Terry Larrier

[Huskyforlife]

Purvis was a better freshman than Larrier. This kid has loads of potential, but I can't stress this enough, we should not expect greatness from the time he steps on our floor. He'll likely need time, which is fine, because he should be worth the wait.

 

[bmayuc]

What you see in that video is what you want to see.

When open, he made shots. Good ball skills. Ability to pass. Great movement skills and athleticism for his size.

What you also see is a kid playing WAYYYYYY too fast, but that is what was expected of him in Havoc.

I have high hopes for Larrier. But, he'll need time.

 

[Excalibur]

Purvis was a better freshman than Larrier. This kid has loads of potential, but I can't stress this enough, we should not expect greatness from the time he steps on our floor. He'll likely need time, which is fine, because he should be worth the wait.

Actually, they were pretty comparable. Larrier's per 40 minute numbers were generally better -- higher scoring average, (predictably) better rebounding, and comparable assist average. Their 2 point shooting %s were very similar and Larrier and had a higher PER. The difference in competition could account for that. Purvis was a significantly better 3 point shooter, and Larrier was much better from the line.

I don't expect greatness. I expect that he can be a guy that plays 25 minutes splitting time between the 3 and 4, averages in the neighborhood of 9 points and 4 boards, attacks the basket and gets to the line.

 

[JimHurley]

Actually, they were pretty comparable. Larrier's per 40 minute numbers were generally better -- higher scoring average, (predictably) better rebounding, and comparable assist average. Their 2 point shooting %s were very similar and Larrier and had a higher PER. The difference in competition could account for that. Purvis was a significantly better 3 point shooter, and Larrier was much better from the line.

I don't expect greatness. I expect that he can be a guy that plays 25 minutes splitting time between the 3 and 4, averages in the neighborhood of 9 points and 4 boards, attacks the basket and gets to the line.

Agree with this part. I also think he will be great in transition. He can really run and finish. But yeah 9 points sounds reasonable because there's going to be so much on offense next season (Adams, Purvis, Hamilton at least). Him and Gilbert will probably both be first off the bench for us and both will give us good minutes.

 

[businesslawyer]

Actually, they were pretty comparable. Larrier's per 40 minute numbers were generally better -- higher scoring average, (predictably) better rebounding, and comparable assist average. Their 2 point shooting %s were very similar and Larrier and had a higher PER. The difference in competition could account for that. Purvis was a significantly better 3 point shooter, and Larrier was much better from the line.

I don't expect greatness. I expect that he can be a guy that plays 25 minutes splitting time between the 3 and 4, averages in the neighborhood of 9 points and 4 boards, attacks the basket and gets to the line.

Now take the comparable numbers, and remind yourself that one played in the ACC and one played in the A-Ten.

 

[Excalibur]

Now take the comparable numbers, and remind yourself that one played in the ACC and one played in the A-Ten.

Maybe that's why I said "the difference in competition could account for that . . ."

 

[JMick]

He can really run and finish.

If he can finish at the rim out in transition, he'll get solid minutes and put up solid numbers. We gave up way too many points for a Division 1 basketball team this year by not making the "easy" buckets.

 

[BUConn10]

Purvis was a better freshman than Larrier. This kid has loads of potential, but I can't stress this enough, we should not expect greatness from the time he steps on our floor. He'll likely need time, which is fine, because he should be worth the wait.

I fully expect to look like a dick with this comment and expect some backlash, but how long do we wait? This isn't specific to Larrier, but your point is absolutely right, this kid came in super raw, rawer than Purvis, and will likely need a year or two before he's there. Yet that's what, 4 years into his college career and 3 years into his 4 total for eligibility just for a guy to get to playing level?

What's the point I'm trying to make here? We need to bring in more polished, ready to play guys. UConn historically has been very up and down and cyclical with its runs to titles because we send as many guys to the NBA as all the top dogs in the sport, yet we don't seem to replace them at the rate they do, leaving us with gaping holes and raw "projects" that need a year or two at the least. So yes, what I'm saying is KO needs to reach just a bit higher on some of the recruits he's targeting, because what separates a lot of these top 20 kids from those below them is their "ready to play" skill set and level of development (unless they are just the athletic freak that is just waiting for an NBA all star skillset). I love guys like Facey and Brimah, they become valuable pieces as upperclassmen, but we cannot survive in the national discussion with them as our front court, harsh but true. We need guys to come in an be players from day 1, and really show it. Lucky for us Ollie is off to a great start and guys like AG and Durham (if he was healthy) are exactly the type of skilled guys we need.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

That post amounts to "recruit better players" which is certainly a sentiment we can all get behind but it's not as easy as simply deciding to do it.

 

[JMick]

That post amounts to "recruit better players" which is certainly a sentiment we can all get behind but it's not as easy as simply deciding to do it.

Especially in this conference for now

 

[pnow15]

Actually, my expectation for Larrier is that he will add to team athleticism. Gibbs, DHam, Facey, Nolan are not monster athletes.
Games can be won by overwhelming lesser athletic teams. You can make dribbling, passing, shooting a lot harder when your guys are quicker and jump higher. This kid could be very rangy during the press or at the top of a zone defense or finishing on the break with a dunk.

 

[Danzz]

This kid has everything he needs talent wise to become a force. The only questions are his development. Can he develop a consistent outside shot? Can he play defense better? The sky is the limit. Age wise, he will begin his 3rd year post high school, and he will need to knock a lot of rust off, and he will need to figure out the way UConn plays defense, but he has all the ingredients to be a classic UConn SF. Not exactly like Stanley Robinson or Deandre Daniels or Rudy Gay, but a similar presence on the floor. I see him as possibly exceeding Robinson and Deandre's play on the floor. I really liked him out of high school, and I considered him the #1 target for that year, so I couldn't be happier that he transferred to UConn.

