This roster is not bad IF.......

Donate To GopherHole
Rockraven said:
Our guards are going to need to be good getting ball onto Betts hands.
Click to expand...
Just yesterday you were saying that Betts was a wing? Wings don't need guards to find a way to get them the ball (because they should have the ball a lot).
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Just yesterday you were saying that Betts was a wing? Wings don't need guards to find a way to get them the ball (because they should have the ball a lot).
Click to expand...
It’s ok to stop arguing with yourself now. That isn’t a good basketball comment.
 


Big Dawg said:
That's my preliminary O/U assuming we get a servicable (better than Samuels) G. If we get Hawkins we could squeak out the 7. Mind you that only puts us at 13th in the BIG assuming this years W/L totals in the BIG. NB at 12th was 9-11. To me it's going to be HOW they look and the other metrics. We could go 7-13 and look like crap. Then again we could go 5-15 and look much better than this past season. Either way I don't see us in the madness or even NIT. I just want to see some progression, no blow out losses and some development of some sort. I want to say one of 2 things when 23-24 is over: Ben is horrible and needs to go or Ben has shown he can coach and I want him to stay on as our coach. For some reason I feel we will land somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...
Just give them a chance to get on the court. It must be difficult to be so negative all the time. I am sure these kids are working their butts off to prove you wrong.
 

Roster =/ Bad, 2023 - 2024:
if (Wins - Losses: Total) > 10
and/or
if (Wins - Losses: B1G Conference) > 4
 


So then what does it make the roster...mediocre? Average? Because a 5 win Big Ten team is still pretty terrible.
 

Dave H said:
So then what does it make the roster...mediocre? Average? Because a 5 win Big Ten team is still pretty terrible.
Click to expand...
If the 5 wins are accompanied by blow out losses it is beyond pretty terrible. Glad I am not tortured waiting and expecting that. Can it happen? Yeah. Will it happen? I doubt it.
 

Dave H said:
So then what does it make the roster...mediocre? Average? Because a 5 win Big Ten team is still pretty terrible.
Click to expand...
What are the levels of terrible and does mediocre factor in to terrible or is it a hybrid of good and bad?

I would say mediocre is a continual failure to meet performance standards such as having a conference winning percentage of 30% or less and season win totals of 18 or less. That is just off the top of my head. The school administration seems to be supportive of a much lower standard.
 
Last edited:

We lose: Jamison Battle, Jaden Henley, Treyton Thompson, Ta'lon Cooper, Taurus Samuels

We gain: Mike Mitchell Jr. , Cameron Christie, Kadyn Betts, Elijah Hawkins, Isiah Ihnen, Parker Fox, Jack Wilson, Erick Reader

What we gain is much better than what we lose. Mitchell is rated as a higher transfer than Cooper (92 vs. 89). Cameron Christie is rated much higher than Henley was. But we had three big needs, depth being one and if Ben adds another player, we should be in much better shape than we have been in the last two years. We also have hopefully solved the PG problem by getting two to commit. While some of the players we gain won't have big roles I am glad they also won't chew up 4 years of scholarships. The thrid thing we've addressed is experience. We were so young last year. We should also be significantly better because last years players will have improved, especially the freshmen Betts, Carrington, Payne, and Ola-Joseph and we've brought in some experience.
 
Last edited:



CoMn said:
We lose: Jamison Battle, Jaden Henley, Treyton Thompson, Ta'lon Cooper, Taurus Samuels

We gain: Mike Mitchell Jr. , Cameron Christie, Kadyn Betts, Elijah Hawkins, Isiah Ihnen, Parker Fox, Jack Wilson, Erick Reader

What we gain is much better than what we lose. Mitchell is rated as a higher transfer than Cooper (92 vs. 89). Cameron Christie is rated much higher than Henley was. But we had three big needs, depth being one and if Ben adds another player, we should be in much better shape than we have been in the last two years. We also have hopefully solved the PG problem by getting two to commit. While some of the players we gain won't have big roles I am glad they also won't chew up 4 years of scholarships. The thrid thing we've addressed is experience. We were so young last year. We should also be significantly better because last years players will have improved, especially the freshmen Betts, Carrington, Payne, and Ola-Joseph and we've brought in some experience.
Click to expand...
I think it's a bit easy to convince yourselves of that based on volume. But it's really about the top 8

