Potential is one of those loaded words. For players, it’s their ultimate ceiling if everything comes together: their knowledge of the game, their skill, their strength and conditioning to become the best (or as close as they can) version of themselves. It’s hard to objectively calculate because it’s impossible to fully know, and when people use the term, their criteria is almost never exactly the same as anyone else’s. For example, Steph Curry was a special player at Davidson, but few thought his potential was to redefine shot selection and the entire game of basketball. His potential was tied, in addition to his work ethic, to his other-worldly hand-eye co-ordination. So, there’s a lot that goes into it, it’s hard to project with 100% accuracy, and one of the best players of the modern era fell to the mid-first round.
That being said, at the simplest level, most easily assessed and consistently applied, there’s a baseline of player’s ultimate potential that’s typically associated with the natural physical traits that augment their already established ability. That’s because you can often improve your knowledge of the game through study, repetition and experience, and you can often improve your skill through practice and hard work; but you can’t move the needle on height or reach and you can only gain so much on base explosion and athleticism. It’s why the NBA is so meticulous about this stuff. At one point, height was the main measurement. Now it’s height, wingspan, standing reach, standing vertical jump, max vertical jump, shuttle, lane agility, and sprint speed… a full picture of how much ground you can cover; your ability to get to and impact the ball in a game with limited horizontal space where how quickly you can get to (or above) 10ft. matters a lot. Additionally, shooting accuracy coupled with your ability to be able to get your most accurate shots off or to keep your opponents from doing the same. It’s NOT the end-all-be all. Curry is a great example of this where immaculate skill and work ethic can supersede even the most athletically gifted players in the world. I watched his interview on Hot Ones recently and he talked about the value of going to Davidson because he could actually play his first year rather than sitting on the bench as he would have at a bigger school, which helped him to grow into the player he is today – a relevant point for later as I’ll make the case to expand the rotation and get more guys time on the floor. But, to complete the point about potential, in most cases skill, opportunity and work ethic coupled with a high level of athleticism has been most reliably successful over the history of the sport.
Sometimes discussions around potential can be challenging ones to have within our fan base. We’re a program, after all, built around, and prideful of, our ability to surpass expectations. Through hard work, development, coaching, pillars, experience, and solid fundamentals, our ability to play effective and winning basketball against more talented or naturally gifted teams has been the hallmark of the CTB era. It’s a source of identity. Yet, it’s no coincidence that the year we won the National Championship, we had 6 guys on the roster who either were drafted or have seen time in a regular season NBA game; including three draft picks one of whom was the #4 overall pick. De’Andre Hunter and Reece Beekman have been two of the best defenders in the CTB era, augmented by coaching and the system. But their respective 7’2″ and 6’7″ wingspans have certainly helped their ability to suffocate players possessing similar height and quickness. The most dominant season we’ve seen during the CTB era from an advanced metrics standpoint was Justin Anderson in 2014-2015; who improved his shot dramatically the offseason prior, but was also probably the single most athletically gifted player we’ve seen over the same time…. For as much as CTB elevates a program through his coaching and system, we still need to field as much high-end talent as possible to maximize our results, as it should go without saying. And, when he does get those kinds of players, magical things can happen; such as our stretch of repeated #1 seeds and eventual championship.
The goal is always to win as much hardware as possible, and to do that, you need as many of those kinds of players as possible; guys who can elevate your team and BE the primary driver of your success against the highest level of competition. You hope to develop/acquire, in some way or another, a tipping point of those kinds of guys. Then you build around them with complementary pieces who can play a role on the team/provide a needed skillset or two to complete the roster and maximize your top talent, or your differentiators. When you look at the title team, come tournament time, Jerome, Guy, Hunter, and Diakite were these kinds of guys, while Clark, Key, Salt (and Huff when he got time) were good, in some cases great complementary pieces who could provide what the roster needed to complement and take advantage of the at times dominant (offensively or defensively, or both) qualities of the other four. Two years later, Murphy, Hauser, and Huff were these kinds of guys but we didn’t have enough complementary shooters or scorers off of the bounce to maximize their abilities.
The problem that we’ve had in most recent years is that some of our most featured and beloved players have NOT been these types of players. Guys like Kihei Clark and Jayden Gardner had, within expected reason, maximized their ceiling by the end of their careers here, developing into about as complete of players as they reasonably could be expected (Gardner may have been able to improve his outside shot more). But they were miscast as “THE” guys when they would have been much better served as incredibly capable role players who could get you a bucked (or get a bucket for someone else). There’s plenty of room for players like this when roster building – Clark was the starting PG on a championship team that was chock full of shooters and size and Gardner took over the ACC Tournament last year until he ran into Duke’s size – it’s just that you don’t want your roster construction (or philosophy) to have to force volume through these players or to be so reliant on them that you can’t afford to pull them when the matchup dictates (i.e. their offense dries up or we can’t find an effective defensive assignment for them). Instead, you need a critical mass of players who will either reliably lift your team offensively regardless of opponent or who are capable of locking down their man (at least making them much less effective) on defense regardless of the opponent and ideally they do both. Keep in mind that the end goal isn’t beating average teams by more, it’s being able to beat those teams AND being able to beat great teams.
Let’s use last year’s team as a quick example comparing Jayden Gardner and Ryan Dunn. Gardner was a much more skilled offensive player than Dunn and, in most situations, he was a reliable and potent source of offense for you. He could bust the Syracuse zone shooting from the high post, he could be effective inside-out against Clemson, was very effective against N.C. State, matched up well against Virginia Tech, etc. These were very good teams but those who also presented favorable matchups. Meanwhile, in other matchups like Wake Forest, FSU or, most visibly, Duke, his offense lost its efficacy and, without his consistent ability to get you a bucket, his lack of size inside on the defensive end became a bigger issue as you didn’t have the positive trade off. Ryan Dunn, on the other hand, was never a reliable source of offense last season. He was not a good play against Syracuse because their zone would have forced him to shoot jump shots, and there were very few situations where you could look to him, specifically, to go and get you a bucket against good competition. But he excelled in those matchups in which Gardner struggled (FSU, Wake, Duke) because, if we weren’t getting offense anyway, Dunn’s improvement on defense was notable and his effectiveness making scrappy effort plays like put backs, transition points, or steals was big. Both players provided different skills that were necessary last year and that the other didn’t provide. They fit specific roles and needs. Throughout the full season, what Gardner offered was more indispensable as we often needed someone to just get us a bucket. It was good that we played both not just to balance that development of Dunn’s potential, but because either could be more effective given the situation. The difference was that Gardner was a 5th year Senior who was about as polished as he could be and Ryan Dunn was a true Freshman. Now, imagine for this coming year Dunn retaining all of the things that made him effective and competitive against our most athletic competition, but having time to make improvement across all of the other elements of his game where he was comparatively lacking and that Gardner had polished over 5 seasons of play. And that’s what I mean about a matchup agnostic player; someone whose ability to impact the game positively is able to shine in matchups where the opponent is at the highest level, is actually capable of keeping them from playing at their best, and who has developed enough to punish lesser teams or matchups just as effectively as higher floor, lower ceiling guys.
Considering that, last season, I would have looked at all of Beekman (especially pre-injury), Franklin (if playing the 2), McKneely, Dunn, Bond, Traudt, and Shedrick as being capable of being these kinds of players either if they were playing really well last year or, in some cases, projecting toward the future after development. Do I know for sure they will be? Certainly not, and this is where we get into the “potential” discussion when it comes to roster construction. Who is or isn’t capable of being the kind of plus player who differentiates you from other teams and is, more or less, opponent agnostic? Can they be the reason that you’re competitive against the toughest competition (Beekman), are they capable of complementing that kind of talent and providing a necessary skillset or exploiting certain matchups (Gardner), or are they likely to be a detriment in those kinds of situations and/or the kind of player who you could easily replace upgrade in the portal (IMO, Murray)?
It’s with this baseline, in the wake of my previous offseason articles around opportunities for improvement and our four incoming transfers, that I hope to frame this piece. Which is to say, in a perfect world, what do I hope will happen this upcoming season, how should we distribute our playing time, and how do we better toe that line of competing as hard as we can this year without sacrificing our future talent?
Updating The Philosophy
I’ve written about this extensively at this point, but it’s worth recapping this point. Our team philosophy, especially recently, has been to play a shorter (8 man max) rotation so as to maximize the time on the floor of our best players with the stated goal of maximizing our efforts to win every single individual game. CTB uses non-conference (and even some early conference) play to figure out his favorite lineups and rotations and to whittle it down to a tight number. It hasn’t always been the case, though. In 2016-2017 he had 10 different players average over 10 minutes per game, which coincided with the arrival of Kyle Guy, Ty Jerome and Mamadi Diakite coming off of his redshirt season. As talented RS and true Freshmen, they got their minutes despite the presence of veterans such as London Perrantes, Devon Hall, Isaiah Wilkins, Darius Thompson, and Marial Shayok. Jack Salt and Jared Reuter both got their own run as well. But interestingly, even getting 10 players in double-digit minutes (not counting suspended Austin Nichols), this was the season that De’Andre Hunter and Jay Huff redshirted. Hunter has said in interviews since that he “felt betrayed” by the “surprise” redshirt that season. It’s not a big leap to suspect that he would not have stayed if the current rules had been in effect that season. Jay Huff made similar comments after leaving UVa about how his early years were difficult not playing but it was in his nature to stick it out.
Imagine if we’d have lost De’Andre Hunter and Jay Huff due to allocating minutes to Jack Salt and Jared Reuter.
I don’t write that to disparage either; it’s to highlight a point in time where, to CTB’s assessment, both players were more court-ready than two of our future NBA players and we as an organization had control over those players once they committed unless they were willing to sit out another entire season to switch teams. This is no longer the case. So, the idea that some of these younger guys with THAT level of potential need to just wait their turn needs some re-evaluation. Not only that, Jared Reuter may have been polished in ways that neither of the other two were. He was definitely stronger. But the idea that he could contribute in a more impactful way toward winning a game than either Hunter or Huff, even the non-Mike Curtis’ed versions of them is unconvincing. In fact, he transferred out the following year because the writing was already on the wall re: his playing time vs. both. No, CTB just (and correctly given the rules at the time) wanted both players to have a year hitting the weights because he knew it would be the most beneficial thing for them long term – an actual example of him sacrificing some on-court talent in the short term in order to maximize the ability of those players down the road.
