2023-24 Season Countdown

[AUFC]

4 months folks. Halfway back to GT Hoops.

 

[yjfan]

When do schedules come out?

 

[57jacket]

4 months folks. Halfway back to GT Hoops.

Can't wait. Going to be exciting .

 

[OG-T]

4 months folks. Halfway back to GT Hoops.

VERY excited about this team - and this new look program’s - breakthrough this year. I think it’s coming.
Here’s a take on starters; personally, I think we’ll have about 8 or 9 potential starters, I don’t see a locked 5.

Projecting Georgia Tech Basketball's 2023-2024 starting five

Georgia Tech has undergone a roster transformation as a program this offseason with the arrival of new head coach Damon Stoudamire. Gone are Deivon Smith (transfer to Utah), Cyril Martynov…

bvmsports.com

 

[YlJacket]

Nice article. He went with a "classic" starting lineup at the 4 and 5 spots. Would not be surprised to see us go slightly smaller at the 4 given the lack of proven talent at the 5 spot. Especially if we are committed to a real 4 out set. That may put Coleman back in the lineup - if not starting then still for major minutes. Will be fun to watch and see how the pieces are put together.

 

[orientalnc]

Nice article. He went with a "classic" starting lineup at the 4 and 5 spots. Would not be surprised to see us go slightly smaller at the 4 given the lack of proven talent at the 5 spot. Especially if we are committed to a real 4 out set. That may put Coleman back in the lineup - if not starting then still for major minutes. Will be fun to watch and see how the pieces are put together.

Like most people, this writer is guessing. I agree with his prediction about Kelly and Abram, but differ on the others. At least to some degree. I firmly believe, based on the interviews with CDS, that we will have four shooters on the floor. Abrams and Kelly and Coleman and Terry are our best shooters. I think that's why Murphy is on the team. All those bigs are going to be vying for one spot with lots of minutes and another with much fewer minutes. That lineup with two bigs starting and neither an outside threat is a 1950s lineup. It ain't flying in 2023 unless we don't have four shooters who can also play some D and run the floor.

 

[MISSOURIJACKET]

When do schedules come out?

Typically sometime in September.

 

[lv20gt]

I think it's very likely that Sturdivant starts the year as the starting PG.

He has more experience both in general and alongside Kelly/Coleman/Terry. He also really came on strong towards the end of last year. His last 12 games (yes a bit arbitrary I know) he averaged 12.6 points, 3 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 1.6 turnovers on 42.4/35.1/80.6 shooting in 33 mpg. Against almost all conference opponents (the one game against FIT doesn't change much if you want to go back and not include it). