(03-18-2015 01:25 PM)hktribefan Wrote:  Looking forward I don't think we have a problem replacing the points that Marcus gave us, but my big concern is we haven't seen anyone with the ability to consistently create their own shot. Omar, Tarpey, and Dixon have proven to be capable scorers, and we know Malinowski and Burchfield can be very accurate. Cohn should be an added scorer, and the inside play can only improve. My fear is that part of what gave other players chances was the need to pay attention to Marcus. His ability to create a shot at any time was amazing. We can't always rely on cuts and screens to get an open shot, so hopefully we have some improvement on creating our own shots.

I share the same fear. Too many times this team struggled to move the ball and score with Marcus out. Also there were too many times the rest of the Tribe players not named Marcus would disappear from games for extended amounts of time. Hopefully the Tribe can solve that problem next season without Marcus

(03-18-2015 01:43 PM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 12:02 PM)WMTRIBE75 Wrote:  it is my humble opinion that next year will be the most important season in the history of Tribe basketball.

I think it's a big season not only for Tribe basketball but for Tony Shaver specifically. Next year is his chance to prove that he's so much more than just a guy who recruited Marcus and that he can deliver consistently high caliber Tribe teams. Go Tribe! And go Tony!

According to last night's announcers, I think you mean Terry (Shaver)...

Some great posts.

The first season of the post-Marcus Era should continue our new winning tradition (how great to be able to say that!) with a third consecutive winning season.

It will be hard to perhaps record a third consecutive 20-win season but that result is very possible with the year of experience under the belt of our younger players. Perhaps the toughest thing at the start will be for our guys when the clock (30 or 35) ticks under ten and we look around for Marcus and don't see him!

Tarpey, Prewitt and Dixon make a solid veteran core and have upside remaining in their games. All three are potential All-CAA level and Prewitt, in my opinion, could really blossom
into a big-time scoring threat.

Sheldon is the other returning vet starter...he and Whitman should split the center position,
but bring big uncertainty to the position. I am almost feel Sean is a known quality now...
he will never be a big-time leaper/defender not more than a layup scorer on set plays; he does pass well, runs hard, and adequately moves around and pass when out on the perimeter. Whitman is the unknown: his upside is high--he is athletic, has good moves around the basket, and has, for a big guy, very soft hands. Tony's big job is to light a fire under him, get him more aggressive, and, in the off-season, muscle him up in the gym.

Burchfield, Malinowski. The first two have a year under their belts and show a very big upside. Both guys can shoot the lights out and show a toughness on the court. Both
guys will have to show defensive improvement...too many times opponents just went around them like they were statues (like Tulsa last night until we zoned up). Tony needs to get both guys into the weight room and lock the doors---these two both could use about 15 pounds or so of muscle. When these two turn sideways they disappear from view!

Rowley is a wild-card. Everybody high on this guy..at 6-8 with decent speed and athleticism
combined with a deadly shot he could surprise everyone after his redshirt this season. he reminds me of Gailliard somewhat, but more aggressive and with a better shot. Really need to watch this guy in pre-season practice.

Cohn is the not-so-well-kept secret of this returning mix of players. He showed speed and quickness in practice, can penetrate on offense and no wilting flower when it comes to shooting the ball (same say perhaps too much). He also demonstrated leadership and aggressiveness in practice. Hard to say now how much he'll play...it ranges from starter to
role player when you ask people around the program. Tony loves his game and his aggressiveness, so we'll have to wait and see.

Schlotman and Tot are the wild cards in this talented mix. Mike had a couple of injuries early
on and appeared to lose his confidence along the way....he is a heady player with outstanding point guard skills--sees the entire court, a very good passer and ball-controller. Can he get back; if he can he'll play lots. And Tot? This is like the nursery rhyme kid who was either very, very good or very, very bad. He has some topline skills...passing, running the offense, and a very tough (and rough, not afraid to throw his weight around) defender with his size and extraordinarily long arms. He is more athletic than he looks, too--he moves well for his size and is athletic around the basket.

Seacat, our only frosh coming in right now, appears from a distance to be like many of our center recruits; developing, needs more weight and muscle, he's thin, etc. He's now 6'9",
supposedly 210-215 pounds, and grew from 6-6 to 6-9 the past three years, so maybe he's still growing? His videos show more athleticism than Sheldon ever had..he can dunk, has some moves around the hoop and shoots some from closer than six inches. Unknown at this point if he'll play and could very well, like Whitman did, redshirt.

