• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

WFU Hoops: '22-'23 Roster Construction - +Ituka/Carr/Appleby/Bradford

obviously this is hiiiighly speculative, but if williamson returns as is rumored and we land appleby, i think your starting / finishing lineup becomes:

appleby
williamson
ituka
monsanto
[big man]


monsanto is a plus rebounder, but i think that really underscores the fact that we desperately need another big man who can really grab boards. good news is that marsh does seem to fill that role if he's playable, he was our best rebounder by a decent amount in his limited minutes last season.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
obviously this is hiiiighly speculative, but if williamson returns as is rumored and we land appleby, i think your starting / finishing lineup becomes:

appleby
williamson
ituka
monsanto
[big man]


monsanto is a plus rebounder, but i think that really underscores the fact that we desperately need another big man who can really grab boards. good news is that marsh does seem to fill that role if he's playable, he was our best rebounder by a decent amount in his limited minutes last season.
Click to expand...

While a "starting lineup" is not super-important as compared to minutes allocations, that is a really small lineup. WF had one of the biggest lineups in college basketball last year (13th in that nation) and think that helped in our 2 point FG% success (4th in the nation) and defense (#42 in effective defense). Really concerned if WF lineup regularly plays that small.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
obviously this is hiiiighly speculative, but if williamson returns as is rumored and we land appleby, i think your starting / finishing lineup becomes:

appleby
williamson
ituka
monsanto
[big man]


monsanto is a plus rebounder, but i think that really underscores the fact that we desperately need another big man who can really grab boards. good news is that marsh does seem to fill that role if he's playable, he was our best rebounder by a decent amount in his limited minutes last season.
Click to expand...

Pilchard said:
While a "starting lineup" is not super-important as compared to minutes allocations, that is a really small lineup. WF had one of the biggest lineups in college basketball last year (13th in that nation) and think that helped in our 2 point FG% success (4th in the nation) and defense (#42 in effective defense). Really concerned if WF lineup regularly plays that small.
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty good for a "protect alead, protect the ball, make free throws" lineup for close end game situations.

I agree with Pilch, not a lineup for lots of minutes. Basketball is still a game in which tall people are very important. I see Carr getting lots of minutes. Like 25-30 per game. And I think he's a good enough ball handler and FT shooter to fit the [big man] spot. In the close out lineup. He may have three years eligibility left, but he has also played a lot of college basketball. As of now, he'll be the only guy on the team with NCAA Tournament experience.
 
Way too early for a minutes projection, but I'd expect Appleby & Williamson to both play 25+ mpg. Ituka probably a shade less than that (20-25).

Monsanto gets as much as he can at the 3. Cam fills in mostly at the 2/3, and hopefully Rob can earn some minutes, as well.

The 4/5 is muddier... Though you'd have to expect Carr to play 20+.

Prior to last season, I had expected us to play more players because I thought we had depth and no real alpha-type players... Turns out the Alondes and Jake were a lot better than anticipated and NBA-type players. But regardless, I think the norm is still to have a 7-8 man rotation, with 1-2 other guys that get situational spot minutes.

If I'm putting the roster in order of perceived playing time, it goes: Monsanto, Appleby, Williamson, Carr, Ituka... Then I don't know - Cam, Marsh, Rob? We clearly still need some more size (and I suspect that'll be addressed next).
 
IAppreciateIt said:
there is no reason to compare carr (or almost anyone else) with laravia. the reason for laravia's success last year wasn't that he put up good numbers the previous season at a midmajor, it's because he's talented enough to now be considered a possible first round pick. there are dozens of guys in each mid-major league that put up solid numbers, the vast majority of those who don't project as NBA draft picks won't be able to sustain their play against tougher competition.

even for dummies like us, the difference in laravia's highlight video at ISU vs. carr's is night and day. i think carr is undoubtedly a nice add and should contribute, but we were his only offer from a power school. comparing him to laravia is just setting him up for failure.

tldr: laravia is an exception, not the norm.
Click to expand...

totally fair point

I have not watched Carr's tape but Jake clearly had "it" at ISU, and it was reasonable to project him as an all-ACC level player
 
Currently Carr is one of two guys on the roster over 6'6". That could change, but if projecting minutes based on the current group on or potentially on the roster, Carr will have to play major minutes.
 
Buttermaker said:
Currently Carr is one of two guys on the roster over 6'6". That could change, but if projecting minutes based on the current group on or potentially on the roster, Carr will have to play major minutes.
Click to expand...

That's an amazing fact for a sport in which the goal is to get the ball into a rim standing universally at 10 feet.
 
Buttermaker said:
Currently Carr is one of two guys on the roster over 6'6". That could change, but if projecting minutes based on the current group on or potentially on the roster, Carr will have to play major minutes.
Click to expand...

