Game 32: A10 Tournament - #8 GMU (20-11 / 9-9) vs #9 St. Joe’s (19-12 / 9-9).

[GMU79]

Not what was said, just going to get ‘shooters’ isn’t the answer, going to get better guards. Yes no **** you need complete players but that’s not what these posts said. He’ll Mason finally found a pg after 10 years and people want 5 new players which is just plain stupid!

So again disagree 100% that going to get 5 shooters is the answer. Maybe finding 2 complete all around scoring guards who can play with Okie Haynes and Maddox is way to go…. That may be too complex though.

Also No one would call Hall a shooter, they would call him a scorer but sure go get shooters! Whatever….. just an oddly specific term for it to be used when yeah they actually need ‘scorers’

I think the point being made of going after shooters was simply that we have seen for years how 3 pt shooters can completely alter a game. They have certainly killed us many times. I don't think anyone said/meant that defense, or bigs, or scorers were unnecessary. Of course they are. Everyone knows that. Usually the most well rounded team wins the most games.
Again, noone on here would ever say "put 5 shooters on the floor and go get 'em!"

 

[GMUgemini]

The point is you can’t put 4 players on the floor at the same time who can’t shoot and expect your offense to run smoothly.

Hall was not a shooter but he shot well enough that you couldn’t ignore him when he caught it on the perimeter.

And very few teams are going to have multiple three level scorers on the same team, especially at our level.

Next season we’ve got a low post bully in Haynes, a slasher in Okojie, and a three level scorer in Maddox: would like our other twi biggest minute getters to be 38%+ three point shooters.

If you think about our first and last conference losses, we were, what 1-28 from three in those games? St. joes (not a good defensive team) confidently ran under screens because they knew we largely couldn’t shoot outside of Maddox.

 

[jruby]

Y

The point is you can’t put 4 players on the floor at the same time who can’t shoot and expect your offense to run smoothly.

Hall was not a shooter but he shot well enough that you couldn’t ignore him when he caught it on the perimeter.

And very few teams are going to have multiple three level scorers on the same team, especially at our level.

Next season we’ve got a low post bully in Haynes, a slasher in Okojie, and a three level scorer in Maddox: would like our other twi biggest minute getters to be 38%+ three point shooters.

If you think about our first and last conference losses, we were, what 1-28 from three in those games? St. joes (not a good defensive team) confidently ran under screens because they knew we largely couldn’t shoot outside of Maddox.

Yes I agree they need 2 shooters/scorers. They do not need 5 players like some have tried saying. If Okie could shoot better, maybe only 1. I think it’s why they will have to run 4 guards until he can shoot better but they can work on that. You can’t teach a kid to be as quick as he is.

 

[Jack Strop]

Y

Yes I agree they need 2 shooters/scorers. They do not need 5 players like some have tried saying. If Okie could shoot better, maybe only 1. I think it’s why they will have to run 4 guards until he can shoot better but they can work on that. You can’t teach a kid to be as quick as he is.

I thought the "five players" thing meant that there is likely (based on some fans' projections) to be five more scholly slots to fill, not necessarily to be starters or rotational players per se.

Malik ==> ???
Polite? ===> ???
Johnson ==> ???
Hall? ===> ???
Dinkins? ===> ???

 

[Patriot8]

I thought the "five players" thing meant that there is likely (based on some fans' projections) to be five more scholly slots to fill, not necessarily to be starters or rotational players per se.

Malik ==> ???
Polite? ===> ???
Johnson ==> ???
Hall? ===> ???
Dinkins? ===> ???

Correct, the expectation is 5 open spots.

Johnson picked up Pavrette's scholarship for this season.

 

[Jack Strop]

Correct, the expectation is 5 open spots.

Johnson picked up Pavrette's scholarship for this season. He'll be back as a walk-on as far as I know.

I got the vibe that some here think that others here think that Mason needs and should go out and get five new starters. Perhaps I'm misreading?

 

[GMU79]

I got the vibe that some here think that others here think that Mason needs and should go out and get five new starters. Perhaps I'm misreading?

I'd be surprised if that was what anyone said or meant.

 

[Patriot8]

I got the vibe that some here think that others here think that Mason needs and should go out and get five new starters. Perhaps I'm misreading?

Maddox and Haynes are locked in. Have to believe Okojie is a sure thing unless the staff can do something really impressive in the portal.

2 starting spots are available.

 

[Patriot Lawdog]

Not what was said, just going to get ‘shooters’ isn’t the answer, going to get better guards. Yes no **** you need complete players but that’s not what these posts said. He’ll Mason finally found a pg after 10 years and people want 5 new players which is just plain stupid!

So again disagree 100% that going to get 5 shooters is the answer. Maybe finding 2 complete all around scoring guards who can play with Okie Haynes and Maddox is way to go…. That may be too complex though.

Also No one would call Hall a shooter, they would call him a scorer but sure go get shooters! Whatever….. just an oddly specific term for it to be used when yeah they actually need ‘scorers’

Yea, I don't want a "scorer". A "scorer" to me is a guy who shoots between 30-35% from three and takes a ton of shots to get his. He also needs to have the ball in his hands. If BO is our PG, we need to surround him with specific types of players. Guys who can make open shots and not need the ball a lot. Guys who can effectively come off screens and play away from the ball. BO and Maddox will have the ball a lot. Part of our problem on offense was guys just standing around when Hall got the ball. I want guys who can move within an offense and knock down open shots. Maybe one other guy who can somewhat create, but I don't think that's nearly as pressing a need.

 

[jruby]

I thought the "five players" thing meant that there is likely (based on some fans' projections) to be five more scholly slots to fill, not necessarily to be starters or rotational players per se.

Malik ==> ???
Polite? ===> ???
Johnson ==> ???
Hall? ===> ???
Dinkins? ===> ???

Ok that may have been what they meant, didn’t come across that way. So that’s fair. I think may go as high as 7 with 2 seniors but have 2 freshmen so if that’s what it means by 5. Sure!

I got the vibe that some here think that others here think that Mason needs and should go out and get five new starters. Perhaps I'm misreading?

I did too, so wasn’t just me. Thank you!

Yea, I don't want a "scorer". A "scorer" to me is a guy who shoots between 30-35% from three and takes a ton of shots to get his. He also needs to have the ball in his hands. If BO is our PG, we need to surround him with specific types of players. Guys who can make open shots and not need the ball a lot. Guys who can effectively come off screens and play away from the ball. BO and Maddox will have the ball a lot. Part of our problem on offense was guys just standing around when Hall got the ball. I want guys who can move within an offense and knock down open shots. Maybe one other guy who can somewhat create, but I don't think that's nearly as pressing a need.

Ok well depends how you play, up tempo etc etc. lot of factors in this statement. End of day you have to score more than other team.

One thing is coming up with a system that offense > defense. Win games and build towards winning culture.

One thing that is a must, have high level point guard play and being tough. Whether you want to be high octane offense, hard nose defense, fast paced slow whatever that’s up to system and that’s debatable and no 1 answer is right or wrong it’s just opinion.

Bad pg play and not being tough enough are undebatable though, those are must haves.