S.C. State and playing the freshmen

I'm working on the midseason basketball update, but in the meantime I thought I would comment on last night's game.

Ugly game from Clemson against, statistically speaking, arguably the worst opponent the team has faced this season. I think the tendency will be to chalk this up as the result of a rusty team looking ahead to an ACC opener against the hated Duke Blue Devils. (From the sportswriter's perspective, the storyline practically writes itself.) Clearly, it was a near-disastrous game where the Tigers played lax defense until the final minutes and failed to hit any free throws down the stretch while SC State seemed to get just about every bounce, deflection, and borderline call to go there way. Clemson is really, really lucky this didn't end up in the "bad loss" column for the selection committee to see come March. (It also raises the question as to when "near-bad losses" will start to enter the selection criteria...)

The most interesting part of the game for me, however, was Purnell's willingness to stick with a lot of freshmen on the floor for the first 10-12 minutes of the second half, even after it became clear that SC State was chipping away at the lead and primed to make a run. As we've stated before on the blog, for Clemson to really contend in the ACC this season they need at least one or two of the freshmen to get comfortable in the system and really start contributing, particularly on the offensive end. I'm wondering if the coaching staff isn't a little bit exasperated at this point. Here is the most highly-touted recruiting class in years and years at Clemson and with the possible exception of Devin Booker, we've yet to see anyone flash even the promise of becoming a star at Clemson. My sense was today Purnell was willing to risk a close(r) game in order to give Johnson and Jennings every opportunity to succeed in a sort of sink-or-swim fashion (not giving them any veteran support). Unfortunately, the strategy didn't seem to help matters and it nearly ended up costing Clemson in the win column.

So what gives? Is this a case of 1) over-hyped talent, 2) a failure on the coaching staff's part to successfully integrate new talent into the system, or 3) is everything going to be fine and we just need to accept that the learning curve is really steep for these players? If you've been following the blog, I've been more or less advocating #3 while cautioning against the possibility that #2 becomes something of a reality. Now that the ACC preseason is over, I'm not so sure anymore. I'm still leaning towards #3, but #2 is becoming more and more of a possibility. Purnell may have made a critical error by awarding scholarships to the best available talent; talent which may or may not ever really "fit" into his brand of basketball. Let's be brutally honest: Jennings and Johnson have looked more or less lost offensively--flat-footed and standing around most of the time. They've been even worse on defense, barely contributing to the press and even struggling to play solid defense in the half-court. Hill has, at least, shown flashes of being a potential contributor on defense, but again hasn't shown anything on offense. I really hope this is setting off alarm after alarm in every meeting Purnell holds with the other coaches and that this is a constant topic of discussion, because the team's prospects for the season (to say nothing of the ceiling of success for the program in the future) depend on integration of superior offensive talent.

To be clear, everything is not lost. One observation that favors #3 over #2 is that Jennings and Johnson are really being asked to do a lot all at once. This isn't a case similar to when, for example, Oglesby was brought in. When he first joined the team his primary responsibility was to get open on the offensive end and drain threes. He worked on other aspects of his game as time went on, without the pressure of being a force on defense by the time game #15 of his collegiate career came around. Another example is Trevor Booker, who was expected to provide a post presence underneath on offense while blocking a few shots on defense in his first year, while gradually building the other parts of his game. This could be an easy way for the coaches to assist Jennings, Johnson, and Hill. Give them some roles to focus on in individual games--I get the feeling these guys are just being asked to do too much at once. With a little focus they might be able to ground themselves a little better.

Unfortunately, the counter-argument to the preceding paragraph is that these freshmen are supposed to be tremendous athletes. The coaching staff could be perfectly justified in setting high expectations for their adjustment into the Clemson system. This also raises the discomforting but ultimately unavoidable notion that once you start considering #2, you have to also consider #1.

I don't have the answers, but I felt like throwing this out. The result of all this is that we may need to temper our expectations for the season. From my vantage point, 10 ACC wins is looking more and more like a goal to be achieved rather than a given. I said in the season preview that Clemson needed at least one of the four freshmen to emerge in the ACC preseason. As it turns out, I was wrong. We really need one of the three non-Booker freshmen to emerge, because Devin Booker's role is filled by Trevor. Of course it's great that Devin looks is able to come in and spell Trevor for a few minutes at a time without a significant drop-off on the offensive end, but the Tigers need someone else to provide us with an upgrade in a slot that doesn't already feature our best position player. The great news for Clemson fans, though, is Devin Booker looks like the real deal, which should relieve concerns about lack of an inside presence next season.

More Quick Thoughts on Noel Johnson

• Wooooooooooooooo!
• Clemben is more of the recruiting guru 'round these parts, but I'm just going to say it: Best. recruiting. class. ever.
• While I stand by my earlier statement that the team was actually slightly better without TOgglesby, before the news about Johnson I had been mulling over the loss of height resulting from his departure. As we talked about ad nauseum here during the season, Clemson really struggled against tall teams, particularly with delivering entry passes into the post. The thought of losing another 5 inches with the 5'9" Andre Young (relative to the 6'2" Oglesby) on the court had me concerned to say the least, although I would argue Young has the potential to be the better passer despite his height. But with the 6'7" Johnson on board as well as the 6'4" Donte Hill, we suddenly could be causing some match-up difficulties of our own next season.
• Notice I didn't mention Tanner Smith. While I love his grit and he's got a great story, after watching him fade with the tougher competition last season I'm hoping we are now assured of a significant drop in his playing time. He just looked lost on the court after ACC play started. Now, if he finds that 3-point stroke we heard about as he was coming out of high school, that's a different story...
• Its good to hear about Johnson's shooting abilities. While I think we would have been more or less fine with some combination of Young, Smith, Potter, and Jennings taking 3s (with the occasional contribution from Booker Sr.), Johnson has the potential to again make our 3-point game something the opposing team will have to specifically plan for.
• Come to think of it, with the bulk of our talent arguably in the front court this season, why is everyone so worried about the 3-point game anyway? As long as it's around league average (a good bet in my estimation) and we can get the ball inside, I think we'll end up with a stronger offense than last year. And that's saying something for 16th best offense last year in Division I.
• Obviously, I'm still on a high after hearing the news. But there will be growing pains for this squad with so much contribution expected from the rookies. In other words, I don't think we'll get through the non-conference schedule undefeated. We'll have stupid lapses (10:1 this is related to sloppy ball-handling) that cost us games. But for once, the upside of the squad is such that we can actually expect the team to get better as the season progresses.

Welcome Noel Johnson

Well well well, Terrence Oglesby you genius...you knew this was for the greater good. Somehow you knew that it was your time to go, that you had to sacrifice your position so that the team could get stronger.

Thank you TO, thank you...

Out with the old, in with the nucleus (old school Simpson joke). While I am at it I would also like to thank Tim Floyd for not only staying away from Clemson but also for having yet another scandal and releasing Johnson at just the right time. If you read this post there is one thing I want you to take away from it--this is big. This is a huge, perhaps pivotal signing for Clemson. This has the potential to launch us into the upper echelon of not only the ACC but makes us a legit top 15 team. That hasn't happened at Clemson--even in the days of Dale Davis and Elden Campbell we werent complete teams. Now we can have some staying power.

Here are the reasons why I am literally drooling about the prospects for next season. Johnson is 6' 7, can play the 1, 2, or 3 positions, can shoot, can penetrate, can play D. He is ranked around the number 50 player in the nation for 2009 by rivals and scout. This is a guy that any ACC team would take, and had it not been for our good fortune and timing would have made a push for him--some say he is the best shooter in the country out of high school this year. Now obviously I am excited and overstating my case but this is the best Clemson basketball recruiting class of my lifetime and, dare I say it, perhaps the best ever. We have now filled every need we once had. We have a serviceable PG rotation, a top shooting guard, we just improved ourselves defensively, and we have a set of four players who could all have an immediate impact. Way to recruit Oliver Purnell, you sir deserve a tip of my hat.

What is there not to like...not much. He needs to get a little quicker with his footwork and keep improving ball handling and passing. While I wish he was also known for great handles I can live with it. One thing we all know is that Clemson needs to improve its ballhandling, primarily entry passing to the post. TO brought a lot to like to the table but we just got more length at the SG position, more versatility, more athleticism, more defense, more discipline. Oh and did I mention he hits free throws, hopefully around 80%??

This is a good kid from what I have seen, not a ball hawk who shoots when he wants to. He played within the Fayetteville system and is very coachable from what I know, surrounded by NBA names etc. He is a legit talent and will ease the burden already put on Milton Jennings. Jennings will be better with Johnson and no one will be able to double team or cover both of them while committing to Booker inside. Little Booker will provide some depth and skill inside, helping Grant to back-up Big Booker, and Donte Hill is a defensive stopper, perhaps one of the more underrated three star prospects. He will provide a solid contribution off the bench.

So thank you TO, we could only have gotten better without you...

Go Tigers!!

Is Oglesby Replaceable? Absolutely.

ESPN link, looks like its all but final.

I hate to toot my own horn here, but this is what I wrote after the NCAA loss:

None of this touches on Terrence Oglesby. All season I have tried to hold my peace on his extreme lack of poise. But after tonight, I have to wonder out loud if he will be back on the team next year. Purnell must be seething right now, not just about the intentional foul and ejection, but the overall sloppy play leading up to it. I think Oglesby is a valuable role player when used in the right way, and he even has some upside suggesting he could be something more, but last night makes you wonder if someone else can't do the same job without bringing the same baggage.

ClemBen touched on it below, there must to be some exchange between Purnell and Oglesby after the tournament that precipitated this. Parsing through Purnell's quotes, it almost seems that while he is surprised about Oglesby playing in Europe, he's maybe not so surprised he's playing elsewhere.

So the big question is: how does this affect next year's team? I've heard the word "game-changer" so much in the last 24 hours you'd think he single-handedly sparked every run the Tigers have had in the past two years. For the answer, look no further than Kenpom.com and the listed individual offensive efficiencies on the Clemson page. Offensive efficiency (a stat pioneered by Dean Oliver) is essentially the number of points a player is expected to produce per 100 possessions. In 2007-2008, Oglesby put up a not-too-shabby 116.2. His 2008-2009 campaign was down a little bit at 110.9, good for fifth-best on the team. Who was fourth-best on the team? None other than his replacement-in-waiting, Andre Young (sporting a 112.4 mark). That's right, in albeit significantly less playing time (but still enough playing time to not consider it a fluke), Andre Young put up better numbers than Oglesby--and this only considers offense! The difference in defensive abilities alone might have warranted benching Oglesby next year in favor of Young, but he also managed to at least equal him on offense. All of the terrible turnovers, the ball-hogging madness, and crazy shots off out-of-control drives killed Oglesby's effectiveness, and made the less flashy but more solid play of Young the better all-around performance.

Its really not hard to believe--the Tigers are a better 2009-2010 team than they were 24 hours ago. Here's hoping Oglesby follows through and hires an agent.

Should I Stay or Should I TO??

So Rivals.com is reporting that Terrence Oglesby (aka the Great Norweigen Hype) has signed to an agent and is going to play ball overseas this next season. Well first I got to say thanks--thanks a lot for sticking with your team and not leaving them with a huge gaping hole at shooting guard next year. Thanks a lot for not wanting to learn to play better defense and play within a the flow of a system. Thanks for acknowledging that you have a lot to learn before you are anywhere close to a complete player.

I know a lot of people are going to wish him well and talk about all the happy times when he single-handedly brought us back to win games and that is all true but allow me to be the angry guy in the room who says--thanks a lot jerk...yeah its harsh but come on--way to leave your team. As a starting guard on a repeat NCAA team, TO was being counted on to provide some leadership--to mature and keep improving his game. So first the positives we will miss--TO is probably the purest shooter we have had at Clemson in at least ten years, he hits FT's, and he can unleash a barrage of 3 pointers at any time in a game. Thats about it I think.

Negatives?? Mediocre defender, very little mid range or to the basket game, sometimes had a bad attitude, took stupid shots whenever he wanted, took a lot of stupid shots, would go very cold, would try to dunk and make the team look stupid.

He was a good player--not great, who showed flashes and could have improved. Obviously he was going to play minutes but I have a feeling he is leaving bc he didnt want to deal with the competition coming in and the possibility of being competely benched didnt sit too well with his ego. I wonder what his relation is with Purnell, obviously not that great if he was so eager to jump ship--puts a lot of pressure on Donte Hill to perform and Milton Jennings to be a legit outside 3pt threat. This doesnt change the outlook for the season but we may not start as strong as we could have. As far as I am concerned the more often we get the ball to the Booker Brothers inside the better off we will be as a team. Bye TO, it was fun to yell at you through the screen...