March 6, 2014 at 8:02 pm #13858
Not sure we’ve ever done this before but interest is at an all time high on this board and might be nice to keep some bantor going, so here goes my grades for the season for all LU players who made an impact on the team and saw regular rotation time, ranked in descending order based on ppg. Note these grades are part quantitative and part qualitative, but what I noticed in doing them were I kept falling back to preseason expectations for the player and based some of the grade off those early expectations as well. Not sure if I even did this well but just wanted to throw it out there
MM: Final Grade, B+ Quantitative: The points, assists, assist/turnover, and rebounds were all up in his senior year from prior years. However, the shooting percentages were down across the board, as he shot 32% from 3 and 40% overall from the field. Qualitative: He carried a big burdon trying to lead a young team, but I still kind of expected a tiny bit more from Mackey this year if I am being honest to myself. He was always in the background behind CJ and Gabe, and last year Holden, so maybe my expectations were to high but I expected him to have a really big senior year. He had a good year, not a great year. From a leadership standpoint, I think he improved, but he still got benched to complete the only ever grand slam recorded in LU History of getting benched or suspended atleast 1 time in all 4 years in the program. I also think he tried to do to much sometimes and forced things, and didn’t make all the right choices with the ball that PGs need to make. I also think Reed played him to much at 35.3 mpg, and like Reed has LU playing at the end MM faded as well, closing his last 8 games at LU with a 31-88 or 35% field goal percentage.
TK: Final Grade, A: Quantitative: Freshman big averaging 13/7 with a tidy 52% from field, impressive. Qualitative:
Not much to say that we haven’t already said, but if you come in and earn ROY in the league and put up the above numbers, you get an A grade. Future is bright for mr. kempton, and I am really excited to see him get bigger/stronger/faster these next 3 years. Looking at 2000 point career and future POY if things break right and he stays healthy.
JC: Final Grade, C+. Quantitative: 8.7 ppg, 5.9 rpb, and 1.4 bpg are all solid for a first year college player. Shot it well from the charity stripe at 72% and well from 3 at 35%, but the 38% from the field at his height/length doesn’t tell a pretty story. Qualitative: JC had a fine first year at LU, having missed a year of playing last year, and there is a lot to build off of here. If he can get any sort of post game offense and improve his offensive game off the dribble, he’ll be solid for us these next two years. He’s a good leaper and strong, but not great lateral agility/mobility or going to the hoop with the ball. Defended well with the blocked shots at some key moments, and some definite upside for JC if he improves in those key areas. C+ is probably a tough grade for first year guy who did some really nice things for us, but I’ll go there based off my own personal opinion from preseason, and say I expected a bit more from JC…still love JC.
AP: Final Grade, C+/B-: Quantitative: 8.4 ppg, 2 rpg, 1 spg. Shot it well from 3 point land, at a 38% clip, and 74% from the line was good. The 37% overall mark from the field is a tough number.
Qualitatively: AP came in as a freshman and carved out a role for himself from day 1, and had some positive moments during his first year, all Rook team isn’t a bad honor either. He was really just a 3 point specialist this year as many have mentioned, but I’m probably a bit higher on AP future them most on the board. He has nice length, quick release, and isn’t a dud athletically. He’s not a kobe or vince carter by any stretch, but he isn’t a slouch with foot speed and leaping ability, just needs to get stronger like most freshman. I saw some change in his game the last month or so and tried to vet it via game log, and think you’ll find this interesting. Teams respect his 3 pt game and close out strong on him, so he has to be able to get to the tin and he showed late in year that he could get there more then he did early in season, now he didn’t make many of his floaters or runners, but he was more aggressive 2nd part of season. Check this stat out: In his first 18 games he took more 2 point attempts then 3 point attempts in just 1 game. ONE! Uno! ONE! In his last 14 games he took more 2 point attempts then 3 point attempts in 8 games. There is upside here, AP had big press coming in and the pedigree and the big start to the season in first two games, and perhaps that had us all higher on him then we should have been. Overall, definitely something to build off of and AP can be a good player here these next 3 years. If he gets stronger and gets some more wiggle with the ball, he’ll be a tough matchup for defenders. Grade partially reflects that I was really high on him preseason and expected a big season, and he underperformed my own expectations.
CS: Final Grade, B+. Quantitative: Career highs in ppg, apg, rpb, and spg for the junior guard. Shot it well at 38% from 3 and 45% from the field and 83% from the line.