I'm a big fan of his game, but you can't expect him to show immediately. Probably on target to impact the second half of next season.

Another mostly dunks video. Slash buckets are nice but if he is going to be a wing he needs to score from the outside. Hope he can do that.

 

[BUConn10]

That post amounts to "recruit better players" which is certainly a sentiment we can all get behind but it's not as easy as simply deciding to do it.

Yes you are right, it's something that's easy to identify and say needs improving, but "how" is a whole different question. Still, I think it's visible to even the fans when an incoming guy is a "raw project" vs "a kid who can play", don't need to be an assistant coach to see that.

 

[businesslawyer]

Maybe that's why I said "the difference in competition could account for that . . ."

Yes you did. I didn't read your post carefully enough. I apologize.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Yes you are right, it's something that's easy to identify and say needs improving, but "how" is a whole different question. Still, I think it's visible to even the fans when an incoming guy is a "raw project" vs "a kid who can play", don't need to be an assistant coach to see that.

If you're evaluating two kids of comparable athletic ability and one is more skilled than the other, the choice is easy. The hard part is evaluating a skilled kid who lacks the athleticism / potential of a less-skilled kid. Do you take the skilled kid and accept the athletic deficiency or hope the athletic kid, whose ceiling is higher, develops his skills?

 

[dennismenace]

This kid has everything he needs talent wise to become a force. The only questions are his development. Can he develop a consistent outside shot? Can he play defense better? The sky is the limit. Age wise, he will begin his 3rd year post high school, and he will need to knock a lot of rust off, and he will need to figure out the way UConn plays defense, but he has all the ingredients to be a classic UConn SF. Not exactly like Stanley Robinson or Deandre Daniels or Rudy Gay, but a similar presence on the floor. I see him as possibly exceeding Robinson and Deandre's play on the floor. I really liked him out of high school, and I considered him the #1 target for that year, so I couldn't be happier that he transferred to UConn.

I'm a big fan of his game, but you can't expect him to show immediately. Probably on target to impact the second half of next season.

Having worked out against the team for a year he should be pretty well versed in the defense systems.

 

[Paesano]

I don't expect Larrier or Gilbert to contribute much next year. Occasional flashes combined with equally occasional negatives. Neither will even approach what we got from Adams last year. Next year will ride on the shoulders of Adams, Purvis, Hamilton and Brimah. Gilbert might provide a few minutes of rest for Purvis and Adams and Larrier the same for Hamilton. We have a gaping hole at PF. If Durham can get healthy and in shape he might be a guy who could contribute right away.

 

[Huskyforlife]

@Paesano I assume you think Sam Jr. is going to be the main backcourt backup next year? Since that probably will not be the case, the expectation should be our AA pg, and terrific ball handler, will be the main backup. Perhaps I could see a scenario where Gilbert comes in strictly for Adams, and Larrier strictly for Purvis or Hamilton, but that depends on everyones performance. Point being, we have some studs in the waiting.

 

[Deadrody]

I don't expect Larrier or Gilbert to contribute much next year. Occasional flashes combined with equally occasional negatives. Neither will even approach what we got from Adams last year.

That seems to be excessively pessimistic. Gilbert is an All American for crying out loud. They don't give out those kind of accolades like participation trophies.

 

[Huskyforlife]

@BUHusky10 I think taking high potential guys works when you have good starters at those positions already. In this case; Hamilton, and Larrier. Right now, we have a guy at Larriers positions who may be an NBA draft pick by the time he offically leaves. Having a guy like Larrier backing him up, someone with immense potential, should leave us in a comfortable spot once Hamilton moves on. Another thing, I don't want people to get the wrong idea, Larrier can be a productive backup for us, with the limited minutes he will get. My point being, nobody should expect a 6'8 200 natural SF, who has been very raw since high school, and hasn't played this level basketball in over a year, to come in and start at PF like I've read here. We must believe in Ollies ability to develop talent, because ready made starters out of high school are on short supply.

 

[Huskyforlife]

That seems to be excessively pessimistic. Gilbert is an All American for crying out loud. They don't give out those kind of accolades like participation trophies.

I don't know man, have you seen some of the "AA" Dook and Kensucky get? You're gonna have a hard time convincing me Matt Jones, and Marcus Lee deserved to be AA.

 

[Paesano]

That seems to be excessively pessimistic. Gilbert is an All American for crying out loud. They don't give out those kind of accolades like participation trophies.

I understand that and he will be a good to great player, some day. I just don't think he will be a major impact player in his first year. And you know as well as I do that being an AA is no guarantee of greatness. I give you Scott Hazelton as a prime example. Gilbert should be better than Hazelton but you get the idea. I just think people are way over hyping him. He will take time.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I understand that and he will be a good to great player, some day. I just don't think he will be a major impact player in his first year. And you know as well as I do that being an AA is no guarantee of greatness. I give you Scott Hazelton as a prime example. Gilbert should be better than Hazelton but you get the idea. I just think people are way over hyping him. He will take time.

I think Jalen Adams-like contributions would be a solid freshman year. I think the expectations of him have gotten a bit out of control, as they do with all major recruits.

 

[jibsey]

I did not see anything to believe that Jalen is not on track to be Bazz like for his career. He was better at some things first year and is behind on outside shooting but I was not disappointed in sny way with his play.

 

[Excalibur]

I did not see anything to believe that Jalen is not on track to be Bazz like for his career. He was better at some things first year and is behind on outside shooting but I was not disappointed in sny way with his play.

Walker is the better comparison, both in terms of style and statistics.