Brady Heslip

[bcaddict]

Hope you're right re: the lights out shooting deep threat. But that's how Roche was billed too....

Here's my fear: the kid enters the fray (maybe in the next two games against Maine and NJIT?) under tough circumstances. It's mid-season and the WTF margin for error has been whittled to zero if the team wants to make the tourney so it's a bit of a pressure cooker. Players #6-9 are jostling for minutes after a mid-season lineup change and they are a relatively tight crew. The staff, players and fans all want to see if Heslip can be "the deep threat." Every shot, therefore, is watched with the same intensity that we watched every one of Roche's shots over the last four years. He wilts under the pressure. Misses lead to more pressure and more misses. We turn a good player into a 4 year head case, trial of perseverance experiment a' la Tyler. For comfort he bonds with Mosakowski and Rehnquist and morphs into a really good walk-on......

Please prove my fears baseless, Brady. Play with abandon. Play with joy. Don't worry about making an impact. Just do it. Play like the fearless Maple Leaf that you are!

Brady is a combo guard though, not a 6'7'' 165 lbs power forward. He brings something to the table other than shooting. Roche can contribute a little now, after 3 years, on defense and the boards, but he is a limited player.

Also, Heslip gets rave reviews about his shooting, and I have heard comparisons to Reddick. We heard that Roche was shooting the lights out, at practice, from bcaddict and his sources. Recruiting services didn't know much about Roche. But just read the writeup on ESPN about Heslip.

I'm not going to sit here and defend SOURCES for fear of sounding like bceagles24; so I'll let others be the judge of the bball content that I've provided over the years. You want to mock it, go ahead. Couldn't care less.

But you were right about Roche ever since his freshman year: Tyler would never play in the ACC and wouldn't last in the lineup and was an AE transfer in the waiting. That's turned out well for you. Meanwhile, shooting 43% from three this year also suggests that he can't shoot and that any talk about him being a much better practice shooter was way off base.

As for Heslip, he's got a LOT of things that this team is currently missing (perimeter shooting following the regression of Trapani/Jackson/Paris in that regard). But he's pretty much for sure redshirtingl-but much depends on how the rest of the team responds to their own individual shooting woes (last night was a welcome sight in this regard).

You can defend Roche's "contributions" all you want. The guy is at best an America east level player. And he is a mediocre shooter, although he is certainly showing that he has improved to average over 4 years. He is a liability on defense, can't rebound at the 4, and is too slow to play or defend the 3 in the ACC. He may shoot 43%, but half of his shots were in the first two games, and he is slowly fading out of the rotation as Elmore shows the talent. When Trapani gets his shit together, Roche will be a spot substitute. After 4 years.

Just because he was smart enough to stay at BC and get an education instead of transferring to a school where he would have been effective doesn't mean that he shouldn't have done so.

Pretend that you were right about Roche all along all you want. But the fact remains, he's a pretty good perimeter shooter and plays a 10-15 minute role, which is exactly what I said he would be from the moment he stepped on campus. And, most importantly, he's the only upperclass leader on the team. Could BC improve upon him? Of course. Could he play a much larger role in a bullshit AE conference? Of course. But that's not what our argument was about. I'm not, nor ever have been, a Roche lover, but we're (and he, himself is) better off that he didn't transfer during/after his freshman year as you (and others) proposed and predicted. But hey, according to you Joe Trapani was going to suck as well, despite how well he was performing IN PRACTICE during his year sitting out. So let's temper the backpatting, TW and criticisms of other's insights.

What ails this team has nothing to do with Tyler Roche. In fact, if you knew anything about what has been going on behind closed doors with this basketball team in the last week, you'd have a ton more respect for Tyler Roche's contribution to this team than you currently do. Tyler Roche actually gives a shit about this team in every game that he plays and attempts to maximize his abilities in every minute that he's on the court. Unfortunately, certain players with FAR more talent than he has refuse to do the same.

No one said Roche is what ails the team. He stinks too much to be on the court enough to make a damn bit of difference. What ails the team lies solely with the Division I players. Fact is, the guy barely plays, and he shouldn't even be playing those minutes.

