Was reading in the "why should I feel good?" thread and thought a forecasting thread might be in order. What are five-to-ten criteria you would consider when evaluating CTG from now until this time next year? Let me see if I can come up w 10. It would be very interesting to revisit this discussion one year from now. Retain Kugel Get a serviceable/good C in the portal Get a serviceable PF/good in the portal Make the right move on Reeves (if he stays, he plays well) Keep Lane and coach him up; loads of athletic potential Get at least one impact player in the portal. If #2&3 above give you pause (re: "serviceable"), I agree but as long as we get one stud, whether a guard, forward, or center we need at least one who makes the team better. If #s 2-5 don't go our way, we need more than one. Make Shimmy and Aberdeen players in our system, partially as a matter of depth/continuity for the future, but also as sophomore contributors. Get above .500 in the SEC Make the tourney Get something from Jitoboh, or have a second transfer center who contributes. I tried to prioritize these and while some would put #9 higher on the list, it's hard to start with higher expectations for a team that will lose Castleton and has so many ?s. Also, I'm trying to be as specific/measurable as possible. Things like "protect the home court" will be harder to judge. I realize "serviceable" and "impact" etc. are also subjective. I'd like to be able to revisit this list and say yes/no for each at this time next year.
If he accomplishes enough on that list, he'll get #9. Like football, I don't think most expect miracles, but they want to see progress.
I don’t have 10, but I’d add these: 1) a roster overhaul is coming… absolutely must address shooting and rebounding 2) better personnel/roster management 3) better use of timeouts 4) employ the so-called “analytics”… especially as it relates to shot selection. How many times did we see guys like Alex Fudge chucking up boulders from the arc? 5) if depth … use it.
Great thread. Thanks! Your #1 would also be my #1 and several others you listed would be on my list. No need to repeat. I don't disagree with any of them. So my list will include coaching/style of play: pressuring the ball more, and more consistently, and playing a more up-tempo style. Moving the ball (especially side-to-side and reversing) for the entire offensive possessions and attacking the basket. We have at least a couple who should be better at that and saw flashes of it at times. Moving the ball and running also helps tire the other teams. Setting better screens and using screens more effectively. Finally, I'd take away the apparent green light from everyone on the court to shoot 3s and only have the designated shooters green-lit and have more focus on rebounding than dropping back early for transition defense. I think a lot of that was limited due to the personnel Coach Golden had this year and lack of depth behind CC. When Florida pressured the ball their defense led to offense. When Florida attacked the basket they did well. IDK why this didn't jump out to the coaches on film.
Very fun thread and better points than I could make. One I'll add: make inroads on HS recruiting. Not immediate signings, but inroads.
It seemed like in White's last year or two, he went away from that and over relied on the portal. Short term fixes usually lead to long term problems.
Much wisdom in your words there is, young Skywalker. If a coach has time to put in a system and stick with it, and recruit to it, and get the guys appropriate for it, the system truly becomes the system and part of the culture. Freshmen may not contribute much, but as sophs, junior, and seniors they tend to be solid even if they're not particularly gifted. They know the nuances of the defense and offense. They have an unspoken communication on the floor with their teammates that also have absorbed the fine points. This is why you see mid-majors advance in the tournament when they don't have any special talents on the floor. They've played together for several years in one system. If you change coaches and players all the time, that continuity gets lost. Our guys were learning a new system and staff this season and didn't particularly get a good handle on any of it through the first half of the season. That unfamiliarity, combined with poor shooting and rebounding, gave us what we got. That said, we do need some experienced transfers immediately, preferably guys that may are suited to the style of play.
Like the list. Though I think #1 is out of anyone’s control. I wouldn’t put it on Todd if Kugel moves up the draft board and decides to leave. Selfishly, I hope he sticks around for 1 more year. The portal is key. Need at least 3 IMO. 2 guys that can play in the paint and contribute now …and an experienced guard. Preferably a PG. Also, win a recruiting battle for at least one top 50 guy. Regardless of position. And somewhere in that mix, we have a true leader emerge. I think all are realistic and doable. As for expectations next year, I’ll go with 19 wins. And win the games you are supposed to.
Assuming Kugel stays (big if, but maybe a generous NIL deal is in the works), then CTG needs to get him to work on his handle. If he improves his handle, his scoring and passing will be so much better without even working on those things. Work on all three and he is gone for sure the next year.
I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out what NBA scouts want, but I don't think Kugel is ready yet to make that jump. As others have pointed out in other threads, his ballhandling is still shaky and not ready for prime time. Just my take.
1. Keep all the scholarship guys. I like them all, and don't think any need to leave. 2. Pick up a big in the portal. A decent big. 3. Pick up 1-2 freshmen who won't leave if they dont play a lot as freshmen (also, a little unrealistic, but a guy can dream) 4. Win 75% non league games, eliminate the bad non league losses. 5. Find the style of play that he feels best fits the guys and run with it
Great List. Saying is one thing doing is another. But the Missouri coach transformed the whole team through the portal. Maybe Golden can do that. If Golden does a majority of your 10, then we will be moving in the right direction.
I would like it if Golden wrote me a check for a million dollars. That would make me feel more positively toward him.
Not sure what you mean by 4. Fudge had a 3PA rate of 26%, which is hardly high. He just shot poorly (worse than as a freshman, even). But his shots were usually decent looks and he is a guy who should be able to make them at a higher clip. And I don’t know how deep of a rotation you want. Analytics say 7 for offense, 9 for defense. We mostly played 9. But for some reason everyone wants us to play 10-11, which hardly anyone does. At any rate, what I love about these threads is that they almost invariably don’t acknowledge anything positive that we can build on or need to carry over. For instance, do we back off our heavy switching, which enabled us to force everything to a waiting CC, but also hurt our defensive rebounding? Or will we be better recovering in transition so we can attack the offensive glass since we had to abandon that by conference season? Will we be able to run more of the flex or double post duck in stuff that they couldn’t last year since we made CC the focus of our half court offense? All of those were fundamentally smart moves we made to adapt to our personnel, but they aren’t necessarily what this staff had in mind when they arrived.
2024 class will be big, but we will probably have to get 2-3 kids out of the portal next year, likely a 5, a 1, and a legit shooter. Hard to know what will be available, obviously. But the staff seems to have a profile: younger guys with plenty of eligibility and ceiling left, but who have shown they can play at the collegiate level and—crucially—will have used to their one free undergrad transfer.
I agree with the parts of your post before this. As for your suggestions, I'm sure those are important points, but my purpose was to address criteria that could either be readily identified or easily measured. If you said "make the top half of the conference in defensive rebounding," that would fit. Then again, that wouldn't be acknowledging anything positive, would it? So, what's your list?
FWIW, I agree with much of your list. Keeping Kugel is essential to us making any positive gains. He is set up for a massive season, IMO. And I do think we need to add some players via the portal, which I said in my second post. Reeves and Lane are almost certainly gone; one has lost all confidence in himself and the other just has too limited of an offensive skill set. Not sure why we need a portal 4. Fudge is our starter there and he has a high ceiling. And we have two of them coming in with the 2023 class. We definitely need a 5. If we can figure out a way to stagger them, then two might be possible. Definitely hope we add a point guard—either Thomas or a portal kid. Another wing shooter would be ideal, too.
Good pt re: PF. I was assuming that neither of the freshmen would play much if any in conference. We might not need a four, though, if Fudge and Shimmy and button down that spot. I've heard several say PG, but don't we need a SG more?
I’m not sure what is confusing. I prefer a guy who shoots 24% from the arc on the season to not shoot from the arc. He had 45 attempts. He converted 11. He made 4 of 14 at lsu… so, I’m not sure there is much evidence “he should be able to make them at a higher clip”. At least not to date…