3, with incoming 6'9" freshman Keller

I don't see a 3-guard lineup of 6'1" guys getting a lot of run, but what do I know
 
If we get Appleby, I'd be surprised if we're not going after dudes with some size to round out the class. I always thought Sy and Dallas on the court together created a ton of problems for opposing teams, and also believe Marsh is going to have a breakout year this coming season so the 5 should be in good shape. Carr, Marsh, Keller, Monsanto, Daivien/Appleby would be a pretty good lineup assuming Keller is ready...guessing he won't be quite yet and we get a bruiser to complement Carr at the 4.
 
Pilchard said:
While a "starting lineup" is not super-important as compared to minutes allocations, that is a really small lineup. WF had one of the biggest lineups in college basketball last year (13th in that nation) and think that helped in our 2 point FG% success (4th in the nation) and defense (#42 in effective defense). Really concerned if WF lineup regularly plays that small.
Click to expand...

definitely on the smaller end, which isn't ideal. that said, there are tons of teams in college basketball playing small lineups with three or four guards. depending on how things shake up, it seems very possible our best talent are smaller guys. if that's the case, i think we'll end up playing a smaller lineup.

it wouldn't be new for forbes, his last team at ETSU (who went 30-4) was very guard heavy. in their last game of the season (the conference champ game), etsu played guys over 6'5" only 41 minutes combined: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/2020-03-09-19-east-tennessee-state.html
 
SkyDivingDeacon said:
If we get Appleby, I'd be surprised if we're not going after dudes with some size to round out the class. I always thought Sy and Dallas on the court together created a ton of problems for opposing teams, and also believe Marsh is going to have a breakout year this coming season so the 5 should be in good shape. Carr, Marsh, Keller, Monsanto, Daivien/Appleby would be a pretty good lineup assuming Keller is ready...guessing he won't be quite yet and we get a bruiser to complement Carr at the 4.
Click to expand...

i pretty strongly disagree the 5 is in good shape (unless you are assuming we will land some quality big transfers) we have marsh, who played 80 minutes the whole season and then carr and keller who are both undersized in the weight department. getting a reliable big who can rebound is our most pressing need, imo.

honestly, i also really disagree that's a strong lineup. if that's who we end up with, i think we're looking like we're back at the bottom of the acc.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
definitely on the smaller end, which isn't ideal. that said, there are tons of teams in college basketball playing small lineups with three or four guards. depending on how things shake up, it seems very possible our best talent are smaller guys. if that's the case, i think we'll end up playing a smaller lineup.

it wouldn't be new for forbes, his last team at ETSU (who went 30-4) was very guard heavy. in their last game of the season (the conference champ game), etsu played guys over 6'5" only 41 minutes combined: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/2020-03-09-19-east-tennessee-state.html
Click to expand...

sure, but that was against Wofford, who was also small, with 42 minutes of guys over 6'6" and 11 minutes of a 6'6" guy
 
IAppreciateIt said:
i pretty strongly disagree the 5 is in good shape (unless you are assuming we will land some quality big transfers) we have marsh, who played 80 minutes the whole season and then carr and keller who are both undersized in the weight department. getting a reliable big who can rebound is our most pressing need, imo.

honestly, i also really disagree that's a strong lineup. if that's who we end up with, i think we're looking like we're back at the bottom of the acc.
Click to expand...

Yeah- the roster is not complete yet. But a lineup Appleby/Williamson/Marsh/Monsanto and Ituka/Hildreth/Carr is not what I would consider "pretty good." Fortunately, we have time to finds some more size and (hopefully) shooting.
 
Really small ball for lengthy stretches has generally not been a recipe for success in the ACC. Gotta have bigs to compete with bigs.
 
Fair points. Could be overly optimistic, but I do think Marsh is going to be more than solid at the 5 this year and I hope we get a bruiser PF type to complement Carr (who I agree needs to hit the weight room hard once he gets on campus). We need more size for sure...I don't think anyone disagrees on that. And totally agree...a big who can rebound/dominate the paint (a bruiser PF) is our biggest need. I will be surprised if that's not what we're going after if we get Appleby. If we don't get Appleby, and/or Daivien comes back, we need a true PG first although I do think Cam did well in that role towards the end of the season.

Carr, Marsh, Monsanto/Ituka, Appleby/Daivien and potentially a portal PF would be a pretty good lineup, IMHO. That's not bottom of the ACC talent and with Forbes coaching, I think we have a shot at another good season.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
obviously this is hiiiighly speculative, but if williamson returns as is rumored and we land appleby, i think your starting / finishing lineup becomes:

appleby
williamson
ituka
monsanto
[big man]


monsanto is a plus rebounder, but i think that really underscores the fact that we desperately need another big man who can really grab boards. good news is that marsh does seem to fill that role if he's playable, he was our best rebounder by a decent amount in his limited minutes last season.
Click to expand...

Did I miss the rumor that Williamson is returning? That would be great news.
 
ipitytheblue said:
Same. Great to have a guy on the court who knows Forbes' system as well as he does. Plus, he seems like a great kid. I'd love to have him back.
Click to expand...

Agree, and he was clutch in conference play from 3. Would love it if we could get him, Appleby/Ituka and Monsanto on the court at the same time (with Carr as well). We would have a good amount of firepower. Recruit offense, teach defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top