Possible Kentan Facey Eligibility Issues | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Possible Kentan Facey Eligibility Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
pj is correct although while offense isn't the requirement at the middle, numbers of people is a concern. With Kentan they have the ability to play small yet big enough against certain teams/lineups!!!

Without they not only lose a body in case of foul trouble (something that Phil and Tyler are both prone) but some athleticism. Brimah is huge if the NCAA screws us on this one!
 
pj said:
I don't see Facey as necessarily better than Nolan, Olander, or Brimah -- he's more advanced offensively than Nolan or Brimah, but the team won't look for offense from his spot so that doesn't matter -- but still there's value in just having bodies to throw out there, probably all of our big men will be foul prone. Daniels could end up playing almost 40 minutes at the 4, it will take 3 guys to hold down the center spot. Giffey and Tolksdorf back up Daniels and could see time at the 5. Tough luck Tyler, there will be no time at the 4 for you.

The loss of Wolf does loom large. In addition to the extra body, Wolf provides a different look at the center spot and in some matchups that would prove crucial. Even without Facey, I would like this team as an Elite Eight/Final Four candidate if Wolf were still here.
Expand ...
This it the situation in a nutshell. There is no guarantee that having a team with Wolf and Facey on it would perform better than one without those players. But with the absence of those players there is an increased risk that foul trouble or injuries will result in the remainder of the team having to make up the difference. Last season a good part of Shabazz's health issues were the result of his having to make up for the front court deficiencies. It wasn't just the minutes but the need to rebound. And his injuries became cumulative.

A front court of just Nolan, Olander and Brimah would be almost identical with that composed of Nolan, Olander and Wolf. At the very least Facey gives the team five fouls. And if Wolf were available as well that's ten fouls and a senior. The team was running out of gas by the end of the season. If Facey and Samuel are not on the team it becomes very difficult to play teams like Ville and MS which throw players on the court with the sole purpose of tiring teams.
 
A front court rotation of DD,Nolan,olander,and brimah could be fine. It does completely hinge on brimahs ability to be productive in 10-15 minutes. Then at the 3 we have Giffey/kromah/Calhoun. But wow we really do need Samuel or some other guard in there for beverely-like minutes.
 
James said:
A front court rotation of DD,Nolan,olander,and brimah could be fine. It does completely hinge on brimahs ability to be productive in 10-15 minutes. Then at the 3 we have Giffey/kromah/Calhoun. But wow we really do need Samuel or some other guard in there for beverely-like minutes.
Expand ...
Omar's pops said that the biggest area where he suffered because of his hip injuries was ball handling, as he was unable to get low to really protect the ball. Who knows, maybe he shows enough improvement with his ball handling and creating so that he can play with one guard more and that will loosen up more minutes at the 3 for Giffey and Kromah. I didn't see Samuel playing more than 5 mpg but not having him would really make everyone staying healthy extremely important.
 
.-.
fleudslipcon said:
This it the situation in a nutshell. There is no guarantee that having a team with Wolf and Facey on it would perform better than one without those players. But with the absence of those players there is an increased risk that foul trouble or injuries will result in the remainder of the team having to make up the difference. Last season a good part of Shabazz's health issues were the result of his having to make up for the front court deficiencies. It wasn't just the minutes but the need to rebound. And his injuries became cumulative.

A front court of just Nolan, Olander and Brimah would be almost identical with that composed of Nolan, Olander and Wolf. At the very least Facey gives the team five fouls. And if Wolf were available as well that's ten fouls and a senior. The team was running out of gas by the end of the season. If Facey and Samuel are not on the team it becomes very difficult to play teams like Ville and MS which throw players on the court with the sole purpose of tiring teams.
Expand ...

Without Facey, it'll mean we have to go smaller more often. Which means those three guys will split the 40 minutes at center and rarely, if ever, play alongside each other. Giffey then gives us spot minutes at the 4 to back up Daniels (who will play 33-35 mpg - Giffey will also give us minutes at the three), and Kromah (who averaged 5 rpg two years ago as a 6-5 guard) has to get his nose dirty and rebound for us, especially when Giffey is at the four. Perhaps that means we give Boat and Bazz a brief rest (not at the same time obviously) when we're small up front, to get more size on the wing with Omar-Kromah, although certainly we could struggle offensively with that line-up with two of our three best scorers on the bench.