I want to take a quick moment to acknowledge that there are competing philosophies on how best to actually develop the games of individual players. Steph Curry says that playing time is crucial to development (and cites a game where he committed 13 turnovers as a freshman as a key learning point). CTB has absolutely played guys early but, especially with big men, he often views that red shirt year for strength, conditioning, and skills training as the best path for player development. The actual best path likely depends on the player and there are a multitude of examples of both approaches working well. The difference is that players NOW have much more of a say in which approach is taken because they can leave much earlier if they do not agree with the method. So, while there may be top 100 guys who are drawn to the program FOR that element of player development with the off year – Kadin Shedrick was one, Leon Bond appears to be another. On the other hand, most of those in that talent range are looking for at least some early court time to both contribute and have the opportunity to earn more time through showing out, and also to help with their development. Given that these are the kinds of potentially “matchup agnostic” guys we’ve been discussing, we need to make sure we’re leaning into that concept.
Since the championship team, until last season, there really wasn’t the same tension between playing talent vs. experience because the roster wasn’t deep enough, at least not to that level. But last year, and now this year, is different two-fold: there is a LOT of talent on the roster and there is no penalty for transferring out.
We saw last year, the desire to tighten the rotation so much hurt off the court, with players like Kadin Shedrick and Isaac Traudt leaving over the offseason as I’ve discussed at length. But I also believe it hurt us ON the court. Straying away from Shedrick, Caffaro, and Traudt so dramatically limited their ability to get some run and create a spark. As BVP’s injury situation worsened and his already hot and cold shooting increasingly worsened, the other guys weren’t leveraged to lighten the load or, in Traudt’s case, to have a chance to provide that shooting spark. It’s no coincidence that once BVP was out permanently our late season swoon ended and our play improved in the ACC Tournament. It’s not because he was a bad player, he wasn’t. It’s not simply because he was shooting worse and playing hurt. It’s because he was being highly leveraged alongside Gardner as a primary solution when their pairing was not complementary. When he was no longer available as the veteran on which CTB relied, those other players (Shedrick and Caffaro) had an opportunity to play both with a longer leash and to have their good play lead to more minutes which, along with them being more complementary players to Gardner, saw our surge.
And that brings me to the intersection of my argument for increasing our core rotational minutes this coming season. Yes, there’s a futures play here when it comes to retaining high potential players; but CTB has already made decisions in the past focused on developing for the future (just in the other direction by redshirting). It’s not just that. When you have so many guys with talent and upside, getting them that regular game time not only helps with their development, but it also allows them to have games where they play well and positively contribute in a meaningful way – even take over. The Ryan Dunn example from earlier is applicable. He ranged from no time at all to 30 minutes, depending on how things were going and how much of a spark he was providing. We likely don’t win the JMU game without him. We almost came back and beat Miami on the back of his huge second half after not playing at all in the first. He was dominant against Wake Forest, etc, etc. He certainly wasn’t the most polished player on the team, but he was gifted, he played with effort, and we don’t get those moments (and likely he’s not as primed to break out this year or as engaged) if he wasn’t given that chance game in and game out to flash. Is he able to be as effective against Kyle Filipowski and Dereck Lively II later in the year if he wasn’t afforded those chances earlier in the season? Unlikely.
So, this is how I want to leverage our young guys this year; players who may not be as polished or experienced as some of the guys ahead of them on the depth chart, but who are too talented to risk losing and who are also too talented not to have games where they blow up. That’s the strategy; not to play them for a flat number of pre-determined minutes each game, but for a window of time in each – increasing within that game when they’re playing well and without the obligation to keep them in when they aren’t. You don’t risk negatively impacting game outcome as much that way, but you do allow yourself the ability to benefit from their spark that you wouldn’t have otherwise if you never tried them.
With the context and the rationale behind the desire to make a shift in rotational approach established, I thought now it would be best to just go through the individual players, provide my ideal minute average, and give the rationale. Keeping in mind, there’s a hard cap at 200 minutes per game because we’re not assuming OT. Again, this is about what I’d LIKE to see happen, it’s not what I think the most probable outcome is. The point of this is to offer my take on ideal strategy/approach.
There are 12 players in consideration here, apologies to Desmond Roberts and Tristan How. Also, I should be clear that these aren’t predictive averages. Certainly, some of these players will see more/less time in blow out games and as CTB plays with rotations throughout the beginning of the season so the actual year-end averages will not be the below. This is just what I’d like to see, on average, once the lineups settle as we’re playing important, closely contested games toward the meat of the year.
——————————————————————————–
Anthony Robinson (6’10”, Freshman Center)
0 MPG – Redshirt
“Wait, wait, wait, Cuts! You literally have written all offseason about how we don’t have the luxury to redshirt players that we used to or else risk losing them, what gives?” That’s all true, and I really like Robinson as a prospect in our system. From what I’ve heard and in the brief moments I’ve seen, I love the way he moves, catches the ball, and what he appears to offer as an above-the-rim menace. But this is one of those rare situations where I don’t mind, and actually support, the risk of a red shirt. Robinson may well be an incredible find/steal, and his physical abilities seem like they could be elite, but he IS currently very raw and doesn’t have the same profile of some of these other guys we’ve been discussing at that 4-star level. He’s a 3-star prospect who committed AFTER the majority of our roster moves this past offseason; after Buchanan signed and after both Minor and Groves committed to transfer in. This isn’t a situation like Traudt where he was a fringe top 50 recruit who bet on himself to earn time and had BVP transfer in after he signed, only to not see any time in his first game. The path to PT is clearly closed and Robinson doesn’t have the national clout to expect to disrupt that immediately. This was clearly a reality that he understood when he signed, and the prospects to take this season to RS and develop were discussed out of the gate. With both Jacob Groves and Jordan Minor (and maybe even, gasp, hopefully not Ryan Dunn) leaving after this season, opportunity abounds for the future and all evidence points to Robinson’s expectations aligning with his situation. Given his lack of readiness to help this season and his clear expectations, this is the kind of player and situation where I’m all for using a year off to develop his game for the future. Additionally, in the unforeseen circumstance where he does decide to leave, the impact of that loss is not the same as one of these previously mentioned players. It’s not even impactful as another player who plays the same position from his class – Blake Buchanan. Raw, under-the-radar, potentially high upside guy who isn’t ready to contribute immediately but who selected the program ostensibly TO wait and develop? Perfect red shirt candidate even in the current environment.
Taine Murray (6’5″ Junior, Small Forward)
0 MPG
Now this is where I need to reiterate that this isn’t what I THINK will happen, I don’t think Taine Murray will log no time, especially considering he got 11 full minutes that could have gone to Franklin or Dunn in the NCAA Tournament. His average will NOT be 0 mpg for the full year, and he might even start at the beginning of the year based on his seniority, but this is where I’d like to see this time level out and is an example of a situation where I don’t think we should prioritize experience, given our other options. Murray, by all accounts, enjoys being at UVa and has kept a positive mentality despite not having his number called much the previous two seasons. But, aside from a wild Iowa game where he absolutely caught fire while playing the 4, no less, he hasn’t shown much to inspire confidence that he’s the kind of player you actively want on the floor rather than hoping the time he does give isn’t costly. Billed as a sniper, he shot just 17% on only 12 attempts last season, neither showing an ability to create his own looks nor converting his open opportunities. His defense improved by the end of the season, going from regularly struggling to keep his man in front of him, to not noticeably being targeted at an abnormally high clip. But his lack of quickness, and general minus athleticism vs. ACC competition, means that he’ll likely need to develop into a deadly sniper from outside in order to positively contribute in any meaningful way. Like the Jared Reuter example but for a different position, he’s a solid enough player who might benefit from playing in a smaller conference, but whose athleticism hasn’t aligned well at this level and has derailed his ability to get his skill/confidence online. Given the talent we have on this team 1-3, especially after the return of Reece Beekman, Isaac McKneely in his second season, Andrew Rohde and Dante Harris transferring in, Leon Bond coming off of his redshirt season, and Elijah Gertrude hopefully being healthy, it’s hard to justify Taine Murray minutes no matter how experienced or patient he has been. This will be one of the larger sources of tension this year, IMO – keeping Bond and Gertrude engaged and leveraging their talent despite their relative inexperience vs. playing Taine for his experience. This is a situation where we’re best served investing in the talent coming up through the pipeline and minutes that go toward Murray represent an opportunity cost.
Dante Harris (6’0″ RS Junior, Point Guard)
7 MPG
This may come as a surprise given my review of his game basically stating that I think he’s being slept on in terms of his quality as a talented point guard. But, the return of Reece Beekman changes everything. Harris is lightning quick, can create his own shot in the midrange and at the rim very well (although he sometimes struggles to finish in traffic), can hound and pressure the ball, and is a good distributor. The problem is he’s no Reece Beekman, who is just a better player in almost every way except for maybe creating his own midrange jumper. This team will be best served by finally giving the lion’s share of playmaking abilities to Beekman, who is the most realized version of skill + potential on the roster, and filling around him with as much shooting, size, and athleticism as possible. Especially with both Andrew Rohde and the likely improvement of Isaac McKneely’s handle to shoulder secondary ball-handler responsibilities, I’d love for us to get away from the dual PG lineups and to use Harris as a true backup to Beekman. I imagine there could be the occasional circumstance where they’re sharing court time to break a press, pressure the ball, etc., but I mostly hope that they will be a mirror of each other’s time. When one is sitting, the other is playing and vice versa. Given that Beekman is gone after this year and Harris has used his transfer, there’s very little risk with regard to losing him long term so there’s really no need to force the non-complementary skillset on the floor at the same time. Harris can take a full year playing behind and learning from Beekman prior to taking the starting reigns next year and mentoring Christian Bliss as he enters the program. This is on par with Murray PT as my biggest worry headed into this season; knowing how much CTB likes to have multiple ball handlers on the floor, and being unsure of how married to that concept he is of if he just liked Kihei Clark (or, for that matter, Beekman) THAT much. If McKneely and Rohde can carry those secondary responsibilities, it will keep some of these rotations viable and allow for some Elijah Gertrude and Leon Bond time. Speaking of…
Elijah Gertrude (6’4″ Freshman, Combo Guard)
10 MPG
Expectations for Elijah Gertrude’s immediate impact have seemingly been muted, perhaps due to the knee injury that he suffered last season from which he is still on the road to recovery; targeting the beginning of this season. Even still, it’s been said time and time again that CTB has NEVER had an athlete on his roster like Elijah Gertrude. Just look at that photo! He’s an inch shorter there than he is now and his head is almost at the rim with his hands above the box. His athleticism, effortless bounce, and the way he moves just pops from the tape. This is the kind of player we don’t often land and the kind of player we could easily lose, especially if he works his way back to full health only to sit.
A quick respite from the Gertrude focus to make this point as it’s most applicable here. Back at the start of this article, I spoke about potential – who are the kinds of players who have the ability to differentiate you at the highest level. Players who are opponent agnostic. Where are we, as a program, getting the majority of these kinds of guys right now since the advent of NIL and the elimination of the sit-out year after transferring? It’s through high school recruiting. Gertrude, Buchanan, Bond, Dunn, Traudt, McKneely… even Beekman who joined pre-portal but kept in house through both opportunity and development are these kinds of players for us.
Meanwhile, since the change in the rules to the portal and as NIL is every increasingly being used each off seasons, as a lure to draw those kinds of players, only Rohde and, maybe you could consider Franklin, have come in at a similar type of talent/upside combination. Everyone else: Gardner, BVP, Harris (TBD), Groves, Minor, are all skilled and more developed players; but ones with limitations who fit more in the mold of guys who can contribute in meaningful ways but who aren’t opponent agnostic.
College teams are getting older. The COVID year has made it even more so, and many of the highest profile colleges with the loosest NIL concerns and deepest purses are shifting their strategy toward using the portal to allocate their funding, acquiring entirely new teams each season, and are spending less focus on high school recruiting. Given that we’ve plainly stated that NIL is a part of our program but we’ll never lead with that or use it in that way, when they zig, we should zag. Double down on retention, give our younger guys opportunity, grow them into stars in house, and supplement roster needs with quality role players through the portal, just like most of those listed above. Don’t let your young talent with elite athleticism or skill get poached. Lean on our advantages – namely our player development through CTB and Mike Curtis and CTB’s system/player development coaching. In a recent interview CTB said just that, that we’re going to lean even more into roster continuity and player development, so his mind is in this headspace too. But to facilitate that, we have to give these kinds guys regular opportunity for run early on so that they can shine. Team continuity and experience is essential, but not if the net result is grinding low upside guys for many minutes and burying your talent on the bench.
Now, back to Gertrude. In practice and even on the floor, especially early in the season, he will probably be our least developed or “ready” player across the 1-3 slots, especially without the summer to practice (although I believe some progress is being made on that now). But there are going to be things he can bring to the floor at those positions that no one else on the team can bring. We can run plays for him at the rim on back door cuts, could play him in the pick and roll with the goal of getting him rapidly moving downhill, could increase our ball pressure on defense or even pick up full court more aggressively; we could even shift to play more up-tempo when he’s in the game on offense and try to run more. If we give him a run in the first half in most games and then keep him in when he’s playing well, not only will he build confidence, see his development, and increase his engagement, but we’ll benefit from those games where he’s shooting well or where he plays with confidence and takes over. Games where he’s struggling? Go ahead and pull him out and wait until the next one – just like we did with Dunn last year. The benefit to this strategy with Gertrude isn’t just about the future. A player with his level of talent will help you this season as well if you let him.
Blake Buchanan (6’11” Freshman, Center)
10 MPG
Even though big men don’t often see the floor as quickly and as early in their careers under CTB as guards do, I’m less worried about Blake’s playing time next year than I am for Gertrude and Bond because there really is a gaping need for another rim protector. Unless we play small ball a lot or play Bond at the 4 (which I hope we don’t often), realistically Buchanan will be the 4th big man in the rotation after Minor, Dunn, and Groves. Now, there is a good deal of risk re: retention here. Let’s not forget that Blake is from Idaho and was heavily recruited by Gonzaga, which is much closer to home and was also selected to play at the Nike Hoop Summit among the best players in his class (and acquitted himself very well in that game). But early language out of UVa that he’s far along with his development seems to be foreshadowing that he will be in the rotation. He moves incredibly well for his size and plays physically and well above the rim inside. Aside from just the desire to get him run, though, we will absolutely need him. Other than Dunn (and Robinson if he weren’t to redshirt), Buchanan is the only other player who offers the ability to rotate and high point a shot block; think Mamadi Diakite or Kadin Shedrick type blocks where it appears that there’s open space and they rotate and erase it toward the top of its arc. Minor is a good defensive player but his block rate was sustained in a league where most players were 6’6″ or shorter and most of his blocks came from positioning and getting the ball on the way up rather than covering space and getting the ball up around the rim. I’d love to see Buchanan come in for about a 4th of the game, set some monster screens, crash the glass hard, finish some opportunities inside, and block some shots – getting more run against some of our larger opponents who can really punish inside. Pave the way for him to be our feature center after this season.
Leon Bond III (6’5″ RS Freshman, Small Forward)
16 MPG
Leon Bond is, perhaps, the biggest enigma on this roster. The forgotten man in last year’s electric recruiting class. Bond is, I believe, the only top 100 recruit in all of college hoops last year who both voluntarily redshirted (without an injury or off-court circumstance) and who is still with his team. A true unicorn in that way. Interestingly, he was a more highly regarded recruit than Ryan Dunn, who had been dealing with injury and grew a lot late in his high school career. Bond is another one of those players with crazy bounce, athleticism, and arm length, but he was primarily utilized as a Power Forward in high school and most of the polish to his game was inside the three-point line. He took last year not only to add to his already formidable strength, but to work on his handle and his outside shot. By all accounts, it’s gotten much better, but I’ve also heard it’s something opponents will likely “live with” given some defensive decisions. How that all translates for Bond this year is the big question and the one I’m most excited to see the answer to of anything. Despite his length and bounce, at 6’5″ IS very undersized to be playing Power Forward (although, Armaan Franklin did from time-to-time last year, it was an extreme option to stretch the defense and isn’t ever an ideal state to play that small). So, while there is some talk that he might play small ball 4, the preferred option for him, and the more natural fit for him long term, is that he can shoot it well enough to play the three and we can benefit from the range and athleticism he’ll bring to our lineups on both ends of the floor. This puts him as likely directly competing with Andrew Rohde for time (although Rohde could play the 2 sometimes with Bond at the 3 as well) given that both Beekman and Isaac McKneely should each be playing most of the game. I expect that to mostly be a defense/offense type of trade off, with Rohde’s more polished play making and scoring tipping the sway of minutes more in his direction. All of that weighted in, this is where I think we’ll want the minutes for Bond to fall this year as he starts to grow into a more polished wing on the offensive side of the ball, and his defense should be strong. I’d go as far as to wager that our best defensive lineups will all have Leon Bond on the floor (alongside Dunn and Beekman). As much as I’m excited about what Andrew Rohde brings to the roster, I have a theory that the more time Leon Bond earns at the 3, the better this team will be, because it’ll mean he’s doing enough offensively (or we have enough offensively around him) and his ability to defend and to help our bigs secure the glass should be invaluable.