One final real unknown: Tony still waiting to hear from the two guys remaining who could get that final 2015 scholarship. Both are major conference-type prospects with major conference schools after them, so our chances appear dim. If one of these guys DOES
shock and commit to W&M this spring another whole avenue opens up for next season---either one of these guys would play next season and get lots of minutes.

This is a very talented mix coming back Post-Marcus, unlike years when the program collapsed after a rare single winning season. I am both intrigued and very positive about 2015-16.

I think we're going to find out just how valuable Marcus was to this team. I don't think we'll enjoy so many open jumpers and teams (like UNCW) will press us big time.

Agree with that.

I for one don't feel it will be insurmountable, and nothing at all against Marcus on this. He was immensely talented as we all know.

On the other side of the coin, he always seemed incredibly relaxed (passive?) to me and I never felt a leadership presence on the court.

We know we have people who can score.

What we need is intensity for improvement.

I think the 2016 edition will do very well.

I will also miss Marcus and those step back threes.

(03-18-2015 02:28 PM)WMtribe17 Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 01:25 PM)hktribefan Wrote:  Looking forward I don't think we have a problem replacing the points that Marcus gave us, but my big concern is we haven't seen anyone with the ability to consistently create their own shot. Omar, Tarpey, and Dixon have proven to be capable scorers, and we know Malinowski and Burchfield can be very accurate. Cohn should be an added scorer, and the inside play can only improve. My fear is that part of what gave other players chances was the need to pay attention to Marcus. His ability to create a shot at any time was amazing. We can't always rely on cuts and screens to get an open shot, so hopefully we have some improvement on creating our own shots.

I share the same fear. Too many times this team struggled to move the ball and score with Marcus out. Also there were too many times the rest of the Tribe players not named Marcus would disappear from games for extended amounts of time. Hopefully the Tribe can solve that problem next season without Marcus

I think that this is the major concern for all of us as we look to next year. When Omar scored his 33 points against Hofstra in Baltimore, he commented in the press conference that probably 15 of those points were attributable to teams always having to account for Marcus first, opening up scoring opportunities for other players. I also agree that the team sometimes looked stagnant when Marcus was out of the game. But in fairness to the many players that return next year, it is probably a bit early to conclude how they will perform offensively without Marcus until they enter a season having planned for and practiced for a season without Marcus.

With Terry's development of a perimeter game, Daniel's pure stroke, Omar's willingness to take the ball to the hoop, and hopefully more minutes for Greg, there is no shortage of players who can score the ball on this team, and in some ways I believe that each will blossom knowing that they no longer will be considered, at best, the second scoring option on the floor. What we will definitely need, however, is a fourth player that can step up and be not only the primary ball handler but a capable scoring threat also, someone who understands the importance of setting his teammates up with good scoring opportunities while having an aggressive offensive mindset also, much like Brandon Britt brought to the table.

I think that it is great that Tony recruited a tough minded pass first point guard like Mike Schlotman, and I think that Tot's future can be very bright. But if are going to continue to be successful running the perimeter offense that we do that spreads the floor, thrives on the 3 and cutting to the basket, and pretty much eliminates the center position from being a major scoring option by keeping him out on the high post, we cannot afford the luxury of a point guard who only shoots out of necessity. We need Mike to grow into a role that is perhaps different than we recruited him for. And we should also pray that David already has that skill set.

Thornton took 27% of this team's shots this year. That's a significant chunk of the offense that has to be replaced. To put it into perspective, the Rusthoven/Britt/Boatner/Gaillard combo took 41% of W&M's shots in 2013-14. Thornton's shots/game was almost the same this year as it was his junior year. Here's where the shots went:

Prewitt: 250 shots in 2013-14; 331 shots in 14-15
Tarpey: 113 shots in 2013-14; 251 shots in 14-15
Dixon: 78 shots in 2013-14; 232 shots in 14-15

Those 3 were able to stay efficient despite the increased workload, and Thornton was a tick more efficient this year, improving his field goal % and hitting 40% of his 3s. This page won't sort by usage rate but it looks like Thornton's was the 4th highest in the CAA. http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/hollinger..._/group/10 (I don't love PER but I find it useful; I would not have thought Tarpey would have rated that well, but it isn't that surprising when I think about it.)

Thornton was able to absorb a lot of shots and make them. I don't think it's that easy to just distribute his shots to the other scorers since they may not be able to stay efficient with a higher workload. What would really help is if W&M can develop some semblance of an interior game to take heat off the shooters. This year's version used Thornton to open up the long range bombers; next year's model will have to find another way to generate good shots from distance.

It would also really help things if W&M played a little defense next year. Assuming they won't be a machine on offense they will have to figure out a way to slow teams down. They were 300th defensively according to Ken Pomeroy, and after their last 2 games it's hard to argue with that number. That number also isn't a fluke:

2010: 175
2011: 266
2012: 296
2013: 319
2014: 318

I don't expect them to be UVA on defense, but they really need to be 200 or better next season. Too often guys rotated off corner shooters ( a huge no-no) or watched guys drive right past them.

Overall, despite not getting off the dang Final Five list and not getting that first post season victory, it was definitely a solid year for us, 20 wins, lots of records broken, a person on each All-CAA team, W&M's 1st POY, two 100 point games, 48% shooting on the season, etc, etc...

As Tony said in the pre-season, when we were picked second in the CAA, he thought we might still be too young (10 of 14 players were in their first or second year) for that much praise. In retrospect, he could have been right. We got a share of the CAA title, but couldn't accomplish the two higher goals.

My opinion was that at the end of the season, our biggest problem (other than a lack of defense) was that our bench just flat out disappeared. That disappearance led to a lot of the other problems we encountered. The production we had gotten earlier just dried up when the bright lights came on (end of the season, playoffs, tourney). The shooters, coming off the bench, lost that touch of earlier in the season and the defenders did not defend as well as was needed. That was never more evident than in the Hofstra game, when we got only 36 minutes of bench help and the entire group went a total of 1 for 1, 2 points, from the field for the whole game. That was mostly because no one, who played coming off the bench, ever looked like they were really comfortable out there. That put more pressure on the starters to play extended minutes, especially critical in a tournament situation. The results were evident the night night.

In the last four contests of the year, the Tribe bench supplied a total of 170 minutes of game time out of a possible 850 minutes (10 minutes of OT). In that time they scored 29 total points. To make matters worse, 15 of those points were by Tom Schalk, so the youngsters scored 14 points over 4 games, or 3.5 points per game. Your bench accumulating 3.5 ppg won't cut it very often.

You can chalk a lot of the end of the season bench slump up to youth, inexperience and hitting the proverbial "freshman wall", but it is still a concern.

The youth and inexperience thing may be our biggest concern again next season. We are still going to be very young.
Again, in my opinion, Tot and Schlotman have to get better at running the offense and seeing the floor, Malinowski and Burchfield have to get better on D and Whitman has got to get some confidence...and about 15 more pounds.



We will have a solid nucleus in 2015-16 with Tarpey, Prewitt and Dixon. It will certainly be Tarpey's team. I, too, have great hope that Coen will supply the solid ball handling needed to fill the void and Sean will work on his offensive game (and foul shooting).

It still looks like next season will turn on how much this year's freshman class dedicates itself to improving their games in the off season. Confidence is the new "buzzword" around college basketball in response to what makes a player successful and, seriously, all of our freshmen could use a solid dose of it, not just Whitman.
Many of those guys will still be coming off our bench next season and we need to feel good that we will get the necessary production, both offensively and defensively, from them to be a winning team for the third year in a row.


Of course, a warm salute to Marcus and Tom. Good job. I wish them both much success in their lives and careers ahead.
.

(03-18-2015 04:59 PM)Rocco Wrote:  Thornton took 27% of this team's shots this year. That's a significant chunk of the offense that has to be replaced. To put it into perspective, the Rusthoven/Britt/Boatner/Gaillard combo took 41% of W&M's shots in 2013-14. Thornton's shots/game was almost the same this year as it was his junior year. Here's where the shots went:

Prewitt: 250 shots in 2013-14; 331 shots in 14-15
Tarpey: 113 shots in 2013-14; 251 shots in 14-15
Dixon: 78 shots in 2013-14; 232 shots in 14-15

Those 3 were able to stay efficient despite the increased workload, and Thornton was a tick more efficient this year, improving his field goal % and hitting 40% of his 3s. This page won't sort by usage rate but it looks like Thornton's was the 4th highest in the CAA. http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/hollinger..._/group/10 (I don't love PER but I find it useful; I would not have thought Tarpey would have rated that well, but it isn't that surprising when I think about it.)

Thornton was able to absorb a lot of shots and make them. I don't think it's that easy to just distribute his shots to the other scorers since they may not be able to stay efficient with a higher workload. What would really help is if W&M can develop some semblance of an interior game to take heat off the shooters. This year's version used Thornton to open up the long range bombers; next year's model will have to find another way to generate good shots from distance.