This is not ideal by any means, but if that's the hand we're dealt, we have to punch the ol' timeclock every day and get it done. If Giffey at the four for a few minutes a night makes you cringe - Villanova made it to the F4 with a point guard playing the four defensively for long stretches (Foye). Or a freshman Scott Burrell was our four in 1990 against guys like Alonzo Mourning, Derrick Coleman and Elden Campbell. The best big out there in college right now is probably McGary (or one of the freshmen). It's not as daunting in this day and age to go small.

That said, if Facey makes it, we are more flexible and can put a true 4 and 5 out there on those bad days when we're on our way to getting outrebounded by 30 and need to adjust. No question he'd help (even if it was just as an occasional Marcus White type spark off the bench), and that we're better off if he's on board. I guess my main point is that we can't pin our entire season's hopes on someone who is likely our eighth best player. If he's not here, our expectations shouldn't change.
 
aceboon said:
Louisville is still in the league and is stll loaded, and while I like our team better than Memphis, they might be the most talented in the league, this season isn't exactly playing in the Sun Belt.
Expand ...


We still should win this league. Not saying their aren't any good teams, even though I kinda did.
 
I'm excited as ever to see a more explosive omar. at 6'5 that would make him one hell of a prospect with his iq/shooting ability. I think Samuel would be important so we could have a back court without the two stars, for a short spurts or foul trouble. But Samuel is a huge question mark, we don't even know if he can shoot the ball.
 
The workhorse known as Niels is waiting for his turn, Im pretty sure he can guard 3-4 positions at the college level. reminds of ,dare i say, Shane battier.
 
intlzncster said:
We still should win this league. Not saying their aren't any good teams, even though I kinda did.
Expand ...

I wouldn't say we "should" win this league...Louisville is ranked top 3 in pretty much all the preseason polls.

If we don't finish top 3, however, I would be pretty disappointed.
 
James said:
I'm excited as ever to see a more explosive omar. at 6'5 that would make him one hell of a prospect with his iq/shooting ability. I think Samuel would be important so we could have a back court without the two stars, for a short spurts or foul trouble. But Samuel is a huge question mark, we don't even know if he can shoot the ball.
Expand ...

If Samuel doesn't make it, we have to live with Omar-Kromah at the 2 and 3 for stretches and hope one of them can be adequate as a ballhandler and secondary creator (who could also play alongside Giffey at the 3). Not familiar enough with Kromah's game or sure about how much Omar's surgery will help to know if this is a recipe for disaster or not. If so, Bazz/Boat have no choice but to both be 38 mpg guys, and we hold our breath when either of them sit. We had that problem with Taliek/Ben and stealing minutes with Rashad or Denham at the 2, albeit with a team that was much deeper/better up front. That team (or the 2006 team, which lacked backcourt depth) could afford to have bad possessions and play volleyball on the offensive glass.

The worst case scenario for us is that Samuel/Facey both don't make it and Kromah/Omar are both inadequate at the two. Then we're dealing with backcourt depth problems and weak post play, and we're really down to no margin for error. But, hey, we'd essentially be five deep at the three (Daniels, Giffey, Omar, Kromah, Tolksdorf), so we'd be in good shape to make a trade.
 
.-.
Gurleyman said:
Without Facey, it'll mean we have to go smaller more often. Which means those three guys will split the 40 minutes at center and rarely, if ever, play alongside each other. Giffey then gives us spot minutes at the 4 to back up Daniels (who will play 33-35 mpg - Giffey will also give us minutes at the three), and Kromah (who averaged 5 rpg two years ago as a 6-5 guard) has to get his nose dirty and rebound for us, especially when Giffey is at the four. Perhaps that means we give Boat and Bazz a brief rest (not at the same time obviously) when we're small up front, to get more size on the wing with Omar-Kromah, although certainly we could struggle offensively with that line-up with two of our three best scorers on the bench.

This is not ideal by any means, but if that's the hand we're dealt, we have to punch the ol' timeclock every day and get it done. If Giffey at the four for a few minutes a night makes you cringe - Villanova made it to the F4 with a point guard playing the four defensively for long stretches (Foye). Or a freshman Scott Burrell was our four in 1990 against guys like Alonzo Mourning, Derrick Coleman and Elden Campbell. The best big out there in college right now is probably McGary (or one of the freshmen). It's not as daunting in this day and age to go small.

