Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
35 minutes ago, Napleshoosier said:

Rice because where else is he going to get paid what he does now!

That’s completely up to Coach DeVries. He could tell him to go elsewhere or maybe he sees a fit…one thing I’m pretty certain, if Coach DeVries is willing to keep him, he’s taking a pay cut. 

Posted
41 minutes ago, Hoosier987 said:

That’s completely up to Coach DeVries. He could tell him to go elsewhere or maybe he sees a fit…one thing I’m pretty certain, if Coach DeVries is willing to keep him, he’s taking a pay cut. 

He could be a valuable piece to our puzzle if used correctly. He can defend when he wants to and can distribute. I think he proved he is not a shooter/scorer at this level. If he shoots when open vs forcing things he is valuable.

Posted
1 hour ago, rcbowla said:

Imo Rice does not fit the PG profile for a DDV team. Not strong, not a high IQ and not a great defender. I would say if he keeps a PG from current roster it'd be Cupps. Just MO.

Cupps is not strong and not a great defender, so he doesn't seem to fit the profile either, right? 

Posted
30 minutes ago, OGIUAndy said:

Cupps is not strong and not a great defender, so he doesn't seem to fit the profile either, right? 

I mean he was a decent defender (at minimum pest-like) and he has 1 year of sample size. But I also said I don't think he'll be retained either. Just IF one were to be kept Cupps is closer to the profile in that he is similar to Enright.

Posted (edited)

I don't expect anyone to return and that is good by me.

I want 5 or 6 really strong players.  I’m less worried about the depth pieces.  We need 8-10 overall.  
 

It’s like McCollum says, everyone is so concerned about depth but all that really does is get your best out of rythym.   
 

Woodson’s hockey sub, platoon stuff was the worst. 
 

I’m keeping this in mind in the transfer portal.  But you do need depth for injuries and when guys just don’t translate for whatever reason.  

Edited by WayneFleekHoosier
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hardwood83 said:

One other reason, that is quickly fading to obsolescence, is 'development.' It would be nice to have 2-3 guys (especially with 15 slots) that are growing & improving for the future. I know, that is a quaint idea in the age of instant gratification/portalization. 

And continuity. Not that we want continuity of Woodson's absence of offense and schemes, but having familiarity between at least some of the players and their respective games is important for chemistry and ability to hit the floor running.

Just throwing 15 guys together from different teams or new recruits is a recipe for lack of game chemistry. Pick a few as a general core to the extent Coach is comfortable with them and how they'll fit his system. No coach wants 15 guys who don't know each other to start.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...