It would also really help things if W&M played a little defense next year. Assuming they won't be a machine on offense they will have to figure out a way to slow teams down. They were 300th defensively according to Ken Pomeroy, and after their last 2 games it's hard to argue with that number. That number also isn't a fluke:

2010: 175
2011: 266
2012: 296
2013: 319
2014: 318

I don't expect them to be UVA on defense, but they really need to be 200 or better next season. Too often guys rotated off corner shooters ( a huge no-no) or watched guys drive right past them.

Ouch those defensive numbers look bad, but impressive we were able to win so many games despite them. This certainly was one of our most potent offensive teams to compensate for some lackluster defensive efforts. I'm guessing our previous NIT team in 2009-2010 was worse offensively but significantly better defensively.

I know this is blasphemous, but I'm excited to see what the remaining players can do without Marcus to turn to next year. By necessity, we will need to be a much more balanced team - that could work for us or against us. I don't think we have a player that opposing teams will double team, but I think that is probably a good thing. I thought there were a lot of times where other guys backed off knowing that Marcus was going to take the shot.

The key will be how our freshman can contribute next year. If anyone has a Tarpey level improvement from year to year, we will solve a lot of our production issues.

I'd love to see us press next year. I think that Tarpey & Dixon can pressure the ball anywhere. Cohn is an unknown, but if Tot showed anything in his few minutes this year it's that he can be an aggressive defender. Omar's defensive strengths are quick hands, jumping passing lanes, and blocking shots. Two of those three will be great on a press. Coach Shaver used to go baseline to baseline at Hampden-Sydney, and I'd love to see a return to form now that he has the athletes to do it. If anything, I think we didn't go to the 1-3-1 soon enough in the game vs. Tulsa. Confidence can come from playing free, and it can come from being turned loose on defense. When we go on our scoring slumps, I'd love to see Coach Shaver change the mood by putting in some players he expects to get 5-10 minutes at most and tell them to go crazy. Pressure the ball, handcheck, whatever. Just go get the ball however you can. If it doesn't work, we got a minute or two of rest for the starters and changed the tenor on the court. If it works, it can change a game completely.

The best thing this season leaves us with is watching the Dixon Vine from now until preseason next year.

(03-18-2015 07:51 PM)TribeTrack Wrote:  Ouch those defensive numbers look bad, but impressive we were able to win so many games despite them. This certainly was one of our most potent offensive teams to compensate for some lackluster defensive efforts. I'm guessing our previous NIT team in 2009-2010 was worse offensively but significantly better defensively.

I know this is blasphemous, but I'm excited to see what the remaining players can do without Marcus to turn to next year. By necessity, we will need to be a much more balanced team - that could work for us or against us. I don't think we have a player that opposing teams will double team, but I think that is probably a good thing. I thought there were a lot of times where other guys backed off knowing that Marcus was going to take the shot.

The key will be how our freshman can contribute next year. If anyone has a Tarpey level improvement from year to year, we will solve a lot of our production issues.

The 2009-10 team was 72nd offensively; this year's team was 27th. I don't think this year's offense was really top-30 (though I didn't watch nearly as much college hoops this year as in the past), but they were quite good and good enough to carry a bad defense (and I can believe W&M's defense is really that bad; thanks to 2 of today's games they're currently 299th). They won 20 games when their underlying stats said they should have won 19.2 games- a tiny bit of overachievement but not that big.

Excited isn't the word I'd use to describe how I feel about next year. For all of Thornton's faults (such as ill-timed Hero Ball shots) he set up shots for his teammates and was a high-volume shooter that made a lot of difficult shots. I went back to the 2009-10 season when listing defensive rankings because I didn't want to inadvertently give the impression that W&M's defensive woes were due solely to Thornton. The team's pieces all fit around him- he'd drive, the defense would collapse, and he would hit them for 3s. Conversely, the shooters on the team created spacing that gave Thornton room to work. It's not yet known if those pieces can work without Thornton. I think there's enough talent to build an offense but we won't know until we see it. A true PG with better playmaking skills may be able to keep the offense going; it's also possible that without Thornton to clean up messes and without someone on the inside capable of doing anything the offense stagnates.

The last time W&M made it to the NIT they spent the next 3 years eating paste- 29-64 record over the next 3 years, ugly play and lots of excuses from fans about why those years don't count. On paper they should be able to reload quicker and not spend 3 years looking like they have never played basketball before. Games aren't played on paper.

(03-18-2015 09:08 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  I'd love to see us press next year. I think that Tarpey & Dixon can pressure the ball anywhere. Cohn is an unknown, but if Tot showed anything in his few minutes this year it's that he can be an aggressive defender. Omar's defensive strengths are quick hands, jumping passing lanes, and blocking shots. Two of those three will be great on a press. Coach Shaver used to go baseline to baseline at Hampden-Sydney, and I'd love to see a return to form now that he has the athletes to do it. If anything, I think we didn't go to the 1-3-1 soon enough in the game vs. Tulsa. Confidence can come from playing free, and it can come from being turned loose on defense. When we go on our scoring slumps, I'd love to see Coach Shaver change the mood by putting in some players he expects to get 5-10 minutes at most and tell them to go crazy. Pressure the ball, handcheck, whatever. Just go get the ball however you can. If it doesn't work, we got a minute or two of rest for the starters and changed the tenor on the court. If it works, it can change a game completely.

The best thing this season leaves us with is watching the Dixon Vine from now until preseason next year.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dixon "Vine" would not have been necessary if only Tony had called more "time-outs" early in the season.

(03-18-2015 09:23 PM)Rocco Wrote:  The last time W&M made it to the NIT they spent the next 3 years eating paste- 29-64 record over the next 3 years, ugly play and lots of excuses from fans about why those years don't count. On paper they should be able to reload quicker and not spend 3 years looking like they have never played basketball before. Games aren't played on paper.

The last time we made it to the NIT we graduated 4 seniors (3 starters) and promptly lost another important player (Gaillard) to injury. We followed up with a strong recruiting class, but ended up playing a lot of freshmen. Hopefully, only losing a single starter and two rotation players will help us keep the level of play up.

(03-18-2015 09:30 PM)62Indian Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 09:08 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  The best thing this season leaves us with is watching the Dixon Vine from now until preseason next year.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dixon "Vine" would not have been necessary if only Tony had called more "time-outs" early in the season.

We wouldn't have played Hofstra in the CAA tournament if we called more timeouts? I think you're saying that we would have won the game in regulation if our starters had fewer miles on their legs, but I think it would have taken a lot of timeouts to impact that. Substitution patterns, sure, but timeouts are the wrong dead horse for that argument.

(03-18-2015 09:30 PM)62Indian Wrote:  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dixon "Vine" would not have been necessary if only Tony had called more "time-outs" early in the season.

Now I'm confused. I don't understand the correlation. Also why does "time-outs" have quotation marks around it?

(03-18-2015 09:32 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 09:23 PM)Rocco Wrote:  The last time W&M made it to the NIT they spent the next 3 years eating paste- 29-64 record over the next 3 years, ugly play and lots of excuses from fans about why those years don't count. On paper they should be able to reload quicker and not spend 3 years looking like they have never played basketball before. Games aren't played on paper.

The last time we made it to the NIT we graduated 4 seniors (3 starters) and promptly lost another important player (Gaillard) to injury. We followed up with a strong recruiting class, but ended up playing a lot of freshmen. Hopefully, only losing a single starter and two rotation players will help us keep the level of play up.

Saying they're "only" losing a single starter under-sells exactly what they're losing a little.

(03-19-2015 07:15 AM)Rocco Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 09:32 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 09:23 PM)Rocco Wrote:  The last time W&M made it to the NIT they spent the next 3 years eating paste- 29-64 record over the next 3 years, ugly play and lots of excuses from fans about why those years don't count. On paper they should be able to reload quicker and not spend 3 years looking like they have never played basketball before. Games aren't played on paper.

The last time we made it to the NIT we graduated 4 seniors (3 starters) and promptly lost another important player (Gaillard) to injury. We followed up with a strong recruiting class, but ended up playing a lot of freshmen. Hopefully, only losing a single starter and two rotation players will help us keep the level of play up.

Saying they're "only" losing a single starter under-sells exactly what they're losing a little.

A little, but to put it in the same context as your earlier post, those 4 were 55% of our shots. My point isn't that we're not going to miss Marcus, it's that the cupboard is not bare as it was the last time. With 4 returning starters and 6 returning rotation players (counting Malinowski as one and the collective remaining freshmen as one) I think we should still project as at least a top half CAA team next year, with a good chance at another top 4 finish.

(03-18-2015 11:02 PM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 09:30 PM)62Indian Wrote:  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dixon "Vine" would not have been necessary if only Tony had called more "time-outs" early in the season.

Now I'm confused. I don't understand the correlation. Also why does "time-outs" have quotation marks around it?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I was being facetious in an attempt to mock other posters on the W&M Board, who have, IN FACT, complained numerous times about Coach Shavers use of time-outs. So my comment was an attempt at biting, but subtle, humor. I am more than OK with whenever, and if ever, Coach Shaver calls a TO.