That said, if Facey makes it, we are more flexible and can put a true 4 and 5 out there on those bad days when we're on our way to getting outrebounded by 30 and need to adjust. No question he'd help (even if it was just as an occasional Marcus White type spark off the bench), and that we're better off if he's on board. I guess my main point is that we can't pin our entire season's hopes on someone who is likely our eighth best player. If he's not here, our expectations shouldn't change.
Expand ...
Not arguing the season is over without Facey. Nor do I believe his absence prevents a deep run in the NCAA's. It just makes it much harder imo because of the flexibility problems. Still love your analysis. It is insightful.

All anyone has to do is look at two seasons in UConn's recent history to realize that we, as fans, should realize that our expectations have a whole lot of uncertainty. Those two seasons being 2006 and 2011.
 
caw said:
UL is probably the favorite. Memphis and UConn are probably close seconds.
Expand ...

Rico444 said:
I wouldn't say we "should" win this league...Louisville is ranked top 3 in pretty much all the preseason polls.
If we don't finish top 3, however, I would be pretty disappointed.
Expand ...


Listen to you all....acting like it's over.

Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no! And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough... the tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!

What the happened to the Delta I used to know? Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? "Ooh, we're afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble." Well just kiss my ass from now on! Not me! I'm not gonna take this. Wormer, he's a dead man! Marmalard, dead! Niedermeyer -

We gotta take these bastards. Now we could do it with conventional weapons that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. We're just the guys to do it.
 
Gurleyman said:
A little bit overdramatic. If our season hinges on an unproven, undersized freshman forward, we're probably doomed to begin with. You can't tell everything from informal settings, but he wasn't that far ahead of Brimah in the Hartford pro-am games.

And then look at our history:
1998-99 - Deng never gets eligible.
2003-04 - MW ineligible after first semester
2005-06 - Bynum goes pro, never shows.
2008-09 - Nate Miles
2010-11 - Wolf has to join mid-year

OK - that last one is a reach. But the point is that when we've had quality teams, we've been able to overcome an incoming role player falling by the wayside.
Expand ...


Maybe this doesn't fall into the category of "incoming role players", but Majok bolting after the 2009-10 season, when he figured to play a huge role in 2010-11, probably fits the bill better than Wolf for that season, especially since his departure forced Roscoe into the four spot, a major deviation from typical Calhoun teams featuring two 6'9+ guys.
 
Anyway, here's my take on Facey possibly being ineligible: it's a big deal, but not a huge deal (i.e., season defining, likely to move us down in the pre-season polls). The biggest question entering the season in regards to Facey was, could he play the five? And frankly, I'm not sure he could have, given he appeared a bit more raw than I had hoped for in what I've seen of him so far and he's as thin as a rail. He would have been a minus offensively and not as impactful as I had hoped for defensively unless he put on a fair amount of weight between now and November. In other words, he would have been a bit of a tweener: not skilled enough to play the four and not physically mature enough to play the five. A few months ago, I thought Facey would scoop up 20-25 minutes a game and play crunch time for us at the five, but the more I thought about it, Nolan's probably more likely to play the lion's share of the minutes at the five due to his extra couple inches and more filled out body. I am not convinced Facey was going to play more than ten minutes a game (assuming everybody was healthy/eligible) with Daniels logging 30+ minutes at the four and Olander likely scooping up the minutes Nolan didn't play at the five.

As for Samuel, I didn't think he'd play much anyway. Where a potential eligibility issue with him would really hurt us would be the following year, when we're relying on him to play minutes at the point and facilitate the offense. Next year, not so much with two all-American caliber point guards in the back court and Calhoun/Kromah capable of filling in at the two. My newest minute projections, assuming the losses of Facey and Samuel, are as follows:

PG - Napier 20 min, Boat 20 min
SG - Boat 14 min, Napier 13 min, Kromah 10 min, Calhoun 3 min (possibly more if he improves his ball-handling)
SF - Calhoun 27 min, Giffey 13 min
PF - Daniels 33 min, Giffey 7 min
C - Nolan 20 min, Olander 15 min, Giffey 5 min

Facey and Olander were going to battle for backup minutes at the five, so worst case scenario, we've lost our backup center. If anybody thinks losing our backup center is going to be the difference between making the final four and not making it, I'd love to hear your rationale on that. And to be honest, I get the feeling Olander would have beaten out Facey for the additional minutes at the five, anyway. He's better offensively and more experienced/savvy defensively. Where these potential losses will really hurt us, is depth. As gurleyman/fleud points out, we now cannot afford to lose a Giffey/Olander/Kromah or Napier/Boat/Calhoun/DD will be forced to log huge minutes.
 
champs99and04 said:
Anyway, here's my take on Facey possibly being ineligible: it's a big deal, but not a huge deal (i.e., season defining, likely to move us down in the pre-season polls). The biggest question entering the season in regards to Facey was, could he play the five? And frankly, I'm not sure he could have, given he appeared a bit more raw than I had hoped for in what I've seen of him so far and he's as thin as a rail. He would have been a minus offensively and not as impactful as I had hoped for defensively unless he put on a fair amount of weight between now and November. In other words, he would have been a bit of a tweener: not skilled enough to play the four and not physically mature enough to play the five. A few months ago, I thought Facey would scoop up 20-25 minutes a game and play crunch time for us at the five, but the more I thought about it, Nolan's probably more likely to play the lion's share of the minutes at the five due to his extra couple inches and more filled out body. I am not convinced Facey was going to play more than ten minutes a game (assuming everybody was healthy/eligible) with Daniels logging 30+ minutes at the four and Olander likely scooping up the minutes Nolan didn't play at the five.

As for Samuel, I didn't think he'd play much anyway. Where a potential eligibility issue with him would really hurt us would be the following year, when we're relying on him to play minutes at the point and facilitate the offense. Next year, not so much with two all-American caliber point guards in the back court and Calhoun/Kromah capable of filling in at the two. My newest minute projections, assuming the losses of Facey and Samuel, are as follows:

PG - Napier 20 min, Boat 20 min
SG - Boat 14 min, Napier 13 min, Kromah 10 min, Calhoun 3 min (possibly more if he improves his ball-handling)
SF - Calhoun 27 min, Giffey 13 min
PF - Daniels 33 min, Giffey 7 min
C - Nolan 20 min, Olander 15 min, Giffey 5 min

Facey and Olander were going to battle for backup minutes at the five, so worst case scenario, we've lost our backup center. If anybody thinks losing our backup center is going to be the difference between making the final four and not making it, I'd love to hear your rationale on that. And to be honest, I get the feeling Olander would have beaten out Facey for the additional minutes at the five, anyway. He's better offensively and more experienced/savvy defensively. Where these potential losses will really hurt us, is depth. As gurleyman/fleud points out, we now cannot afford to lose a Giffey/Olander/Kromah or Napier/Boat/Calhoun/DD will be forced to log huge minutes.
Expand ...
we had no depth or centers before wolf left. without facey we have no depth at all at either the 4 or 5. and as much as i like Giffey, he won't play any time at the 5. in a situation where we have to go small,DD would play the 5 and NG 4
 
.-.
Is there a possibility Jordan Fuchs can gain eligibility?
 
intlzncster said:
Listen to you all....acting like it's over.

Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Expand ...

(Germans?)
 
So reading through this thread one would assume that Kentan Facey is ineligible, and its a done deal.

I'm assuming that is just normal BY insanity, yes? We do not have an official word on this.

I mean for Christ sake the kid is on campus and has started taking classes? Right?
 
Huskyforlife said:
we had no depth or centers before wolf left. without facey we have no depth at all at either the 4 or 5. and as much as i like Giffey, he won't play any time at the 5. in a situation where we have to go small,DD would play the 5 and NG 4
Expand ...

Depth isn't necessarily a problem. Even without Facey, we're three deep at the 5 (Olander, Nolan, Brimah) and two deep at the four (Daniels, Giffey when small). Quality of the depth might be a problem, especially if TO and Nolan aren't any better than last year and Brimah isn't ready. Last year, we had depth at the five with TO, Wolf and Nolan (who wasn't ready) - but we didn't have much quality. It felt like a rotation in the sense of the wheels of an exercise bike, rotating but not going anywhere. Add Facey and you probably still have the same depth in numbers - just someone falls out of the rotation.

If Facey actually turned out to be, say, freshman year Okafor, everything would look different. He'd get 30 minutes a night - maybe TO would get 15 minutes a night to back up the 4 and the 5, maybe Giffey would never play the 4, and maybe Nolan and Brimah wouldn't even be rotation guys. So we'd in a way have less depth in the rotation (three guys playing two spots), but we'd be better. I'm just not certain that Facey adds that sort of immediate quality.

I hope he gets squared away, and I hope I'm underestimating the quality he can provide, and he turns out to be a vital cog as our best rebounder. That's the best case for us.
 