1: Cooper to Mitchell: At least a wash, hopefully an upgrade. +1

2: Henley to Christie: Same as above. +1

4/3: Battle to Ihnen: This is a downgrade until proven otherwise -1

5/4: Garcia/Garcia: Should be better early in the season next year. +1

6/5: Payne/Payne: See JOJ, though I think a slump is less likely. +1

3/6: JOJ/JOJ: Hopefully improvement, but sophomore slumps are also often a thing when freshmen exceed expectations. Even.

#7/7: Samuels to Hawkins: This should hopefully be a significant upgrade +2

#8/8: Carrington/Carrington: Hopefully healthier and more productive. +1

Total: +6. Count the bench players at 50%, it's +4.5. That would put us at 6-7 B1G wins. It would really help of they could pull a legit shooting guard from the portal and have the #3 spot be a competition between Christie/Ihnen and Carrington.
 

I am pretty psyched about Hawkins, didn’t realize he went to DeMatha! He’s been playing high level ball for awhile.

His TOs should go down with the Gopher pacing. Plus Mitchell and he will most likely split minutes.

Looks pretty good.

PG: Mitchell/Hawkins
SG: Christie/Carrington
SF: JoJ/Betts/Ramburg
PF: Garcia/Ihnen
C: Payne/Fox/Wilson

Much better positional balance upcoming this year if they are all healthy.

One scholly left to get that elusive D & 3 wing who’s a natural SF. This will probably be a fail.

Too bad Ben ran off Hunter Dickinson by signing Wilson or we would be really solid.
 

Otis said:
I am pretty psyched about Hawkins, didn’t realize he went to DeMatha! He’s been playing high level ball for awhile.

His TOs should go down with the Gopher pacing. Plus Mitchell and he will most likely split minutes.

Looks pretty good.

PG: Mitchell/Hawkins
SG: Christie/Carrington
SF: JoJ/Betts/Ramburg
PF: Garcia/Ihnen
C: Payne/Fox/Wilson

Much better positional balance upcoming this year if they are all healthy.

One scholly left to get that elusive D & 3 wing who’s a natural SF. This will probably be a fail.

Too bad Ben ran off Hunter Dickinson by signing Wilson or we would be really solid.
Click to expand...
Excellent point.
 

Otis said:
I am pretty psyched about Hawkins, didn’t realize he went to DeMatha! He’s been playing high level ball for awhile.

His TOs should go down with the Gopher pacing. Plus Mitchell and he will most likely split minutes.

Looks pretty good.

PG: Mitchell/Hawkins
SG: Christie/Carrington
SF: JoJ/Betts/Ramburg
PF: Garcia/Ihnen
C: Payne/Fox/Wilson

Much better positional balance upcoming this year if they are all healthy.

One scholly left to get that elusive D & 3 wing who’s a natural SF. This will probably be a fail.

Too bad Ben ran off Hunter Dickinson by signing Wilson or we would be really solid.
Click to expand...
Time will tell how much this roster has improved over the previous 2 seasons. But the one thing that is certain is this is far and away the most balanced roster Johnson has had to this point.

Hopefully we can avoid the season ending injury bug this time so that we actually get to see the entire roster in action.
 



Well they got someone...here is hoping he is good enough for the Big Ten. Seems like a bit of reach based on the his size though. (that is obviously only one measurable but I have never seen him play)

Fingers crossed!
 

