Bball gurus, are we in trouble?

[TSpoke]

I think Herndon improved on the defensive side as the year went on and think he will continue to improve over the off-season. I think the biggest jumps in this system happen after the sophomore year. Gain a few more pounds and continue to work on defense and rebounding and of course his shooting. The last game he had 15 and 10. I know it was one game but it showed he can get boards just needs to become consistant. There were other times he showed flashes but wasn't aggressive enough most of the time. That can change. I don't think he will become elite defensive or a rebounder but I think he will become decent(at least not a liability).

The comparisons with Nance and Cooke don't really work in my mind. Since the day he was recruited we knew he wasn't going to be the same type of player. He didn't have the same out of this world athleticism but had a better stroke and better ball handling. I agree that he has a quick enough first move to drive by people and take it to the rim.

I guess in short I'm saying I expect a big jump from him next year and that is one of my reasons for being optimistic about next year. But if it doesn't happen then I agree it could be a long year.

[CowboyCO]

I disagree about Herndon improving on defense. He is clueless when we switch to zone. When you look at all those open dunks against SJSU in the final game, those were on Herndon, When the ball would rotate tot he top of the key, he would shift up towards the ball handler and leave the baseline empty for an easy dunk from the man moving in from the corner. No discipline. His feet are too slow for man-to-man coverage and he needs help from the weak side, which against a good interior passer leads to easy buckets as well.

[Cowduck]

To summarize my thoughts about Herndon in response to the posts above: I agree that he is not a great rebounder or defender, which is why I say he has to play alongside Naughton/Barnes. We can only go small and get by with him as the only big on the floor in very limited situations. As long as one of Naughton/Barnes is on the floor we should get by rebounding-wise. Neither of them are bouncy as calpoke puts it but they have good positioning and strong bases which I think are more important. Herndon is definitely a different type of player than Nance and Cooke, it just time he puts in the work to fulfill his destiny as a legit stretch 4 and become a weapon from 15 ft. out to the 3 pt. line. It will unlock so much for the rest of the team if we can count on him to make those shots.

[Adv8RU12]

My take on Herndon is that he doesn't think quickly, or maybe for a better term: react quickly to a suddenly changing situation. My order of "quick reacting" would be: Adams, Leibs, McMan, Dalton, Naughton, Aka Gorski, Herndon.

[Coeur d' Alene]

So much unknown about next years team. Starting with the roster. I know we all like to think everyone is coming back, and if not everyone then it would just be Marshall leaving. When almost every single player on the team ends the season feeling wronged by playing time, role, or punishment? Some turnover is going to happen. Imo (and I hope I'm wrong) I'd be surprised if there weren't atleast 2 guys leaving that we don't know now. I sure hope it isn't 3-4

[JimmyDimes]

So much unknown about next years team. Starting with the roster. I know we all like to think everyone is coming back, and if not everyone then it would just be Marshall leaving. When almost every single player on the team ends the season feeling wronged by playing time, role, or punishment? Some turnover is going to happen. Imo (and I hope I'm wrong) I'd be surprised if there weren't atleast 2 guys leaving that we don't know now. I sure hope it isn't 3-4

Everyone is getting solid minutes.....much more so than the freshman on last years team. If any of them leave because of playing time or punishment......did we really want them on the team to begin with?

[carbonpoke]

I like herndons skill set... However, he has very little confidence in his post play. He has to add 15 more pounds, and that's just to start. A couple of times this season he called for substitution because he was getting punked. That can't happen, and until it stops he will remain kinda weak and detrimental at his position. Need to send him to boot camp, or a fight club, maybe he just needs to get into a scrap. Same with Barnes. Both are lion's with a puppies temperament.

[307bball]

This conversation has turned more towards personnel (which is fine) and away from the initial question....The rules changes on the surface do seem to be geared toward teams that have players with an NBA skill set. My thoughts on the shot clock change is that if a good defensive team can keep you from getting a quality shot in 35 seconds i'm sure they can do it for 30 or 24 seconds. Where the shot clock change hurts a bit is it takes away the ability to take the air out when we have the ball. I really don't think that WYO needs to be a "slow it down - grind it out" team every year but if you have a team of guys that are a little short on talent and long on effort then you'd be nuts trying to play up-tempo ... especially against teams that have more individual talent.