.-.
Huskyforlife said:
we had no depth or centers before wolf left. without facey we have no depth at all at either the 4 or 5. and as much as i like Giffey, he won't play any time at the 5. in a situation where we have to go small,DD would play the 5 and NG 4
Expand ...


I'm not really concerned with having depth at the four because Daniels is going to play 80% of the minutes there, and if God forbid Daniels gets hurt, we can easily slide Giffey into that slot and have him play 80% of the minutes. If one of them goes down and Tolksdorf has to play ten minutes a game at the four, I don't think that's the end of the world.

As for the center position, we won twenty games last season with Olander starting there. Our situation is not as dire as some make it out to be - no, center is not a strong suit on this team, but there are not a lot of good centers in college basketball and the rest of our roster is more than strong enough to make up for it. Duke's starting center next season - Amile Jefferson - averaged four points and three rebounds last year. I think they are going to be alright. As last season established, if Olander is your best option at center, you're in trouble. But that's why the ceiling of next year's team hinges on the development of Phil Nolan - if he can play twenty minutes a game, and Olander backs him up, we'll be fine. We act like losing Wolf is earth-shattering when in reality there was no noticeable drop-off in our play last season once he was suspended. Losing Facey, in addition to Wolf, would be a bit of a blow, but not something we cannot overcome.

Giffey is capable of playing center for a couple minutes here and there, as he proved last season. It isn't ideal, but against teams with smaller front lines, I would love to see a lineup of Bazz-Boat-Omar-DD-NG.
 
champs99and04 said:
I'm not really concerned with having depth at the four because Daniels is going to play 80% of the minutes there, and if God forbid Daniels gets hurt, we can easily slide Giffey into that slot and have him play 80% of the minutes. If one of them goes down and Tolksdorf has to play ten minutes a game at the four, I don't think that's the end of the world.

As for the center position, we won twenty games last season with Olander starting there. Our situation is not as dire as some make it out to be - no, center is not a strong suit on this team, but there are not a lot of good centers in college basketball and the rest of our roster is more than strong enough to make up for it. Duke's starting center next season - Amile Jefferson - averaged four points and three rebounds last year. I think they are going to be alright. As last season established, if Olander is your best option at center, you're in trouble. But that's why the ceiling of next year's team hinges on the development of Phil Nolan - if he can play twenty minutes a game, and Olander backs him up, we'll be fine. We act like losing Wolf is earth-shattering when in reality there was no noticeable drop-off in our play last season once he was suspended. Losing Facey, in addition to Wolf, would be a bit of a blow, but not something we cannot overcome.

Giffey is capable of playing center for a couple minutes here and there, as he proved last season. It isn't ideal, but against teams with smaller front lines, I would love to see a lineup of Bazz-Boat-Omar-DD-NG.
Expand ...

i agree i think our best lineup would be going small with NG at the 4, but i don't think KO is going to play that lineup for long stretches of time. i was also not aware that jefferson started at the 5 for duke, thought it was MP but maybe he played 4. you are right however that there is a lack of good 5s in college BB, we should be lucky though that UL lost Deing(sp?)
 
Huskyforlife said:
i agree i think our best lineup would be going small with NG at the 4, but i don't think KO is going to play that lineup for long stretches of time. i was also not aware that jefferson started at the 5 for duke, thought it was MP but maybe he played 4. you are right however that there is a lack of good 5s in college BB, we should be lucky though that UL lost Deing(sp?)
Expand ...


Sorry for the confusion, I meant Jefferson was going to start at the five for Duke next year.
 
I laugh at this Giffey-center thing. He's 6'6" and people expect him to give minutes at the 5. We sound like Quinnipiac or Marist fans wanting a 6'6" shooting small forward to be our emergency center.
 
I think this is just another example of why the NCAA no longer should have any moral authority at all. Messing with a kid's life over some BS about how he came to the USA? IF the US Gov has allowed him to stay and be in school and play ball- that should be good enough. Find some other kids to $%#& with- this seems petty.
 
Scot-e said:
I think this is just another example of why the NCAA no longer should have any moral authority at all. Messing with a kid's life over some BS about how he came to the USA? IF the US Gov has allowed him to stay and be in school and play ball- that should be good enough. Find some other kids to $%#& with- this seems petty.
Expand ...
To an extent I agree, but if a kid is staying here illegally and gets a fake birth certificate then I have no problem in deeming a kid ineligible. I would deport him.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,354
Messages
4,566,877
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom