nustudent

We've only been recruiting him for 2 weeks

These were my first thoughts as well. After thinking about it for a little longer, I think it will work itself out. There are some factors that I don't know. Is he going to be a graduate transfer candidate next year? If things do not go as he hopes this year, then he could use that option next year. And maybe things will go well for him. Either way, he seems to be a D1 type of athlete at the guard spot. Something to be said for that if we need him to play here or there for whatever reason. I think it is much more pro than con. Id agree...better to have him and not need him than find out the hard way with an injury.

2 Thoughts: A. Glad we signed someone with experience as we need them for depth B. Would've preferred a 5th year guy as opposed to tying up that spot for 2 years

A guy like Fowler is just fine with me. One year hit man. Warm body for depth. Ball handling skills. We have enough guys who can potentially score. Just get some depth

Nick Fuller is a warm body...If we are going after someone, they need to be able to win playing time over what we already have. At this late date, I am unsure if that person exists. As a guard, I don't think Fuller can be considered a warm body. Agreed.

Nick Fuller is a warm body...If we are going after someone, they need to be able to win playing time over what we already have. At this late date, I am unsure if that person exists. That's debateable. He struggled to find time as a 9th or 10th guy on two pretty bad teams. He's a guy who is supposed to be a shooter but isn't a good one. Even further so as a guard and not a role player at a wing/stretch 4

Amen. Been saying for a long time I wanted another guard. I never got the disregard for Evelyn either. I hate to say it...but I really wish he was still around. I know he had a bad shooting percentage last year, but I never felt he was a bad shooter...if that makes sense. He was an athletic guy that could have...especially now...a role on this team.

I thought we'd be better than last year. Considerably so...even with a slightly tougher schedule. I was thinking an 18-19 win team that was truly on the bubble. Without White....I just don't see it. I think we'll end up being better than last year because we have more talent and more experience at every position.....but I see us struggling at times without having a go to guy...especially early on. I do think this might be a good thing long term (as in two years from now) because it accelerates the learning curve for Roby and forces McVeigh into a bigger role this year too.....but I just don't see us having the upside without White. Too many things would have to go right for us.

We really need to take a chance on a 5th year combo guard. We don't need him to start...but for depth. There's going to be a game where we get into foul trouble or need an extra ball handler Even if its an average guy from a mid major.

So on The Drive yesterday, Washut said that White wants to go to a team where he will serve MORE as a three-point specialist like he would in the NBA... A better team where he'd have a specific role, versus here where'd he'd be asked to do a lot more. I ran into Gandolfo's in the middle of the segment, so I missed some of it, but that's the gist of what I heard. That would make a lot of sense, but think he could have done that here. Anyway, I was under impression by some comments here, that he wanted to handle the ball more. He's even said it himself. Which is the crazy thing. And I agree...his avenue to the league is his perimeter shooting...not handling the ball.

Best player is JD. Ubel helps us the most though

I'm glad to see you two are in nearly complete agreement here. Exactly. Shavon can not be replaced with "one guy." No one here has said he will be.

Just because one thinks he's not irreplaceable doesn't mean he's undervalued. TP was a more decorated player (first team all conference player, higher scoring average) and most people felt we'd be better this year than last despite losing him. Shavon was a terrific player for us. But that doesn't mean we'll be worse because he's gone. We're adding more talent, depth and experience at the other 4 positions and don't exactly have a lack of talent waiting in the wings at his spot. By the way, I didn't say that SS is "irreplaceable." But the notion that Shavon's impact can be easily dismissed is balderdash. Who has said it was easily dismissed? I see people acknowledging that you have a talented sophomore point guard in Watson who will have an increased role....a senior in Webster who came on big down the stretch, a talented guy in Gill being added to the mix, our leading scorer returning in White who will be on a mission, a guy in McVeigh who filled in nicely as a true frosh for Shields in the four games he replaced him, guys in Jacobson and Morrow who played lots as true freshmen out of position, extremely talented freshmen coming in in Roby, Horne and Jordy. There is a lot of talent there to pick up the slack by committee

Just because one thinks he's not irreplaceable doesn't mean he's undervalued. TP was a more decorated player (first team all conference player, higher scoring average) and most people felt we'd be better this year than last despite losing him. Shavon was a terrific player for us. But that doesn't mean we'll be worse because he's gone. We're adding more talent, depth and experience at the other 4 positions and don't exactly have a lack of talent waiting in the wings at his spot.

Shavon is/was a very good player. But I think we replace him and then some. Maybe not with just one guy but sum of all parts type deal. And for as good as he was.....as good as he was against Michigan State, Purdue and some others...he had some real clunkers too. I also think the team lots of times, stood around and watched Shavon. People forget that McVeigh was pretty solid in Shields's absence during those 4 games. As far as Parker is concerned....I still don't understand where this belief that Benny was this great defensive player comes from. I never saw that. I saw a guy who could create some havoc using his quickness and short stature in short bursts....but also a guy that routinely got beat, or had his size exposed at times on defense like any other defender. He's a guy, with all due respect, that is replaced immediately with the combination of Tai, Watson's experience and Gill. Assuming good health, I see just too much potential, too many options out there for this team to not be significantly better than last year.

I think Webster and Watson are givens. Both were pretty solid, especially Tai during conference play. Watson had the occasional off game...but for a true frosh...wasn't horribly up and down once he started playing a bunch. I think a big thing for us is that we won't have total liabilities out there anymore. Parker was an offensive liability. Sure he average 4.5 ppg but other teams basically ignored him on the floor as he was no threat to really do anything. You start ignoring guys like Webster, Watson, Gill, McVeigh and they can put up 12-15 real quick. I think that's where we see the biggest jump this year. Not as many dead minutes. Last year you had Hammond, Fuller and Parker contributing 35-40 minutes per game between the 3 of them. This year, you will have far far better players taking those minutes. As far as the free throws...same thing applies. We might not have someone who gets to the line as much as Shields...but the overall increase from every other position will make up for it.

Have to think/ hope so. He's in a big numbers crunch and really has never shown anything. Classic tweener and for being known as a shooter has proven to be remarkably average at best at it.

Lost their best player from last year in Blossomgame

Unders

He looks to be in great shape. Our strength staff looks to do a great job...you can really see the body transformation from when last years class stepped foot onto campus to now. Thought the same. Definitely seems more cut

That's fine 15 quality minutes a game is all we need

Agreed

Robin Washut posted it

No offer per Rivals this morning

6'0" 6'3" 6'7" 6'7" 6'8" when your next 4 off the bench are all 6"4"-plus is not a small college lineup.