I don't think that year in and year out very many blue chip recruits are coming into Laramie. For sustained success we need to find an identity and for my money....ball control, discipline, defense, can all be taught and learned over the course of a college players career.

[NowherePoke]

I do like Cowducks post a lot but I wish I shared his optimism about us potentially being really good next year. Ragtime I don't think the shot clock or pace of play are really the important issues, the problem is simply the general lack of talent on the roster. Doesn't matter what the scheme or anything else is if you simply don't have the horses to keep up (no different than football). We just have a huge portion of the roster tied up in the classes of 13-14 that aren't very productive.

I think you're underrating how much players have improved under Shyatt historically. The players we need the biggest leaps from happen to be our most talented players, and Cooke, Nance, and Adams are the players who improved the most from years 1-4 (3 in Cooke's case) in the past. But even role players have mostly trended up. We're deeper than we've ever been in the Shyatt era. Next year's starting 5 will consist of a steady PG with better shooting than we've had from that spot in years, a potential first-team all-MWC SG who might flirt with 50% from 3, the most overall talented wing player in recent Wyoming history, an athletic and experienced four who is a jump shot away from wrecking defenses, and a big, strong post player who will be able to hold his own against any of his counterparts in the league. We'll have at least three guys off the bench who will be able to contribute.

Also, don't overlook the attrition around the league. Boise St. is losing Drmic and Thompson. Fresno is losing Harris. CSU is losing a bunch of guys. Nevada is losing Coleman and Criswell. I'd say we're in a better position even with the loss of Adams from top to bottom than any of those teams after their seniors are gone, and it isn't like any of those teams were really that good this year. I expect New Mexico to improve substantially next year, and SDSU will continue to be the best team in the league, but I don't think you can definitively say any other team besides those two in the MWC will be head and shoulders better than Wyoming. We'll need some things to go our way, but a top-five finish is easily within our reach.

It is strange to assume no improvement. But, as you've pointed out, most of Shyatt's players have progressed year to year. Take JMac for example, he went from 3 to 15 points a game. And is one of the better shooter in college basketball. The others haven't really been in the system long enough. And I'd say Barnes is the only one who hasn't made noticeable improvement from last year.

I don't think anybody assumes no improvement. Many of the players who stay will improve and statistical improvement is almost a guarantee as the will get more minutes, touches, etc. It's not like we will suddenly only average 40 ppg without Josh, it's just that we won't improve enough to be a factor in the MWC.

The issue Is just how far we have to go. This year's team was much worse than any previous Shyatt team. We could improve by 100 spots in the RPI and still not even make the NIT. Obviously it is unlikely we will improve that much (although it did happen in Shyatt's first year after taking over from Schroyer), but it shows you how far away we are from being a team that is consistently in the postseason mix.

JMac's improvement is impressive, and I can see Herndon improving offensively as he has a nice offensive skill set. I just don't see how we will ever be a good defensive team with Herndon, Lieberman, JMac, and Naughton/Barnes as starters.

If you look back since the MWC started Wyoming has finished .500 or better in conference play on 7 occasions. In every case we have a dominant defensive rebounder in the post, sometimes two:

99-00: Davis
00-01: Davis, Uche
01-02: Davis, Uche
02-03: Uche

04-05: Williams

13-14: Nance, Cooke
14-15: Nance, Cooke


We have had plenty of great guards on other teams (Ewing, a Straight, Adams, etc) that finished with losing records. The best predictor of success/failure for UW in MWC play has been defensive/rebounding capability of the front court.

You can find plenty of teams that don't have great rebounders in the front court that still manage to have success. The great Dembo/Leckner teams were an example. The key is that you have to offset that with help from the guards and wings on the glass and we just don't have the size and athelticism to do that on this roster. Those late 80's teams had Dembo who led the team in rebounding.

Beyond all the stats is the eye test. With some notable exceptions, our younger players are smaller and less athletic than their counterparts across the MWC. You can't fix that. James is a little skinny and Naughton is a little lacking in quickness, but they are MWC caliber athletes at their respective positions. The same can not be said about our Sophomore class. It wouldn't be such a big issue if it weren't for the fact that our Sophomore class this past year made up nearly half of our scholarship roster.

[NowherePoke]

To summarize my thoughts about Herndon in response to the posts above: I agree that he is not a great rebounder or defender, which is why I say he has to play alongside Naughton/Barnes. We can only go small and get by with him as the only big on the floor in very limited situations. As long as one of Naughton/Barnes is on the floor we should get by rebounding-wise. Neither of them are bouncy as calpoke puts it but they have good positioning and strong bases which I think are more important. Herndon is definitely a different type of player than Nance and Cooke, it just time he puts in the work to fulfill his destiny as a legit stretch 4 and become a weapon from 15 ft. out to the 3 pt. line. It will unlock so much for the rest of the team if we can count on him to make those shots.

I agree with your description oh Herndon's game and what he can grow into. The issue though is defense/rebounding and the fact of the matter is that neither Barnes nor Naughton are good rebounders either. I don't know what the solution is here.

[Coeur d' Alene]

To summarize my thoughts about Herndon in response to the posts above: I agree that he is not a great rebounder or defender, which is why I say he has to play alongside Naughton/Barnes. We can only go small and get by with him as the only big on the floor in very limited situations. As long as one of Naughton/Barnes is on the floor we should get by rebounding-wise. Neither of them are bouncy as calpoke puts it but they have good positioning and strong bases which I think are more important. Herndon is definitely a different type of player than Nance and Cooke, it just time he puts in the work to fulfill his destiny as a legit stretch 4 and become a weapon from 15 ft. out to the 3 pt. line. It will unlock so much for the rest of the team if we can count on him to make those shots.

I agree with your description oh Herndon's game and what he can grow into. The issue though is defense/rebounding and the fact of the matter is that neither Barnes nor Naughton are good rebounders either. I don't know what the solution is here.

bigby-Williams at Gillette college. Him and moemeka adding to those 3 make a big difference. Bigby-Williams would be the best player of that group and would help the current 4's games. Getting him would be huge. But not having him already for some time for a wyo juco player going to the national tourney? Who knows where he goes

[Cowduck]

This conversation has turned more towards personnel (which is fine) and away from the initial question....The rules changes on the surface do seem to be geared toward teams that have players with an NBA skill set. My thoughts on the shot clock change is that if a good defensive team can keep you from getting a quality shot in 35 seconds i'm sure they can do it for 30 or 24 seconds. Where the shot clock change hurts a bit is it takes away the ability to take the air out when we have the ball. I really don't think that WYO needs to be a "slow it down - grind it out" team every year but if you have a team of guys that are a little short on talent and long on effort then you'd be nuts trying to play up-tempo ... especially against teams that have more individual talent.

I don't think that year in and year out very many blue chip recruits are coming into Laramie. For sustained success we need to find an identity and for my money....ball control, discipline, defense, can all be taught and learned over the course of a college players career.

I dunno man, we attempted the 334th most field goals in the country this year. I'd say we're slowing it down about as much as we can. We were actually a better offensive team than defensive team this season by some measures, which bodes well for the future because I think we can fix the defense more easily than the offense. The rule changes definitely do favor offense and it isn't just about the shot clock, it's about the freedom of movement and cutting down on the amount of contact that defenders are allowed to get away with. I don't think this was all that tough of an adjustment for our team because the coaching staff has always preached defending without fouling. The personnel points I was making just were to demonstrate how I think our team should (continue to) evolve stylistically on offense next year: four guys who can shoot surrounding one true big to space the floor, ball movement, lots of pick-and-pop/pick-and-roll. Our three-point shooting was excellent this season and we'll keep going that way - that's why Herndon's development of his jumpshot was so central to my points about how next year's team plays.

[307bball]

This conversation has turned more towards personnel (which is fine) and away from the initial question....The rules changes on the surface do seem to be geared toward teams that have players with an NBA skill set. My thoughts on the shot clock change is that if a good defensive team can keep you from getting a quality shot in 35 seconds i'm sure they can do it for 30 or 24 seconds. Where the shot clock change hurts a bit is it takes away the ability to take the air out when we have the ball. I really don't think that WYO needs to be a "slow it down - grind it out" team every year but if you have a team of guys that are a little short on talent and long on effort then you'd be nuts trying to play up-tempo ... especially against teams that have more individual talent.

I don't think that year in and year out very many blue chip recruits are coming into Laramie. For sustained success we need to find an identity and for my money....ball control, discipline, defense, can all be taught and learned over the course of a college players career.

I dunno man, we attempted the 334th most field goals in the country this year. I'd say we're slowing it down about as much as we can. We were actually a better offensive team than defensive team this season by some measures, which bodes well for the future because I think we can fix the defense more easily than the offense. The rule changes definitely do favor offense and it isn't just about the shot clock, it's about the freedom of movement and cutting down on the amount of contact that defenders are allowed to get away with. I don't think this was all that tough of an adjustment for our team because the coaching staff has always preached defending without fouling. The personnel points I was making just were to demonstrate how I think our team should (continue to) evolve stylistically on offense next year: four guys who can shoot surrounding one true big to space the floor, ball movement, lots of pick-and-pop/pick-and-roll. Our three-point shooting was excellent this season and we'll keep going that way - that's why Herndon's development of his jumpshot was so central to my points about how next year's team plays.

I agree with trying to develop a consistent offense based on personnel. I interpreted the OP to be a question about rules changes and the effect they have on our teams philosophy.

My question is "What does sustained success in men's basketball at the University of Wyoming look like?".

I believe the answer to that question is a level of consistency and commitment to things like defense, rebounding, disciplined shot selection, and player development. If the team can keep those things as top goals then regardless of individual abilities we will always be a tough out. That is why I'm a supporter of Shyatt. Being realistic about who we recruit and what style gives us the best chance is huge for us. If your Kentucky you will always have the best guys, individually, on the court....anyways...lets hope the best is yet to come for this coaching staff.

[WYCowboy]

This conversation has turned more towards personnel (which is fine) and away from the initial question....The rules changes on the surface do seem to be geared toward teams that have players with an NBA skill set. My thoughts on the shot clock change is that if a good defensive team can keep you from getting a quality shot in 35 seconds i'm sure they can do it for 30 or 24 seconds. Where the shot clock change hurts a bit is it takes away the ability to take the air out when we have the ball. I really don't think that WYO needs to be a "slow it down - grind it out" team every year but if you have a team of guys that are a little short on talent and long on effort then you'd be nuts trying to play up-tempo ... especially against teams that have more individual talent.

I don't think that year in and year out very many blue chip recruits are coming into Laramie. For sustained success we need to find an identity and for my money....ball control, discipline, defense, can all be taught and learned over the course of a college players career.

I dunno man, we attempted the 334th most field goals in the country this year. I'd say we're slowing it down about as much as we can. We were actually a better offensive team than defensive team this season by some measures, which bodes well for the future because I think we can fix the defense more easily than the offense. The rule changes definitely do favor offense and it isn't just about the shot clock, it's about the freedom of movement and cutting down on the amount of contact that defenders are allowed to get away with. I don't think this was all that tough of an adjustment for our team because the coaching staff has always preached defending without fouling. The personnel points I was making just were to demonstrate how I think our team should (continue to) evolve stylistically on offense next year: four guys who can shoot surrounding one true big to space the floor, ball movement, lots of pick-and-pop/pick-and-roll. Our three-point shooting was excellent this season and we'll keep going that way - that's why Herndon's development of his jumpshot was so central to my points about how next year's team plays.

I agree with trying to develop a consistent offense based on personnel. I interpreted the OP to be a question about rules changes and the effect they have on our teams philosophy.

My question is "What does sustained success in men's basketball at the University of Wyoming look like?".

I believe the answer to that question is a level of consistency and commitment to things like defense, rebounding, disciplined shot selection, and player development. If the team can keep those things as top goals then regardless of individual abilities we will always be a tough out. That is why I'm a supporter of Shyatt. Being realistic about who we recruit and what style gives us the best chance is huge for us. If your Kentucky you will always have the best guys, individually, on the court....anyways...lets hope the best is yet to come for this coaching staff.

To me, rebounding is right at the top of the list in what this team needs to be successful.

[Adv8RU12]

To me, rebounding is right at the top of the list in what this team needs to be successful.

Very true. My opinion of top 5 of weaknesses last season (given personnel available):

1) rebounding
2) turnovers
3) inside defense
4) inside offense
5) poor ball movement

[wyoming3]

You've got to think Naughton will start next year over Barnes. I see more potential in Naughton, not sure how much Barnes can improve from a physical standpoint. If he cant rebound this year no amount of weight will help with that next year. Allow Herndon and Dalton to play stretch 4's if they can improve their 3 point shooting.