And Trapani does suck right now. His shooting fucking blows and he better get his act together. Besides, I never said Trapani couldn't play at BC - in fact I said he was what Roche would be if he could play basketball. I just scoffed at the idea that Trapani would ever be the go-to guy (like everyone else said) - he is what he is, a nice 2nd or third option. We've seen what happens when he tries to step up and be the man.

Roche plays the exact amount that I said he would. He didn't transfer and he's a valuable role player whether you want to admit it or not. And he's one of the very few leaders on this team. Minimize that all you want, but that's a MAJOR issue plaguing this team right now. I'm glad he didn't transfer to Albany.

Trapani absolutely stinks right now, but if you're suggesting that you predicted that he would be the 2nd option on this team, you're doing a helluva job of revisionist history, b/c that's certainly not what you were saying. I said the guy would be the #2/#3 scoring option at BC, that he could play the four (another point you disputed) and that he was far more athletic and physical than you or any other message board hero would admit. While practicing with his team during the year off, I told you all of this (tho, according to you, I make up my "sources"). Either way, Trapani is a much better player than he's displayed these last few weeks and he's much better than the guy you thought he'd be. But twist this any way you like.

As an Albany fan, I am fucking thanking my lucky stars that Roche did not transfer there. So I guess we agree.

I predicted Trapani would be the #2 option when Rice left. Period. Which is what he should be, if he didn't fucking blow at basketball for the past 2 months. But I am sure he looks fucking awesome in practice.

Have a good night, Mo Cassera.

ahh that's right, your alma mater...tell me, as an albany fan, is there an albany message board that you find time to post in every single fucking thread too?

wow, good for you, you predicted he would be the #2 scorer the year after he was the #3 scorer at BC and the #1 scorer graduated. Nostrafuckingdamus. I told you he'd be that player when he was sitting out the year before he ever stepped on the court at BC...much to your disagreement.

Bottom line, you were wrong on Roche and you were wrong on Trapani (who, regardless of his poor play thus far, has exceeded those expectations you set for him when he transferred to BC). So perhaps, maybe, just maybe, you might not be the all-knowing message board god that you think you are.

[ATLeagle]

Is Addict really Coach Mo?

[bcaddict]

did i miss a memo on the addict/teddy war?

Teddy gets a little pissy at some of the bball stuff I wrote on Chevy's site. For the most part, we actually have a lot of common opinions on football/skinner etc., but our two major disagreements have been over Roche and Trapani...ever since I said Roche would always stick around BC and that he'd be a good shooting, role player by the time he became a senior (as he was a good shooter in practice, who was always hustling/in the right spot on the floor etc). As for TRapani, when he transferred, I said he would immediately step in as a #2 or at worst #3 scorer for BC and that he was absolutely lighting up the team when he was sitting out. That he played more of an NBA-style face-up four, but that he WOULD start at the four for BC, even if the three was technically a better position. TWBG disagreed vehemently. We bickered back and forth for the last couple years.

As for Roche, whether you think the guy would be better off playing in America East right now or not, he's a good role player for this team and if we turn this season around, a part of it is going to be a result of what Tyler Roche has been doing off the court more than on--things are not all kosher over there, as they shouldn't be. We've got a gigantic leadership void w/ our best, veteran players (they never learned under Marshall/Dudley/Smith/Hinnant who wouldn't stand for much of this shit etc.)--and this is the staff's greatest failure right now. Tyler Roche is not the problem that Teddy finds a constant to bitch about.

[bcaddict]

Is Addict really Coach Mo?

hahah, come on.

[bignick33]

Is Addict really Coach Mo?

Addict is a .

[bignick33]

I'm getting the sense that Teddy just doesn't like white basketball players.

[twballgame9]

did i miss a memo on the addict/teddy war?

