2025-26 ROSTER

[billikenfan05]

15 minutes ago, BrettJollyComedyHour said:

The portal and NIL has made this impossible for mid-majors with any success.

I do not think this is true.

[BrettJollyComedyHour]

1 hour ago, billikenfan05 said:

I do not think this is true.

I'm pessimistic, what can I say

[billiken_roy]

8 hours ago, thetorch said:

The wishlist of most posters is one that a P5 school with a 20 mil NIL budget would blush at.  Get realistic please.

The key for success now for a mid major is recruit, develop, retain.  The transfer market is only an auxillary.  If you use it for more than that you will be burned.  Look at all the good players Ford ran off that "weren't good enough" and then who he brought in to replace them.

Everyone points to the success stories in the portal, Drake, Utah St, etc.  I can count on one hand the teams at our level who do this successfully every year.  I can count 50-75 schools who fail and end up losing talent and being worse. 

we are being realistic.  i dont recall anyone saying it could or would happen.   it is just realistically what it will take to move up.   what we have now and what some are wishing we do with "developing" what we have now, is not realistic unless you are happy with a middle of the pack A10 team headed to D1A.  if we ever expect to play in the ncaa tourney, we have to get better players and that means a much much much bigger pay to play budget and a very active portal push.

[cheeseman]

11 hours ago, willie said:

I am not trying to be overly cute but Why?

It was more a question then a statement

[SLUMS81]

Coach Schertz has explained his offensive strategy.  No midrange shots.

Not so sure that allowing well-coached, athletic opponents to only need to protect 2/3 of their defensive end of the court is going to get us to Tournament status.  
   Interested to see if our offensive strategy gets modified going forward.

[Bilzz]

16 minutes ago, SLUMS81 said:

Coach Schertz has explained his offensive strategy.  No midrange shots.

Not so sure that allowing well-coached, athletic opponents to only need to protect 2/3 of their defensive end of the court is going to get us to Tournament status.  
   Interested to see if our offensive strategy gets modified going forward.

This isn't an issue when everyone on your team can shoot (i.e. ISU 2023-34). When you have guys like Anya (and Kobe who didn't take 3s until conference play) it doesn't work as well. 

[juniorbill76]

32 minutes ago, SLUMS81 said:

Coach Schertz has explained his offensive strategy.  No midrange shots.

Not so sure that allowing well-coached, athletic opponents to only need to protect 2/3 of their defensive end of the court is going to get us to Tournament status.  
   Interested to see if our offensive strategy gets modified going forward.

He also has talked about taking what the defense gives you, so he may be open to adapting that philosophy—as long as he can get players who can be consistent in the midrange—which would open up the defense for layups and 3s.

[shempie]

Stu has a nice articel on this on his Substack feed this morning. The coach is well aware of what he needs to do to upgrade the roster and compete. Let's see if he can do it.

[ACE]

12 hours ago, BrettJollyComedyHour said:

I'm pessimistic, what can I say

No, you're just realistic. Just look at this year's tournament field. How many "mid majors" are really thriving in this era? Not many. Certainly a lot fewer than a decade ago. The AAC, MVC and the A-10 just one bid. The Zags are poised to join the Pac 12, along with several MWC teams... the new Pac 12 will be a multi-bid P6  league. Then what is left? St. Mary's and the WCC will go back to being a one-bid league without the Zags.

The transformation is nearly complete... we're looking at the P6 conferences (SEC, ACC, BIg 10, Big East, Pac 12 and Big 12) being the only multi-bid leagues who get at large bids and every other conference only gets one auto bid for the conference tournament winner.

[VeniceMenace]

22 hours ago, ACE said:

In his post-game comments Schertz talked about "overhauling" the roster this offseason. More athleticism is what he kept going back to. The current roster is not good and there is a lot of uncertainty with some injured players. A lot of work needs to be done. Next year will be a 15-man roster. Here is how it stands heading into portal season...

