3star_recruit Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 17 minutes ago, slufan13 said: Bishop is a better player. Hines makes the team better. When you're playing a grind it out game with a low number of possessions, your margin for error is microscopic. You can't afford to take risks on offense. We won't be nearly as conservative on offense next year. There will be room for creativity on offense because we will have finishers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Christ, everyone, mellow out. We played an athletic 19-5 team on two days' rest (they had three days' rest). We're still exactly where we were before the game -- slightly overperforming suckiness. If we're similarly blown out by Fordham, then we will have regressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 I didn't watch the game. How was Ford's coaching? Could you decipher anything good or bad? Didn't really expect this one to be close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLU_Nick Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 1 minute ago, RiseAndGrind said: I didn't watch the game. How was Ford's coaching? Could you decipher anything good or bad? Didn't really expect this one to be close. I thought Ford's coaching was below average this time. He had a sound strategy going in, but he played Reggie way too much when it was clear he was the single weak point both offensively and defensively. When Neufeld came in, we tightened up defensively a little bit, but we were already down 15 and in the panic mentality. I really want to pull a 5th year point guard grad transfer so we dont even have to argue about Bishop vs Hines. A 5th year point guard has to be on Ford's mind as he looks at next year's roster, unless he thinks he is already covered with Graves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 43 minutes ago, RiseOfTheBillikens said: I seriously question the sanity of you folks choosing Hines over Bishop. It is amazing to me. +1 Ford said that he was putting Bishop in a very difficult spot due to our lack of scoring options - he called on him to be the playmaker, and also carry the scoring load. Bishop will be fine surrounded by a better cast with more scoring threats. Hines can take the AG scholarship that will likely open up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierPal Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 1 hour ago, slufan13 said: Bishop is a better player. Hines makes the team better. I think you hit it right on the button. And just to be clear Rise of the Billikens, I want them both back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 After missing however many shots it was at beginning of game they seemed to have no condfidence to shoot, exact opposite of last game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 1 hour ago, bonwich said: Christ, everyone, mellow out. We played an athletic 19-5 team on two days' rest (they had three days' rest). We're still exactly where we were before the game -- slightly overperforming suckiness. If we're similarly blown out by Fordham, then we will have regressed. +1....The numbers changed very little overall (for us or Dayton). That's because things played out pretty much the way they were supposed to Could Dayton have run the score up more? Maybe, but the computer diminishes those effects past a 20 pt spread. Bottomline...we were over matched....an A- team (Dayton) is not the same as a B- team (UMass or GM) Too much to overcome. If we can improve to at least B- next year we won't be over matched by any team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 I think the question of Hines vs Bishop is meaningless until next year. As far as this season goes it is Hines. For next year the question of Hines vs Bishop will depend on a number of factors (are they going to stay in or move out) that have yet to be determined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveLisch Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 I also do not understand the debate between Hines and Bishop. I thought the consensus was that Goodwin would be the primary PG, at least until Graves become eligible. I think Bishop would be a better two guard than Hines, obviously, but he'd compete for time against Roby and Henriquez. My gut says that neither of them will play much next year, barring any injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 18 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: I also do not understand the debate between Hines and Bishop. I thought the consensus was that Goodwin would be the primary PG, at least until Graves become eligible. I think Bishop would be a better two guard than Hines, obviously, but he'd compete for time against Roby and Henriquez. My gut says that neither of them will play much next year, barring any injuries. Agree on all this. Also, after Roby graduates Thatch comes in. So while Bishop would be a nice spare piece to have around I think his days as a primary rotation guy are probably over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 The irony is that Goodwin plays with a kind of reckless abandon, even more so than Bishop. Since he's a physical specimen that will often work out in his favor but sometimes it won't. Other times his aggressiveness will get him in foul trouble. Sometimes his backup will have to play 20 min. I look forward to Bishop stepping up his game. It's up to him whether he wants to be an important piece of some exciting postseason teams or the starting point guard for a low mid-major. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsBeliever!!! Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Goodwin plays point with Hines as a walk on with no scholarship is the backup (until graves) Bishop transfers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 2 hours ago, slufan13 said: Bishop is a better player. Hines makes the team better. This 2 hours ago, ACE said: +1 Ford said that he was putting Bishop in a very difficult spot due to our lack of scoring options - he called on him to be the playmaker, and also carry the scoring load. Bishop will be fine surrounded by a better cast with more scoring threats. Hines can take the AG scholarship that will likely open up. Neither of them are good enough long term. Why would you keep around the one that might cost you a roster spot for 3 more seasons? The team will take a while to gel next year, so you want to keep around the guy that will limit the number of turnovers in that transition period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, brianstl said: This Neither of them are good enough long term. Why would you keep around the one that might cost you a roster spot for 3 more seasons? The team will take a while to gel next year, so you want to keep around the guy that will limit the number of turnovers in that transition period. We've had a LOT of players in this program worse than Bishop. And we've had a LOT of players who were worse than Bishop as freshman who went on to have solid careers. If he leaves after this year, I don't think it is the end of the world, but I just don't get the fixation some seem to have in driving him out. A bigger priority at this point is having the two weakest players on your roster leave, before I want to drive out the most talented player on the current roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 22 minutes ago, brianstl said: This Neither of them are good enough long term. Why would you keep around the one that might cost you a roster spot for 3 more seasons? Because I think Bishop is worth that roster spot. I could easily see him averaging 12 and 5 as a full time point next year with a 2:1 assist ratio playing with finishers. Now he most likely won't get that opportunity, that's true. But using your reasoning all the 9th best players on a good roster should just transfer. What's the point of having 13 scholarships then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 35 minutes ago, ACE said: We've had a LOT of players in this program worse than Bishop. And we've had a LOT of players who were worse than Bishop as freshman who went on to have solid careers. If he leaves after this year, I don't think it is the end of the world, but I just don't get the fixation some seem to have in driving him out. A bigger priority at this point is having the two weakest players on your roster leave, before I want to drive out the most talented player on the current roster. I'm not convinced Bishop is even the most talented player at his position on the current roster. If I had to choose between him and Roby, I'd take Roby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 9 minutes ago, ACE said: We've had a LOT of players in this program worse than Bishop. And we've had a LOT of players who were worse than Bishop as freshman who went on to have solid careers. If he leaves after this year, I don't think it is the end of the world, but I just don't get the fixation some seem to have in driving him out. A bigger priority at this point is having the two weakest players on your roster leave, before I want to drive out the most talented player on the current roster. 11 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said: Because I think Bishop is worth that roster spot. I could easily see him averaging 12 and 5 as a full time point next year with a 2:1 assist ratio playing with finishers. Now he most likely won't get that opportunity, that's true. But using your reasoning all the 9th best players on a good roster should just transfer. What's the point of having 13 scholarships then? Bishop is a a guard. With Bishop we are going to have seven guards on the roster for next season and eight if you add in Hines as a walk on. It would mean seven guards on the roster the following year, too. How deep are you willing to go loading up your roster with guards for two seasons? None of the three in a row tournament teams had rosters that heavy with guards. It really is a roster management issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 On paper, I can see the argument to keep Bishop around. He's a combo guard with a knack for scoring and you'd think he'd be a good fit, especially before Graves can play. I do think there are some other questions around him, particularly regarding attitude and work ethic. Ford has been vocal about getting rid of the losing attitude left over from the Crews era. Players who aren't all-in are going to have a tougher time staying around. So I figure I'll just wait and see how it shakes out with him. As for other potential transfers, just look at distribution of minutes lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 50 minutes ago, brianstl said: Bishop is a a guard. With Bishop we are going to have seven guards on the roster for next season and eight if you add in Hines as a walk on. It would mean seven guards on the roster the following year, too. How deep are you willing to go loading up your roster with guards for two seasons? None of the three in a row tournament teams had rosters that heavy with guards. It really is a roster management issue. A frontline of French, Foreman, Gordon and Welmer, come 2018, would be the envy of some Big 10 teams, never mind the A10. Having an extra guard is a luxury we can afford to have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 3 minutes ago, brianstl said: Bishop is a a guard. With Bishop we are going to have seven guards on the roster for next season and eight if you add in Hines as a walk on. It would mean seven guards on the roster the following year, too. How deep are you willing to go loading up your roster with guards for two seasons? None of the three in a row tournament teams had rosters that heavy with guards. It really is a roster management issue. Not sure I follow... Welmer, Foreman, French, Johnson, Bess, Gillman and Neufeld... that's seven of your 13 scholarships (as it stands now) that are forwards. Goodwin, Henriquez, Roby, Bishop, Graves and Moore (Hines, a possible walk-on again) guards. I understand there is some crossover between guys who can play the 2 and 3. If AG and/or MN leave as expected, getting more depth on the frontline is an obvious priority. If one of the guards leaves, finding another player to help run the point becomes a priority. RM showed what an advantage it was to have several players capable of directing the offense. I think the position breakdown of the roster is not bad, but there are still a few areas that could be upgraded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 10 minutes ago, ACE said: I think the position breakdown of the roster is not bad, but there are still a few areas that could be upgraded. A post player would be nice, given that we have two 6-11 guys combining for low-single-digit minutes on a roster with minimal depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Pistol said: A post player would be nice, given that we have two 6-11 guys combining for low-single-digit minutes on a roster with minimal depth. Yep, that's why I said this: If AG and/or MN leave as expected, getting more depth on the frontline is an obvious priority. Even with Gordon coming in the next year there still is a need, Foreman will be graduating in two years and it would be good have some other options to challenge Welmer for playing time, even though I think the kid has some potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierPal Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 23 minutes ago, ACE said: Not sure I follow... Welmer, Foreman, French, Johnson, Bess, Gillman and Neufeld... that's seven of your 13 scholarships (as it stands now) that are forwards. Goodwin, Henriquez, Roby, Bishop, Graves and Moore (Hines, a possible walk-on again) guards. I understand there is some crossover between guys who can play the 2 and 3. If AG and/or MN leave as expected, getting more depth on the frontline is an obvious priority. If one of the guards leaves, finding another player to help run the point becomes a priority. RM showed what an advantage it was to have several players capable of directing the offense. I think the position breakdown of the roster is not bad, but there are still a few areas that could be upgraded. You have it right on the breakdown. The days of defined 1-5 positions is over. There are only two positions that have a defined slot, a post player who can play with his back to the basket and defend the post, and a point guard (or forward) who can organize the team. After that you have combinations of stretch forwards who can bang inside and then everyone else who has a 15'+ jump shot and hopefully can drive to the hoop. For this year, is Crawford a guard or forward? Does it matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 18 minutes ago, ACE said: Not sure I follow... Welmer, Foreman, French, Johnson, Bess, Gillman and Neufeld... that's seven of your 13 scholarships (as it stands now) that are forwards. Goodwin, Henriquez, Roby, Bishop, Graves and Moore (Hines, a possible walk-on again) guards. I understand there is some crossover between guys who can play the 2 and 3. If AG and/or MN leave as expected, getting more depth on the frontline is an obvious priority. If one of the guards leaves, finding another player to help run the point becomes a priority. RM showed what an advantage it was to have several players capable of directing the offense. I think the position breakdown of the roster is not bad, but there are still a few areas that could be upgraded. I see Bess as more of a guard. How many guys on a roster do you need to help with the point guard load? Even if Bishop leaves, you have Goodwin, Graves and it is one of the roles Roby has been filling most of the season. 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.