Qualitative: CS got his chance after waiting in the wings his first 2 years on campus, and he took full advantage of it. He was very efficient from the field, mostly took good shots and moved the ball when he needed to. He is a hard worker and I think the captain next year along with SC, assuming we go back to captains off the one year hiatus where we avoidied captains cause of MM. Plays smart and smooth, not an elite athlete or a plus defender, but a guy you can win with and does whatever asked of him. Good season for CS. To my post a couple weeks ago about him and MM getting to many minutes, well I gave you MM averages last 8 games, well CS was 15-41 to close out the year, 36.5% from field.
JG: Final Grade, B. Quantitatively: 5 ppg, 3 rbg, and almost a block per game. Shot a ridiculous 62% from the field. Qualitatively: You started to see that JG upside we talked about at this time last year ,as the super athletic forward had some moments that made your jaw drop. JG saw his minutes and role increase in PL play versus non-conference play, as to start the year he wasn’t getting consistent playing time. Glad he got a chance to produce and he answered the bell in most cases, now it is a point of continuing to fine tune his game and getting more consistent, as he tends to be streaky as well in terms of what he produces on a nightly basis. JG could be in line for a strong last 2 years on campus. Excited we have two more years of JG.
SC: Final Grade, B. Quantitative: 4.5 ppg and a strong 42% from 3 point land, and 37% overall from the field. Qualitative: SC did a good job coming off tough injury to get back in the rotation. He is a special 3 point shooter, and he shot it well, but he doesn’t do much else out there as he’s not a slasher or plus defender or rebounder. SC had a good year and met my expectations, glad he has another year nad I hope its fully healthy as we’ll need his 3 point prowess and leadership.
CB: Final Grade, C. Quantitative: Career high in ppg, rbg, and field goal percentage. Qualitative: CB had a nice half a season, showed he can rebound effectively and showed more on the offensive end. Amazingly, he also had himself academically ineligible for second semeseter of season, something not many guys at LU pull off. On pure on court contribution, he did better then I expected and I’d give him a B, but the ineligibility prevents me from going higher then a C. He is a backup big, as he has been last few years, and will be behind TK JC JG again next year.
SW: Final Grade, C. Quantitatively: 3.2 ppg and 2.0 rpg for frosh forward. Shot 43 from field and 56 from charity stripe. Qualitatively: SW showed some serious flashes of upside potential, and he has some offensive game off the dribble and he did okay in post at times. Reminds me of HG a bit in that he can get to the tin, spin moves all over, and little post up game, but needs to work on his shot. If he can ever get his shot going he’ll be a real good PL player. This year, teams played off him and dared him to shoot, and he kept going to the rim into traffic and got caught many times taking bad shots or charges. Role dimished greatly down the stretch in PL play, but for a freshman we saw the potential is there and he is a key guy in this frosh class.
MS: Really tough to even grade MS, limited PT throughout the year, so I’ll just comment that I think MS or JG get my vote for most underutilized player on team this year, as I thought he should have gotten more minutes. Didn’t get to find out a ton about MS, but what we did learn was positive. Athletic, fast, quick and a good on the ball defender. Happy to have MS and think he has a bright future with this team.March 6, 2014 at 8:46 pm #13859
I would rate SC a little higher, based on how much better he played as the year went on. Maybe due to getting more confident after coming off injury, don’t know. I really thought his D was much improved by late season.March 7, 2014 at 12:41 am #13860
I like your grades across the board, Hoops. One part I’m struggling with is JC getting C+ and SW getting a C. In terms of pure production, it’s hard to see them as that close. But I don’t have the right answer, either. I’m a victim of the same thing you describe – preseason expectations. But JC was a full-time, every day contributor, while SW was a spot player at best.
Much easier to throw stones than to build the house – but I might bump JC to a B- and nudge SW to a C-. I want to give JG a better grade too, but based on my own logic it’s hard to give him more for pure contribution. Now if he got more minutes…March 7, 2014 at 3:24 am #13863
Final thoughts: There has been a transition. In the past, a year like this one was to be expected. Even if we had a solid returning crew. I like the fact that we’re pissed about this year. Expectations are higher now – and I want it to stay that way. I really like where the PL stands now for hoops generally, and our new expectations specifically.
CJ and Muscala could be harbingers of a new PL. What did Gorgonzola and Buthole have? Let’s go!!!!!March 7, 2014 at 5:24 pm #13868
Nice overview hoops:
I would say: (based on expectations, not necessarily production)
MM – B
CS – B+
TK – A
JC – C-
JG – B
AP – C+
SW – C
SC – C
CB – D
DC – D
MS – C
GP – incomplete
CR – incomplete
BR – DMarch 7, 2014 at 7:11 pm #13869
As I said to Hoops00 in a private message, I would agree with the rankings assigned with few exceptions and those would be either slight + or – move in one direction or another. All in all, a great report. Well done and much appreciated.