Teddy gets a little pissy at some of the bball stuff I wrote on Chevy's site. For the most part, we actually have a lot of common opinions on football/skinner etc., but our two major disagreements have been over Roche and Trapani...ever since I said Roche would always stick around BC and that he'd be a good shooting, role player by the time he became a senior (as he was a good shooter in practice, who was always hustling/in the right spot on the floor etc). As for TRapani, when he transferred, I said he would immediately step in as a #2 or at worst #3 scorer for BC and that he was absolutely lighting up the team when he was sitting out. That he played more of an NBA-style face-up four, but that he WOULD start at the four for BC, even if the three was technically a better position. TWBG disagreed vehemently. We bickered back and forth for the last couple years.

As for Roche, whether you think the guy would be better off playing in America East right now or not, he's a good role player for this team and if we turn this season around, a part of it is going to be a result of what Tyler Roche has been doing off the court more than on--things are not all kosher over there, as they shouldn't be. We've got a gigantic leadership void w/ our best, veteran players (they never learned under Marshall/Dudley/Smith/Hinnant who wouldn't stand for much of this shit etc.)--and this is the staff's greatest failure right now. Tyler Roche is not the problem that Teddy finds a constant to bitch about.

I have never said anything bad about Tyler Roche off the court. I will take your word that he is a positive influence and I will admit that he plays hard when he plays. I also assume that there is a reason he is the team captain beyond merely being a senior.

On the court, he has been about what I said he would be. A guy that looks like he doesn't belong in the ACC. Now that Elmore has stepped up his game on both ends of the floor, Roche's minutes are going elsewhere. And Roche, despite one 30-point game against little sisters of the poor, has never been the 3-point sniper off the bench that we hoped he would be.

Our argument about Trapani was never about whether he could play in the ACC; like I said when he transferred, he is everything that Roche is not, talent wise, and that was evident he played in the America East (I saw him live at the Championship Game and he was the second best player on the court by far as a freshman). Our dispute was about whether he could be a power forward in the ACC. I thought his game was more suited to a Wally Sczerbiak type small forward, and that it was a mistake to put weight on him to make him a power forward. I will admit that I was pleasantly surprised by how well he played last year on offense at the 4 (he is not a good defensive post player), but I still contend that he is out of position. And he is WAY over his head playing the 5, considering that Al won't trap and run (and probably shouldn't with this team).

Fact is that BC has three guys that play the same position and they are the three most talented players. So Sanders has to play 2 and Trapani 4. And both have done well, admittedly.

[twballgame9]

I'm getting the sense that Teddy just doesn't like white basketball players.

I like Trapani a lot. Just not in the low post. I think it was a mistake to make him a 4, and he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

[bignick33]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

[twballgame9]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

I figured. Especially since my favorite hoop player growing up was this guy:

[bignick33]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

I figured. Especially since my favorite hoop player growing up was this guy:

Ha. You can probably guess who my favorite was, based on the number in my handle.

Also, Elmore isn't gonna take Roche's minutes this year because he isn't as good (yet). He gets after it on the defensive end, but is anemic on offense. Roche's ability to shoot off the catch is something this team sorely needs. And I'm not saying Roche is any sort of star...he's a borderline role player, but he's the best we got.

[twballgame9]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

I figured. Especially since my favorite hoop player growing up was this guy:

Ha. You can probably guess who my favorite was, based on the number in my handle.

Also, Elmore isn't gonna take Roche's minutes this year because he isn't as good (yet). He gets after it on the defensive end, but is anemic on offense. Roche's ability to shoot off the catch is something this team sorely needs.

I know not of this "ability to shoot of the catch" of which you speak. Does that translate to points?

[bignick33]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

I figured. Especially since my favorite hoop player growing up was this guy:

Ha. You can probably guess who my favorite was, based on the number in my handle.

Also, Elmore isn't gonna take Roche's minutes this year because he isn't as good (yet). He gets after it on the defensive end, but is anemic on offense. Roche's ability to shoot off the catch is something this team sorely needs.

I know not of this "ability to shoot off the catch" of which you speak. Does that translate to points?

Better?

[twballgame9]

he is going to get murderated in the ACC if they stay with the small lineup and he stays at the 5.

This much I strongly agree with. For the record, I was just giving you a hard time.