1) Avilla

2) Anya - Good defender and rebounder, but limited offensively. Got a lot more playing time than originally planned due to Casey and Thames injuries. Hopefully he goes down to about 15-18 mpg next year. Still a valuable player

3) McCottry - Rough around the edges, but the upside is very exciting. Athletic and versatile. I think Schertz should have given playing time sooner when Thames went down, but he did get valuable experience down the stretch. A key player heading into next season, gotta keep him. With a bigger role, he should really help our defense.

4)  Thames - Who knows. I hope they figure out what the deal is. I feel bad for the kid. I really liked the potential he flashed early in the season. I will feel much better about the roster if he returns and is back at 100%.

5) Dotzler - Another injury question. Not really sure what we have since he didn't really play much. I would like to see him back.

6) Casey - You can learn a lot of by listening to Schertz interviews. In the preseason, he would often talk about Thames and Hughes (returning players) - of course he said positive things about all the players, but he talked a lot more about Thames in glowing terms than Hughes.. that's when I figured he wasn't very high on Larry. In the same way, he would often talk about the two new transfer bigs at the same time (Anya and Casey). He was much more positive about Anya. This is a long way of saying, even before the injury, I don't think Casey was going to have a big role. Now with the injury, I'm fine if we free up the scholarship.

7) Warlick - I think he's a good "glue guy" to keep in the system for a while - I think Schertz likes him, although he doesn't have the "athleticism" Schertz has talked about needing on the roster. I hope he stays, but not crushed if he leaves.

8  Pikaar - I liked the potential he flashed in the William Woods game, but then again it was William Woods. On the season averaged just 1 ppg and 1 rbg. With the lack of depth, there were opportunities for Max to get some PT, and Schertz didn't give it to him. I'm fine seeing what he can do in year two, but Schertz is bringing in two other skinny bigs next year. I think if Schertz believed in his upside, there was an opportunity for more minutes throughout the season, especially with all the injuries on the roster.

9) Brockhoff - I just don't see anyway he's coming back. If he couldn't get playing time on this depleted roster, it's not likely to happen in the future.

10) Hutson - He had a big HS season, he could be a nice scorer off the bench. The kid seems like a winner

11) Laczkowski - Seems like a little shorter Pikaar type player. I never expect tall skinny freshmen to contribute their first year and just hope I'm wrong

12) Kerr - Same expectation for tall, skinny freshmen

13) Open

14) Open

15 Open

I see a minimum of 4 available scholarships and as many as 7. 

 

At the start of this season, he said the roster was deeper and more athletic than that at Indiana St the previous season...

[3star_recruit]

2 minutes ago, ACE said:

No, you're just realistic. Just look at this year's tournament field. How many "mid majors" are really thriving in this era? Not many. Certainly a lot fewer than a decade ago. The AAC, MVC and the A-10 just one bid. The Zags are poised to join the Pac 12, along with several MWC teams... the new Pac 12 will be a multi-bid P6  league. Then what is left? St. Mary's and the WCC will go back to being a one-bid league without the Zags.

The transformation is nearly complete... we're looking at the P6 conferences (SEC, ACC, BIg 10, Big East, Pac 12 and Big 12) being the only multi-bid leagues who get at large bids and every other conference only gets one auto bid for the conference tournament winner.

The A10 can be a multi-bid league.  The issue is that the 2nd place team in the conference is rarely a team with a decent non-conference schedule.  The only teams that realistically have a strong enough non-con to finish 2nd and secure an at-large are VCU, Dayton, Loyola, Davidson and SLU.  We haven't even sniffed a 2nd place finish in over a decade.  That's what we're hoping Coach Schertz can change.

[ACE]

9 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The A10 can be a multi-bid league.  The issue is that the 2nd place team in the conference is rarely a team with a decent non-conference schedule.  The only teams that realistically have a strong enough non-con to finish 2nd and secure an at-large are VCU, Dayton, Loyola, Davidson and SLU.  We haven't even sniffed a 2nd place finish in over a decade.  That's what we're hoping Coach Schertz can change.

Sure, if everything breaks right, like VCU losing in the conference championship game, there could have been a second team. But it's a hell of a lot more difficult than it used to be, and more than 2 bids wasn't uncommon not that long ago. Welcome to college basketball 2025. And as you point out, having a decent non-conference schedule is needed. That's a lot more difficult than it used to be. Schertz talked about that difficulty at length prior to the start of the season - echoing what Ford had talked about the previous two seasons.

[Lord Elrond]

14 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The A10 can be a multi-bid league.  The issue is that the 2nd place team in the conference is rarely a team with a decent non-conference schedule.  The only teams that realistically have a strong enough non-con to finish 2nd and secure an at-large are VCU, Dayton, Loyola, Davidson and SLU.  We haven't even sniffed a 2nd place finish in over a decade.  That's what we're hoping Coach Schertz can change.

Any league CAN be a multi-bid league. The problem right now is that the A10 is not a multi-bid league. This needs to change somehow quickly.

[Lord Elrond]

1 minute ago, ACE said:

Sure, if everything breaks right, like VCU losing in the conference championship game, there could have been a second team. But it's a hell of a lot more difficult than it used to be, and more than 2 bids wasn't uncommon not that long ago. Welcome to college basketball 2025. And as you point out, having a decent non-conference schedule is needed. That's a lot more difficult than it used to be. Schertz talked about that difficulty at length prior to the start of the season - echoing what Ford had talked about the previous two seasons.

There were plenty of people saying if VCU lost, they would not have been given an invite. Obviously we’ll never know the truth of that.

[ACE]

28 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

There were plenty of people saying if VCU lost, they would not have been given an invite. Obviously we’ll never know the truth of that.

Indeed, in spite of having a NET of 31, they were not a lock... it proves my point how difficult it is in today's environment for mid majors. Even when mid majors post a NET ranking that should be good enough for an at large- like Indiana State last year - it's often not good enough. When the NET is good, the committee shifts the discussion to Quad 1 wins to explain the snub, and when in doubt, can always revert to the old "eye test" explanation. Meanwhile the likes of Vandy, Arkansas, Texas and Oklahoma with worse NET rankings have no problem getting a bid.

[shempie]

32 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

Any league CAN be a multi-bid league. The problem right now is that the A10 is not a multi-bid league. This needs to change somehow quickly.

Stu also addressed this in an article earlier this week. There is no comparison in SOS between the A10 and the MWC. It was embarrassing to see. He also referenced resources and revenue sharing and took a shot at Bernadette McGlade's leadership. I sound like a shill for his work but he is writing some good stuff. I don't think it is fair to him to copy and paste it here since it behind a paywall. 

[almaman]

2 hours ago, shempie said:

Stu has a nice articel on this on his Substack feed this morning. The coach is well aware of what he needs to do to upgrade the roster and compete. Let's see if he can do it.

trust him, he knows what's best more than any MBM will ever

[billiken_roy]

5 hours ago, SLUMS81 said:

Coach Schertz has explained his offensive strategy.  No midrange shots.

Not so sure that allowing well-coached, athletic opponents to only need to protect 2/3 of their defensive end of the court is going to get us to Tournament status.  
   Interested to see if our offensive strategy gets modified going forward.

Pitino has been using that strategy for 30 years.   Seems to have served him well.   Just have to find the shooters.  We only had 2 maybe 3.  

[okay]

Theres our enforcer 

 

[ACE]

On 3/19/2025 at 12:00 PM, ACE said:

In his post-game comments Schertz talked about "overhauling" the roster this offseason. More athleticism is what he kept going back to. The current roster is not good and there is a lot of uncertainty with some injured players. A lot of work needs to be done. Next year will be a 15-man roster. Here is how it stands heading into portal season...

1) Avilla

2) Anya - Good defender and rebounder, but limited offensively. Got a lot more playing time than originally planned due to Casey and Thames injuries. Hopefully he goes down to about 15-18 mpg next year. Still a valuable player

3) McCottry - Rough around the edges, but the upside is very exciting. Athletic and versatile. I think Schertz should have given playing time sooner when Thames went down, but he did get valuable experience down the stretch. A key player heading into next season, gotta keep him. With a bigger role, he should really help our defense.

4)  Thames - Who knows. I hope they figure out what the deal is. I feel bad for the kid. I really liked the potential he flashed early in the season. I will feel much better about the roster if he returns and is back at 100%.

5) Dotzler - Another injury question. Not really sure what we have since he didn't really play much. I would like to see him back.

6) Casey - You can learn a lot of by listening to Schertz interviews. In the preseason, he would often talk about Thames and Hughes (returning players) - of course he said positive things about all the players, but he talked a lot more about Thames in glowing terms than Hughes.. that's when I figured he wasn't very high on Larry. In the same way, he would often talk about the two new transfer bigs at the same time (Anya and Casey). He was much more positive about Anya. This is a long way of saying, even before the injury, I don't think Casey was going to have a big role. Now with the injury, I'm fine if we free up the scholarship.

7) Warlick - I think he's a good "glue guy" to keep in the system for a while - I think Schertz likes him, although he doesn't have the "athleticism" Schertz has talked about needing on the roster. I hope he stays, but not crushed if he leaves.

8  Pikaar - I liked the potential he flashed in the William Woods game, but then again it was William Woods. On the season averaged just 1 ppg and 1 rbg. With the lack of depth, there were opportunities for Max to get some PT, and Schertz didn't give it to him. I'm fine seeing what he can do in year two, but Schertz is bringing in two other skinny bigs next year. I think if Schertz believed in his upside, there was an opportunity for more minutes throughout the season, especially with all the injuries on the roster.

9) Brockhoff - I just don't see anyway he's coming back. If he couldn't get playing time on this depleted roster, it's not likely to happen in the future.

10) Hutson - He had a big HS season, he could be a nice scorer off the bench. The kid seems like a winner

11) Laczkowski - Seems like a little shorter Pikaar type player. I never expect tall skinny freshmen to contribute their first year and just hope I'm wrong

12) Kerr - Same expectation for tall, skinny freshmen

13) Open

14) Open

15 Open

I see a minimum of 4 available scholarships and as many as 7. 

 

There are now 5 scholarships available by my count with the departure of Dotzler. I would expect at least one more departure and two would not be shocking.

 

[Bilzz]

19 minutes ago, ACE said:

There are now 5 scholarships available by my count with the departure of Dotzler. I would expect at least one more departure and two would not be shocking.

 

Brockhoff seems likely. Anya would be the other to watch.

[gobillsgo]

22 minutes ago, Bilzz said:

Brockhoff seems likely. Anya would be the other to watch.

Agree on Brockhoff. Think Anya stays for sure. Could see Warlick and/or Pikaar leaving too. 

[Bilzz]

4 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

Agree on Brockhoff. Think Anya stays for sure. Could see Warlick and/or Pikaar leaving too. 

Pikaar followed Schertz to SLU. Warlick got quite a bit of PT and has a buddy from back home joining the team as a freshman. Anya had minutes cut substantially down the stretch and is a risk of getting recruited over. His inability to contribute to the offense doesn't really fit the model. We'll see.

[gobillsgo]

2 minutes ago, Bilzz said:

Pikaar followed Schertz to SLU. Warlick got quite a bit of PT and has a buddy from back home joining the team as a freshman. Anya had minutes cut substantially down the stretch and is a risk of getting recruited over. His inability to contribute to the offense doesn't really fit the model. We'll see.

Think the bolded is incorrect.  Fair enough on other points. I guess I should say nothing would really surprise me these days transfer wise. 

[3star_recruit]

31 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

Think the bolded is incorrect.  Fair enough on other points. I guess I should say nothing would really surprise me these days transfer wise. 

Coach Schertz spent a year recruiting Pikaar while at Indiana State and had him on campus for a visit two months before he took the SLU job.  I think it's a reasonable assumption that Pikaar followed Schertz here.