So much of what has been said is spot on. But, let me add another observation. That is shock over what I viewed as uninspired and lackluster play – especially on offense – throughout the season but especially over the last 7 games leading to our 1 W / 6 L record down the stretch. This from a team so young and supposedly so athletic?! Our “O” was simply tedious and unimaginative. It was certainly not what I, as a fan, wanted to see but probably just what the opponents planned for, hoped to see, and got from us. Check out the shooting percentages below. The number following the players’ initials represent their season-long and final FG%. The other numbers that follow represent the players’ first 25 game (13 W / 12 L) effort, their next 7 games (1 W / 6 L), and lastly their final 3 games (3 L). In nearly every case, the numbers headed south. Looking at 3-point attempts alone, the percent drop is even more severe as the team hit just 15 of 59 long range attempts in their final 3 games, going just 8 for 41 (.195%) in the final two. Bottom line, I believe the team simply tired and became easy to defend.
CS (.446) .455/.400/.353
MM (.400) .410/.365/.361
AP (.374) .383/.346/.346
SC (.374) .426/.297/.227
MS (.362) .345/.454/.000
JG (.621) .689/.448/.455
TK (.515) .508/.541/.452
JC (.378) .373/.393/.353
SW (.432) .437/.400/.333
Finally, I also wonder what might have been had AD and SC been ready from the start. I guess we might have had a better record and be competing for a title right about now, but sadly left with a team far less prepared than the one we have now ready to face the rigors of play in 2014-15.
Like every poster, I’m disappointed by the way the season came to an end but anxious and upbeat over the future of the team. The addition of Ross, Jenkins, Alston and, of course, Glover to the fold should prove interesting to say the least and the topic of endless conversations on this Board going forward.
Finally, I wish Mackey and Anthony much success in their chosen fields of endeavor both on and off the court and thank them for their dedicated and, far more often than not, stellar play while wearing the Brown and White.March 8, 2014 at 4:17 pm #13871
Somebody may have said it somewhere else, but for me, I was just surprised at how raw JC is/was. I know that he is relatively new to basketball, but since he is old for his grade (turning 21 this month), and had all of last year to practice and focus on skill development – I thought he would be much farther along. I think that is the main reason I was disappointed in his year. I also think he could be effective on the offensive boards if he had an inclination, but he doesn’t seem to. Lastly, his drives to the basket seem out of control about 80% of the time. He take a couple massive strides then picks up his dribble and has no angle or plan and ends up tossing up a prayer. I’d really like to see the staff work with him on taking on more dribble to get into a better spot, as well as using some spin moves and pump fakes instead of getting pushed off his path. Agree that JC still has some really nice tools, and I’m hopeful he can have a better year next year now that he has a year of game experience.
I said it before, but I think a major weakness of the team this year was a wing capable of getting to the tin and finishing. AD would have helped. Can Glover be that guy? Alston? Maybe AP or SW can make major strides in that area. Either way, I think that is an area that needs to be addressed through skill work (and recruiting! maybe more true wings and less 6 footers).
JG can be a beast in the PL if he brings it every night.
Those who said the offense was predictable are spot on. That is Reed’s MO though I believe. He is a recruiter/motivator/teacher and I think those are real strengths, but he is not very innovative on O or D.
Last note, one thing I find frustrating is all the talk preseason (by the team and coaches) about how athletic they were. And then getting dunked on like 8x by Holy Cross. I know Holy Cross is athletic, but we didn’t appear to be in their neighborhood. That’s fine if Lehigh won’t be the most athletic team in the league, but if so, I agree that we need a little more structure to be effective every night.
Really excited to see the freshman and transfers next year. Think we could have some real gems and sleepers in that group.March 8, 2014 at 5:31 pm #13872
Someone posted earlier the stats for CJ’s class as frosh. Think we should remember that despite our frustration at lack of improvement this yr, all that youth will be a yr more mature ( hopefully ). I have to believe staff will mesh this team. Do think we are very athletic,just not self assured.March 10, 2014 at 3:23 pm #13881
I think we all got a little ahead of ourselves on the athleticism front.
If you look at this team, JG and JC are athletes. Capable of running floor, jumping and playing above the rim. MS has quickness and is able to motor up and down the floor. Not an outrageous leaper or finisher, but quick. Outside of those 3, that is about it on the athleticism front.