I figured. Especially since my favorite hoop player growing up was this guy:

Ha. You can probably guess who my favorite was, based on the number in my handle.

Also, Elmore isn't gonna take Roche's minutes this year because he isn't as good (yet). He gets after it on the defensive end, but is anemic on offense. Roche's ability to shoot off the catch is something this team sorely needs.

I know not of this "ability to shoot off the catch" of which you speak. Does that translate to points?

Better?

I wasn't busting your grammar. I was busting your thinking that Roche can shoot. The typo was actually mine.

[bignick33]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

[twballgame9]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

[bignick33]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

Thing is, even if you subtract the 30 point game when Rakim was suspended and Roche went off for 30 , Roche is the second best 3 point shooter on the team by % (Sanders 37.5%, Roche is 37.1%, Trap 36.1%). Overall, he shooting over 50% from the field. This is exactly the type of efficiency you love to have from a role player.

Speaking of three-point shooting, ReJax needs to stop shooting threes immediately.

[eepstein0]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

Forget Roche isn't a valuable shooter, Roche isn't a valuable player. He sucks at shooting (the only thing he was supposed to be good at), he's way too slow or small to cover any position in the ACC and his dribbling is pretty much non-existent. So to recap, he's useless on offense and defense. I'd much rather see Elmore out there, he's more athletic and can play defense, something this team desperately needs. I'll be even happy when Tyler Roche graduates than I was when John Oates graduated.

[bignick33]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

Forget Roche isn't a valuable shooter, Roche isn't a valuable player. He sucks at shooting (the only thing he was supposed to be good at), he's way too slow or small to cover any position in the ACC and his dribbling is pretty much non-existent. So to recap, he's useless on offense and defense. I'd much rather see Elmore out there, he's more athletic and can play defense, something this team desperately needs. I'll be even happy when Tyler Roche graduates than I was when John Oates graduated.

His offensive stats contradict what you're saying. And, over the last couple of years, he's pretty a solid (if unspectacular defender), although that part--unlike his offensive game--admittedly cannot be proven with statistics.

[twballgame9]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

[twballgame9]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

Forget Roche isn't a valuable shooter, Roche isn't a valuable player. He sucks at shooting (the only thing he was supposed to be good at), he's way too slow or small to cover any position in the ACC and his dribbling is pretty much non-existent. So to recap, he's useless on offense and defense. I'd much rather see Elmore out there, he's more athletic and can play defense, something this team desperately needs. I'll be even happy when Tyler Roche graduates than I was when John Oates graduated.

His offensive stats contradict what you're saying. And, over the last couple of years, he's pretty a solid (if unspectacular defender), although that part--unlike his offensive game--admittedly cannot be proven with statistics.

hey nick, i'll wager you significant amounts of money that his offensive stats will suffer to levels covered by eepstein's post once the acc season begins.

signature bet - we haven't had one of those over here yet... whaddya say?

This is a key point. When it comes to guys like Raji and Roche, the season hasn't started yet. Both are notorious for feasting on Nov/Dec games. Let's see what they do in the conference.

[eepstein0]

He's at worst the third best shooter on the team. Granted, part of that demonstrates how anemic we are in that area as a team; but it also increases his value in his role (off the bench, 12-18 minutes), since nobody else besides Trap and Sanders are even remotely good shooters.

No doubt that the rest of the team stinks at shooting. I just haven't seen much from Roche that makes me believe he can be valuable as a shooter. With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes. Most of the time he doesn't shoot at all. It doesn't matter if you can shoot if you never put it up. He had almost 25% of his total points in one game.

Forget Roche isn't a valuable shooter, Roche isn't a valuable player. He sucks at shooting (the only thing he was supposed to be good at), he's way too slow or small to cover any position in the ACC and his dribbling is pretty much non-existent. So to recap, he's useless on offense and defense. I'd much rather see Elmore out there, he's more athletic and can play defense, something this team desperately needs. I'll be even happy when Tyler Roche graduates than I was when John Oates graduated.

His offensive stats contradict what you're saying. And, over the last couple of years, he's pretty a solid (if unspectacular defender), although that part--unlike his offensive game--admittedly cannot be proven with statistics.

He shot 31% freshman year, 38% sophmore year and 41 % junior year. Granted he's shooting 51% this season but that number is over-inflated by those two games at the beginning of the season against "St. Mary's of the Poor". From 3 point range, he's 30% freshman year, 33 % sophmore year and 36% junior year. He's shooting 43% this year but again, his first two games he was like 9 of 11. After that he's been like 6 for 30. He's a crappy shooter if he's not absolutely wide open. His one assist and two rebounds per game isn't exactly buoying the offense either. He sucks, we can call a spade, a spade. I have no idea why Al has a love affair with him. The only nice thing I can say is he played well the 2nd half against South Carolina.

[pick6pedro]

With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes.

Translation: Roche is the Jet Smith of the hoops squad. At the very least he's the Horace Dodd.

[twballgame9]

With the exception of one game in 4 years he has yet to have one of those hot streaks where in 15-20 minutes of time he hits like 3-5 threes.

Translation: Roche is the Jet Smith of the hoops squad. At the very least he's the Horace Dodd.

Except Jeff Smith did it against a real football team with two of the faster players in college football history on the field.

[bignick33]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Well, he's taking roughly 5.5 shots per game...which ads up to about 11 shots per 40 minutes. So, the characterization that he isn't shooting isn't exactly accurate. We'll see how he does in ACC play. I certainly think he can contribute more offensively than Elmore, whom it was suggested would take his minutes. Scoring, more than anything, is what this team needs off the bench, especially when Paris is out of the game.

If you want to make a sig-bet, how about this: Roche will score more points per minute played in ACC play than Elmore.

[twballgame9]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Well, he's taking roughly 5.5 shots per game...which ads up to about 11 shots per 40 minutes. So, the characterization that he isn't shooting isn't exactly accurate. We'll see how he does in ACC play. I certainly think he can contribute more offensively than Elmore, whom it was suggested would take his minutes. Scoring, more than anything, is what this team needs off the bench, especially when Paris is out of the game.

If you want to make a sig-bet, how about this: Roche will score more points per minute played in ACC play than Elmore.

Elmore has already started taking his minutes.

[eepstein0]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Ok fine I can see that point. Then just tell me what your eyes tell you when he's on the court. He's not an ACC basketball player. Against a team like Clemson, unless he's absolutely on fire shooting, he's a huge liability on both ends of the floor.

[twballgame9]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Ok fine I can see that point. Then just tell me what your eyes tell you when he's on the court. He's not an ACC basketball player. Against a team like Clemson, unless he's absolutely on fire shooting, he's a huge liability on both ends of the floor.

You aren't arguing with me. As this thread makes evident, I think Roche is terrible.

[bignick33]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Well, he's taking roughly 5.5 shots per game...which ads up to about 11 shots per 40 minutes. So, the characterization that he isn't shooting isn't exactly accurate. We'll see how he does in ACC play. I certainly think he can contribute more offensively than Elmore, whom it was suggested would take his minutes. Scoring, more than anything, is what this team needs off the bench, especially when Paris is out of the game.

If you want to make a sig-bet, how about this: Roche will score more points per minute played in ACC play than Elmore.

Elmore has already started taking his minutes.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with Roche's back.

[twballgame9]

Shooting percentage is only valuable if you shoot enough to make a difference. And epstein, I focused on shooting because it is the only on court skill where Roche could be valuable, not because I was assuming he was valuable elsewhere.

Well, he's taking roughly 5.5 shots per game...which ads up to about 11 shots per 40 minutes. So, the characterization that he isn't shooting isn't exactly accurate. We'll see how he does in ACC play. I certainly think he can contribute more offensively than Elmore, whom it was suggested would take his minutes. Scoring, more than anything, is what this team needs off the bench, especially when Paris is out of the game.

If you want to make a sig-bet, how about this: Roche will score more points per minute played in ACC play than Elmore.

Elmore has already started taking his minutes.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with Roche's back.

It also has something to do with the fact that Elmore plays defense.