Jacob Groves (6’9″ 5th Year Senior, Power Forward)
17 MPG
Jacob Groves should be a Swiss Army Knife for us this season and should facilitate for some of the more interesting lineup combinations along with the most diverse styles of play offensively. Think BVP but with a considerably better shot from outside; shooting 38% from deep last year in arguably the best conference top-to-bottom in the country. Unlike with Minor and Rohde, there won’t be any questions with regard to how his game translates to this level on a game-by-game basis. He started the majority of his two years in Oklahoma and faced off/had some big games against some of the best teams in the country. He will provide spacing, allowing us to play 4-around-1 if he’s sharing the court with Minor or Buchanan, and allowing us to give credible 5-out looks if he’s sharing the court with Dunn. He’ll be a dangerous pick-and-pop threat both in the pick and roll and setting screens in the Inside Triangle. He’ll also be dangerous stationed as a kick out option on the wing, as his heigh will be challenging for defenders to effectively recover and contest his shot. On the whole, his strength will overwhelmingly be his ability to stretch the defense and open up quality offensive spacing, while his weaknesses on offense will be that he doesn’t often create his own shot and isn’t a huge threat around the rim despite his size. Defensively, he’s serviceable but walks that fine line of giving up too much footspeed to quicker bigs on the perimeter and getting overpowered, at times, inside. That being said, he is capable of either playing a stretch 4 OR a small ball 5, depending on the matchup and what the situation calls for, which should unlock some coaching options for CTB that he wouldn’t otherwise have with the personnel. I would have his playing time higher if not for the fact that I want Ryan Dunn on the floor SO much and, especially given last year, I remain unconvinced that playing small ball with an under-athletic center who struggles with mobility and lift is a solid strategy most of the time. That line reads harshly, because I do think there are going to be plenty of unique uses for Groves in different situations that will be effective – and he is a very good shooter. I just hope we better leverage who he plays alongside, and which situations call for his skills – I do not think we’re going to want him to move into the universal starter role as BVP did last season.
Jordan Minor (6’8″ 5th Year Senior, Center)
20 MPG Starter
I imagine this number is going to appear low for most considering Minor was the Co-Player of The Year and Defensive Player of The Year in the Northeast Conference. Minor is a strong player who can clear out the glass, impose his physicality on a game, is great catching the ball with explosiveness toward the basket out of the pick and roll, and is an underrated passer. While he’ll have to learn the Pack Line from scratch, and it’s about as dissimilar to his old defensive system as possible, he should benefit from man-to-man responsibility as opposed to just playing center field in the middle of an extended 2-3 zone. There are elements of his game that I do not think will transfer well at this level, though. He is not a threat to shoot the ball from outside or stretch the defense and he’s undersized as a true inside focused center at the ACC level. I expect he’ll have trouble creating much of his own offense. A good portion of his offensive game focused on pounding the air out of the ball with his back to the basket and physically overwhelming smaller players. Against major conference length and athleticism, he was susceptible to having his shot blocked and could struggle to get clear/high percentage shots. He’s also not a great free throw shooter, just converting 59% of his attempts for his career so that when he does generate an advantage, a foul will limit the output of that success. Defensively, I’ll be excited about times where he’s defending the 4 alongside Buchanan at the 5 – especially if Dunn or Bond are at the 3. That’s a lot of size and length and physicality to really secure the inside and to crash the glass. But I expect most of the time he’s on the floor he’ll be at the 5 alongside Dunn at the 4. This will be a formidable duo, especially with Dunn’s shot blocking prowess, but it’s still going to concede significant size against teams like UNC and Duke. As mentioned in the Buchanan section, Minor isn’t the same vertical athlete who covers ground and gets to shots in that way. Some of that was system based as his responsibility was to hold down the middle of an extended 2-3 zone, so he often had to be more reactionary to things coming at him rather than being able to proactively go make a play on the ball. Minor will need to use his mobility and strong base to control/influence his man as opposed to being able to compete vertically with him in most matchups at this level. It all amounts to a player who is going to offer toughness and skill but who also has clear limitations that will not always align with our matchups. He should be more effective and efficient than he was at Merrimack on a play-by-play basis due to the talent and support around him. Merrimack often asked him to do everything; and I have visions of watching him try to bounce between Drew Timme and Chet Holmgren in the middle of their zone. I can’t wait to watch him against Norchad Omier. That’s the kind of center who has given us trouble in the past and who he should be able to thrive against; but with Minor as our starting center we will be giving up size against many teams without the ability to stretch the floor as we typically do in small ball. There are going to be plenty of times where it’s just better to have Groves or Buchanan out there instead. And that’s how I’d like to see Minor utilized – our starting center, about half the game on average, leveraged fairly extremely in minutes either way depending on matchups.
Andrew Rohde (6’6″ Sophomore, Small Forward)
25 MPG Starter
Andrew Rohde CAN play 1-3 and almost never came off the floor toward the end of the season for St. Thomas last year. He’s best served for us at the 3 given the strength of Beekman and McKneely. He has the potential to be offensive igniter fluid in virtually any situation (and I actually kind of like the idea of Bond starting but Rohde coming off of the bench and playing more minutes in a Manu Ginobili-type role to inject offense wherever its needed – but for the purposes of this list I’m giving the starter nod to who I’d like to play more minutes). I don’t think we want him running much point since Beekman is so valuable and because Harris brings a lot to that position – but you could still put him in that role some to bother opposing PGs with his size (more likely with his offensive game as, despite his size, there aren’t many, or possibly any, situations where he’ll be a more impactful defender than Beekman). The question becomes two-fold: he was SUCH a ball-dominant player for St. Thomas, how will his offensive game/flow adjust to having the ball in his hands less often? Additionally, how will his defense hold up at the ACC SG and SF level? He was a very good defender at times for St. Thomas, using his length well and competing against some high-quality players, but obscuring the situation was that opponents often opted not to test him because there were considerably easier defenders to exploit on that team. He did seem to both get gassed and struggle with great quickness at times. A less focal offensive role with more rest across the board will mitigate a lot of that but, looking at this roster, I expect our opposition will test him (and possibly Minor) with the most regularity. That’s where we’re going to want Bond to step in, to clamp down on problematic defensive matchups or just to provide more explosion/rebounding if Rohde’s offensive game (particularly his shooting which can sometimes be streaky) isn’t in top form. That being said, this is the recommendation about which I’m least confident. Rohde has the ability to take over/carry a game on offense, and as a secondary ball handler who could keep from needing to play the Beekman/Harris duo at the same time (depending on how IMK’s handle has progressed), we may well want this number higher. That’s most going to depend on what Bond is bringing to the table. Fascinating!
Isaac McKneely (6’4″ Sophomore, Shooting Guard)
29 MPG Starter
I read through some of my pieces last year and realized that I didn’t spend as much time talking about Isaac McKneely as I did… most anyone else who got significant minutes on the team. That’s not because he wasn’t notable, that’s because he was basically utilized and progressed exactly the way I would have hoped (aside from preferring him to play SF less). CTB was locked into IMK, so much so that he finished the season over 21 MPG despite the experience on the roster, and you could see his confidence grow – making more plays off of the bounce and being more confident in letting his shot rip as the year progressed. His 39% from deep on just under 4 attempts per game was very good, especially because he started off the season in a bit of a shooting funk as he adjusted to the pace of play and to his role off of the bench behind so many seasoned guys. While we likely will look back at this as the year of Beekman and Dunn, McKneely time starts, fully, now. I will be surprised if he’s not our leading scorer this season. Seriously. McKneely bombing away with freedom should be a thing that strikes terror into his opponents as his shooting % only improved throughout last season as he got more comfortable and willing. He doesn’t need much space but, also, he’s talked a lot this offseason about working on his handle and his ability to create off of the dribble, which was already something he became increasingly willing to do toward the end of last year. Plainly, there shouldn’t be many situations, aside from a rare off shooting game or something, where McKneely isn’t a universal plus offensively. Where will he shake out on defense? One of the big feathers in his cap heading into last year was already knowing the Pack Line and not taking long to adjust to the defensive scheme. He occasionally got exposed/lost but was normally solid defensively within that framework; especially considering he was often guarding up and out of position against opposing Small Forwards. Aside from the (hopefully) rare situations where he’s playing alongside both Beekman and Harris this year, he should be guarding Shooting Guards most of the time, which should improve his prospects. All of that said, I haven’t seen much to believe he is a lock down defender, or even above average on that side of the ball; at least not yet. Altogether, I think there’s a great case to be made to play him around that 29 minute mark, which is exactly what Armaan Franklin averaged last season. Keep him fresh, flex in some stronger defensive matchups when needed, take advantage of your lineup versatility, but still play him as one of the staple driving forces on your team.
Ryann Dunn (6’8″ Sophomore, Power Forward)
33 MPG Starter
I believe that this season is going to be the Ryan Dunn coming out party. According to advanced metric site evanmiya.com, he was part of 5 of our top 6 most effective five-man lineups last season, our three most effective three-man pairings, and 3 of our top 4 two-man pairings. There was as strong of a case as any that leaning into more Dunn minutes (he averaged just 13 mpg) would have been a huge benefit to the team across virtually any lineup combination last season, although I broke down in more detail earlier the need for Gardner in many matchups – Dunn also did well alongside of him as well. The merit to playing him more was perhaps obscured by the fact that he was not the offensive threat that many others on the roster provided last year. He was neither confident in his handle nor his jump shot as the season progressed. But his uncanny ability to block shots and contest at the rim (highest block rate on the roster), secure the glass on both ends (highest rebounding rate on the roster), play tenacious defense on a variety of player types, and to make explosive plays around the rim re: put backs and fast breaks, all amounted to a player who you were rarely upset to see on the floor and, quite the opposite, were often calling to see more of. If we just got that version of Ryan Dunn for starter’s minutes this year, I’d feel confident about that as a solid part of our team. But, by all accounts, Dunn has been working on his shot and his ability to get to the bucket this offseason, Mike Curtis is working his magic, he’s becoming a visible leader on the team, and there are already first round draft rumblings abound. Sometimes all it takes is confidence, being the guy, and the right role within a team structure, but if any (or all) of these elements of his game are markedly improved, then Dunn will become a player we never really want to see come off of the floor; capable of locking down most players 2-5, or to bother opposing bigs while overing scary help side rim protection. Matchup agnostic. Offensively he’ll be able to play the stretch 4 role, or even slide up to the 3 in certain large lineups (expect him to be in the 4 most often, though), improving our spacing, punishing on the offensive glass, hopefully developing into a slasher from the outside. You may ask, “why not even more than 33 minutes?” to which I answer: I won’t be sad if it’s more as long as the time comes from Groves or Minor and not Buchanan. Two years ago, prior to Dunn being on the roster, when Jayden Gardner was our entrenched 4 and we had no viable alternative we were willing to play when he sat (Igor Milicic Jr. didn’t come off the bench and the alternatives were either Kody Stattmann or playing both Shedrick and Caffaro at the same time), he still only played 32.7 mpg. Each of our other bigs offer something different; skillsets that can be leveraged to create different lineup wrinkles; so I’m fine resting Dunn for 7 mpg and keeping his at his freshest and most impactful while we give different looks when he’s out.
Reece Beekman (6’3″ Senior, Point Guard)
33 MPG Starter
I need to take a second to firmly put on the record here how excited I am that Beekman is coming back and that we’ll get to see him for a full season at the height of his powers, with zero need to defer to any other facilitators. Just give the ball to Reece and let him cook! Put him on the opposing team’s best 1 or 2 and don’t worry about that player! Imagine Las Vagas pre-injury Reece but even better and at a much higher volume. The mind reels. Barring anything unforeseen (knock on wood), that’s where we’re headed and All-ACC and National Defensive Player of The Year awards should be in the discussion. I don’t actually think Beekman will be the most irreplaceable player on the roster, such is my confidence in Harris as a backup and opinion on Dunn-over replacement, but he should be our best player. Last year he landed right in that 32.6 MPG sweet spot, although that was altered by a couple of games where his time was shortened due to injury, but I think that slightly reduced workload is one we should attempt to replicate. Keep him rested, healthy, batteries full at the end of the year, while maintaining a clear role for Harris without having to force them together much. It’s time for this star to shine.
So, those are my preseason thoughts on how best to marry all of the findings from last year in to an adjustable strategy for this coming season that takes into account the abundance of talent on the roster, plays to win now while also developing and engaging our youth. For those following along at home:
Starters
Reece Beekman, PG – 33 mins
Isaac McKneely, SG – 29 mins
Andrew Rohde, SF – 25 mins
Ryan Dunn, PF – 33 mins
Jordan Minor, C – 20 mins
Bench
Jacob Groves, PF/C – 17 mins
Leon Bond III, SF – 16 mins
Blake Buchanan, C – 10 mins
Eliah Gertrude, SG – 10 mins
Dante Harris, PG – 7 mins
Taine Murray, SG/SF – 0 mins
Anthony Robinson, C – 0 mins (Redshirt)
Most of the justification is above but just a few short notes here in terms of things I like re: lineups:
Almost never play Beekman or Harris together but always play one. Exception to this might be breaking the press or pressing, for the latter it could be cool to see a Harris, Beekman, Gertrude, Bond, Dunn lineup.
Consider starting Bond at 3 and bringing Rohde off of the bench as instant offense. Occasionally play Rohde at 2 with Bond at 3. Consider playing Gertrude with Bond when trying to kill an opposing team’s hot hand/scoring run and don’t hesitate to look for transition buckets when that group is out there.
Minor and Buchanan can be played together when we need to fight bully ball, either with Dunn at the 3 for extra size or alongside both McKneely and Rohde in a more traditional offense (could be one of the few times Sides would be one of our better offensive options).
Dunn at the 4 and Groves at the 5 should be great for spreading out an opposing team and opening up the middle of the floor. Ideally Bond (if he can prove his outside shot) augments that unit to help with rebounding.
Generally speaking, and I haven’t talked about this much yet, but heavy on-ball screening actions worked into our offense should universally help. We have great screeners who can finish well when they get a head of steam going toward the hoop, have some quality pick and pop guys, and have quite a few ball handlers who can attack the rim when given space/momentum.
In Conclusion
I feel the need to say, again, that I do not expect the above will be how it plays out. Specifically, I think both Harris and Murray will get more time than I’ve listed; Minor probably too. But I found this an interesting thought exercise when considering all of the variables at play re: what do I think will be the best approach and what will I be rooting for as the season unfolds. It’s always fun to think about the plethora of options available. As always, I’ll be watching as the season plays out and updating these thoughts re: what do I think I missed and what was correct as well as where things could be improved and what’s going well. It will be year-two of my post-game film analysis. It seems like a chasm of time before the season starts and with no overseas contests to scrutinize this year, we’ll be chomping at the bit even more for that first game action. The pace of my content will slow from here until we get closer to opening tip, but I’ll be looking at putting out a couple of more pieces before then and am open to ideas on what that content should be.
Thanks again for reading along, the many discussions that have gotten us to this point, and your engagement!
Leave a Reply to GTACancel reply