CS – below average athlete (especially for a guard)
SC – below average athlete (see CS)
AP – average athlete (see CS)
TK – average/below average athlete (no quickness or leaper)
SW – average athlete
DC – average/below average athlete (see CS)
CB – average/below average athlete (see TK)
GP – probably below average athlete
CR – plus athlete but no minutes
So, if you look across the board, this team is not nearly as athletic as we thought. We don’t have one athletic wing who can finish. Hopefully, we pick up some athleticism in the form of JRG and the incoming freshmen. We are at best middle of the pack as far as athleticism goes in the conference. Team like BU is far more athletic than we are.March 10, 2014 at 3:37 pm #13882
OK, only major differences I see are with SW and MS. Both are very good athletes. SW needs to learn how to finish but athletically he is very good. Lets not confuse Bball ability with athleticism. MS also,his issue is confidence and getting used to D 1 Bball. Game speed,even in PL, a good bit different than HS ball.March 10, 2014 at 8:56 pm #13884
I’ll just post here again that while TK was rook of the year, I believe the book on Lehigh was to have TK get into foul trouble, and when he would sit, Lehigh couldn’t get as strong a combination underneath. Without TK/Goldy underneath, MM needed to take on more himself, then he would play more out of control, and then things would fall apart.
Here’s TK’s game log during that 1-6 stretch:
* 5 times out of 7 TK got to 4 PFs. One time fouled out.
* Only went over 30 mpg in last two games. Against Navy only on the court for 15 minutes.
* Got to foul line for more than 3 attempts in only two games.
This seems to indicate strongly that the league had been largely successful in taking TK out of the game thanks to foul trouble.March 10, 2014 at 10:06 pm #13885
I don’t see the plus athleticism in SW. He has nice size at 6’7″ 210, as listed, but look at these stats.
Remember, he played in 32 games, averaged 15 min/game:
13 offensive rebounds in the entire season
2 blocks in the entire season
5 steals in the entire season
Only 65 rebounds in entire season, or 2 per game.March 10, 2014 at 10:17 pm #13886
not disputing his stats but that is not athleticism, it is Bball production. The transition to D 1 from HS seems more likely culprit. He is very tentative, a step slow reacting. He is quick and agile. The rest will come.March 10, 2014 at 10:44 pm #13888
MS has a huge vertical, probably top one or two on team, look at where his feet are when he releases his J, its insane how high he gets. also in warmups he is getting up big on dunks. Him and SW two top frosh athletes, and I put ms in top one or two on team as pure athlete.March 11, 2014 at 1:58 am #13889
I’ve enjoyed the entire year reading the very insightful observations on this board. Thank you to all. And as an alum and college basketball fan (but certainly no guru) I’ve enjoyed even more attending 11 games including Lafayette and Fordham on the road. Reading everybody’s player by player evaluations helps to explain the season to a point I guess, but I think my summary is based on the season’s games in general. When you look game by game the disparity between the highs and lows is pretty dramatic. Quinipiac, Rider, and the two Boston games were impressive. At Holy Cross, at Army , at American, and Colgate at home were disheartening stinkers. Even so, in a league this balanced I think you have to expect a few of these kind of games. Maybe not as many as this year, but you’re gonna have ‘um. To me the ”in between” games tell more of the story. Discounting Minny & Pitt, we were very competitive in the rest. But we could never put someone away, winning narrowly, or could not quite get over the hump after a long slog to overcome an early deficit. And we certainly did not get better as the year went on.
Some generalities; we communicated poorly on defense. The number of times we gave up layups on give and goes after 28 seconds of good defense in close games drove me crazy. Or the number of offensive putbacks we allowed for easy scores made my hair hurt. Meanwhile on offense our point guard often tried to play both the 1 & the slashing 2 at the same time, probably out of necessity. And when the opposition figured out TK was our only consistent offense, they packed it in and made us win from outside. How many times did Mackey (in frustration?) feel it necessary to take it to the rim and then get stuffed ‘cause they had the lane clogged with guys 7 to 8 inches taller than him? In general those two issues made the difference between a very successful year for a very young talented team, and the “didn’t meet expectations year” we ended up with.
Youth of course explains some of this. And maybe we don’t have a CJ in this class. But to me the lack of improvement as the year went on these basic game changing issues should be a serious question for the coaching staff. A number of folks here have expressed this opinion, and I totally agree. The talent is there. And apparently more is coming. Hopeful Doc & friends can figure it out.
Two quick questions for the assembled multitude:
Was Zahir Carrington as raw as Jessie when he came in?
Does Corey Schaefer remind anyone of Johnny Waters(‘71)? (question for old timers)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.