We could still use one more good piece, and I still don't understand why they signed Wilson, but this is now feeling like a full-ish roster. Say a prayer that the squad avoids any devastating injuries between now and the fall, and we'll see how this thing shapes up. As always, we won't defintively know what we have until we see them on the raised floor, but I'll stick my neck out and say we're going to like Mitchell. Still not sure if we have the star power to tread water in the conference, and as we've discussed, that'll largely depend on whether and how much the returning players have improved through the off season, but that's where a person might as well be hopeful, because why not?
 

howeda7 said:
I think it's a bit easy to convince yourselves of that based on volume. But it's really about the top 8

1: Cooper to Mitchell: At least a wash, hopefully an upgrade. +1

2: Henley to Christie: Same as above. +1

4/3: Battle to Ihnen: This is a downgrade until proven otherwise -1

5/4: Garcia/Garcia: Should be better early in the season next year. +1

6/5: Payne/Payne: See JOJ, though I think a slump is less likely. +1

3/6: JOJ/JOJ: Hopefully improvement, but sophomore slumps are also often a thing when freshmen exceed expectations. Even.

#7/7: Samuels to Hawkins: This should hopefully be a significant upgrade +2

#8/8: Carrington/Carrington: Hopefully healthier and more productive. +1

Total: +6. Count the bench players at 50%, it's +4.5. That would put us at 6-7 B1G wins. It would really help of they could pull a legit shooting guard from the portal and have the #3 spot be a competition between Christie/Ihnen and Carrington.
Click to expand...
The starter at 3 (by the time we enter conference games) is Betts. I think the main reason for Battle’s drop off and panicked/desperate play was he was up against Betts in practice. Betts is a great defensive/harasser player and tore up Battle’s confidence. Plus he can shoot the lights out.
 

Bad Gopher said:
We could still use one more good piece, and I still don't understand why they signed Wilson, but this is now feeling like a full-ish roster. Say a prayer that the squad avoids any devastating injuries between now and the fall, and we'll see how this thing shapes up. As always, we won't defintively know what we have until we see them on the raised floor, but I'll stick my neck out and say we're going to like Mitchell. Still not sure if we have the star power to tread water in the conference, and as we've discussed, that'll largely depend on whether and how much the returning players have improved through the off season, but that's where a person might as well be hopeful, because why not?
Click to expand...
I agree. It is the wagon we are going to be hitched to for this upcoming season, so I figure I might as well try to find a comfy spot and hope the ride isn't as bumpy. If the horse takes us over a cliff, then we'll be looking at a new horse for next season.
 

Rockraven said:
The starter at 3 (by the time we enter conference games) is Betts. I think the main reason for Battle’s drop off and panicked/desperate play was he was up against Betts in practice. Betts is a great defensive/harasser player and tore up Battle’s confidence. Plus he can shoot the lights out.
Click to expand...
That 3 position is the most interesting to me. I believe 30+ min/gm will be eaten up at the 5 by Payne, the 4 by Garcia, the 1 by Mitchell/Hawkins and the 2 by Mitchell/Hawkins/Carrington. I could see many different scenario's at the 3. Betts/Christie/Ihnen. I could even see 1-3 being Mitchell, Hawkins and Carrington some times. Going to depend on matchups, chemistry and what the heck Ben wants to do. I do like the fact that we have choices and hoepfully someone will shine and look good in that 3 spot.
 

Big Dawg said:
That 3 position is the most interesting to me. I believe 30+ min/gm will be eaten up at the 5 by Payne, the 4 by Garcia, the 1 by Mitchell/Hawkins and the 2 by Mitchell/Hawkins/Carrington. I could see many different scenario's at the 3. Betts/Christie/Ihnen. I could even see 1-3 being Mitchell, Hawkins and Carrington some times. Going to depend on matchups, chemistry and what the heck Ben wants to do. I do like the fact that we have choices and hoepfully someone will shine and look good in that 3 spot.
Click to expand...
I expect a much bigger role for Christie as the season goes on. The coaching staff has huge flexibility and options this year. Lots of offensive schemes and rotations. We have more depth than I remember, but then I only go back to Musselman.

I don’t mind naysayers but I resent when they attack instead of discuss.
 

Big Dawg said:
That 3 position is the most interesting to me. I believe 30+ min/gm will be eaten up at the 5 by Payne, the 4 by Garcia, the 1 by Mitchell/Hawkins and the 2 by Mitchell/Hawkins/Carrington. I could see many different scenario's at the 3. Betts/Christie/Ihnen. I could even see 1-3 being Mitchell, Hawkins and Carrington some times. Going to depend on matchups, chemistry and what the heck Ben wants to do. I do like the fact that we have choices and hoepfully someone will shine and look good in that 3 spot.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how bad it is when people say that this is the most balanced roster we will have under Ben, yet we don't have one legitimate player to play the 3 on the roster.

