four plus Henriquez are our five best players (as many on here seem to be predicting). For this reason, I would guess that when Bess is on the floor, we will be less likely to see Goodwin out there, and also more likely to see Welmer, so as to compensate for Bess's lack of range. This makes me think that bringing Welmer and Bess off the bench together would make a lot of sense. Start with Goodwin, Roby, Henriquez, French, Foreman and then bring Bess in for one of the guards, and Welmer for Foreman. Then let Johnson/Anthony and Graves/Bishop help out as needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 8 minutes ago, Zink said: Yeah, I tend to believe that Bishop will be more efficient with a lower usage rate (most players are). We should have enough shooting on next year's squad to be competitive, but I am somewhat concerned that Welmer, Roby, Bishop, and Johnson won't see that many minutes. Ford will have to be careful with rotations, so as to avoid lineups with only one shooter on the floor. Goodwin, X, Bess, French, Foreman could be a pretty common foursome, but they seem to lack sufficient outside threat to keep defenses honest, even if those four plus Henriquez are our five best players (as many on here seem to be predicting). For this reason, I would guess that when Bess is on the floor, we will be less likely to see Goodwin out there, and also more likely to see Welmer, so as to compensate for Bess's lack of range. This makes me think that bringing Welmer and Bess off the bench together would make a lot of sense. Start with Goodwin, Roby, Henriquez, French, Foreman and then bring Bess in for one of the guards, and Welmer for Foreman. Then let Johnson/Anthony and Graves/Bishop help out as needed. I think you are putting more stock in the transfers that maybe is deserved. I'm excited about them as well, along with Goodwin and French (actually much more excited about Goodwin and French). However, I expect Welmer, Roby, Bishop, and Johnson to get more PT than it seems that you do. Remember, regardless of how good we feel about them, the transfers were all guys that were not getting PT at other schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 Ford is going to be on 101 soon. Perhaps he will give some insight about the last scholarship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zink Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: I think you are putting more stock in the transfers that maybe is deserved. I'm excited about them as well, along with Goodwin and French (actually much more excited about Goodwin and French). However, I expect Welmer, Roby, Bishop, and Johnson to get more PT than it seems that you do. Remember, regardless of how good we feel about them, the transfers were all guys that were not getting PT at other schools. Yeah, I would say that I'm more being realistic about the guys we have seen than expecting great things from the transfers. Consider this: Welmer had our best BPM last year, and it was 1.0. None of our players last year would have contributed much to a good team. Surrounding them with better players will help, and Johnson and Welmer were in their first year of college ball, so there is obviously room for improvement. I have little doubt that Henriquez will be able to replicate his UCF form, and he would have been far and away our best player last year. Bess is similar, although his impact will come more on the defensive end. Foreman profiles as a good defender who needed to get some polish on the offensive end, which is exactly what a year off is good for - but I don't think he'll be as impactful as Bess or Henriquez. If we look at guys who were around 50th overall in the recruiting rankings (like Goodwin) from last year, you find De'Riante Jenkins who was limited due to injuries for VCU last year but put up excellent efficiency numbers when he was able to get on the floor. DeJon Jarreu struggled at UMass last year, but still would have been our best player in terms of BPM and PER, and tied with Roby on WS/40. I guess what I should have said was that unless someone turns out to be much better than we have reason to expect, we're looking at an improved season, but not one with a Dance at the end of it. I think it makes more sense to project our transfers to (at least) maintain their levels of production than to believe that our returnees will significantly improve and surpass them. I hope I'm wrong, but Roby/Johnson/Bishop give me no reason to think that they'll be better than the other guys. We have seen what a team led by those guys looks like, and I don't think it will lead to results we'd be happy with moving forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLURadioBoy Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 hour ago, ACE said: Ford is going to be on 101 soon. Perhaps he will give some insight about the last scholarship. Did anyone hear the interview? Anything worthwhile mentioned? EDIT: Here it is if anyone wants to listen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBFan Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, Zink said: I guess what I should have said was that unless someone turns out to be much better than we have reason to expect, we're looking at an improved season, but not one with a Dance at the end of it. I think it makes more sense to project our transfers to (at least) maintain their levels of production than to believe that our returnees will significantly improve and surpass them. I hope I'm wrong, but Roby/Johnson/Bishop give me no reason to think that they'll be better than the other guys. We have seen what a team led by those guys looks like, and I don't think it will lead to results we'd be happy with moving forward. Johnson and Roby played with Hines Agbeko and an injured Crawford and better players around them will make a big difference. Roby averaged double digit points and Johnson improved all season and is only a freshman. At the end of the season Johnson rebounded well and shot well and helped win some conference games. The book on Bishop is incomplete but I think most SLU fans liked what we saw in his freshman year and has room to grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.