More square peg round hole fits, and people think we're not going to finish last again...
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
It's amazing how bad it is when people say that this is the most balanced roster we will have under Ben, yet we don't have one legitimate player to play the 3 on the roster.

More square peg round hole fits, and people think we're not going to finish last again...
Click to expand...
Curious as to what a pefect 3 looks like to you? Legitimate question. 3's come in all sorts of packaging depending on coach, style of play, roster makeup, chemistry, etc... I just don't know which way Ben will go.
 

Bet on Betts to start with. There are several more obvious round pegs for your round hole.
 


Rockraven said:
Bet on Betts to start with. There are several more obvious round pegs for your round hole.
Click to expand...
Speaking of holes and peg's, I wouldn't call Payne a round peg for a round hole. 6'9" is on the short side for 5 in the BIG. Garcia isn't the protypical 4 in the BIG. Fox isn't the standard 4-5 but we have been hearing for 3 years now that he will be logging minutes at the 4/5 for our Gophers. Murphy was 6'6" and is 2nd all time in the BIG (rebounds).
 

Big Dawg said:
Curious as to what a pefect 3 looks like to you? Legitimate question. 3's come in all sorts of packaging depending on coach, style of play, roster makeup, chemistry, etc... I just don't know which way Ben will go.
Click to expand...

I said this last year, and although he was extremely raw and has a long ways to go, Henley was always close to an ideal 3 to me from size, ball handling ability, and a potential shooter.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I said this last year, and although he was extremely raw and has a long ways to go, Henley was always close to an ideal 3 to me from size, ball handling ability, and a potential shooter.
Click to expand...
So 6'7", 190lbs, slasher-shooter. Got it. Could that be Betts(6'8", 210)? How about Ihnen? Maybe Christie(6'5", 160)? Nice to have choices. Thinking we will be fine. Wouldn't mind finding a guy Ben likes for the 3 out of the portal. Still some time.
 

Henley is 50% what Betts will be. I guess that projects well for us!
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I said this last year, and although he was extremely raw and has a long ways to go, Henley was always close to an ideal 3 to me from size, ball handling ability, and a potential shooter.
Click to expand...
You were not much of a Henley fan as I recall...or am I thinking of someone else?
GopherWeatherGuy said:
It's amazing how bad it is when people say that this is the most balanced roster we will have under Ben, yet we don't have one legitimate player to play the 3 on the roster.

More square peg round hole fits, and people think we're not going to finish last again...
Click to expand...
We don't have a proven 3 on the roster. We have several guys who might become that this year. I think the odds are on our side that one of Betts, Carrington, JOJ, Christie or Ihnen fills that spot nicely
 

bga1 said:
You were not much of a Henley fan as I recall...or am I thinking of someone else?

We don't have a proven 3 on the roster. We have several guys who might become that this year. I think the odds are on our side that one of Betts, Carrington, JOJ, Christie or Ihnen fills that spot nicely
Click to expand...

I was never a fan of Henley playing guard. I said he should be Battle's replacement at the 3 once he was finished. Even though Battle should be a 4, both are more of a 3 than anyone on our current roster.

The hype train here for Betts is absolutely out of control. He was a middling 3* high school prospect and should have been a SR last year, and is the same age as a true freshman this year. Race Thompson was a much better prospect and also skipped his HS SR year to RS, and he still did nothing his RS FR and RS SO years at Indiana.

JOJ started at center last year and Ihnen couldn't play the 3 with two good knees. If Christie/Carrington are playing the 3, then who's playing the 2? This roster is still a complete mess.
 

Big Dawg said:
So 6'7", 190lbs, slasher-shooter. Got it. Could that be Betts(6'8", 210)? How about Ihnen? Maybe Christie(6'5", 160)? Nice to have choices. Thinking we will be fine. Wouldn't mind finding a guy Ben likes for the 3 out of the portal. Still some time.
Click to expand...
CBJ says II is a two.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom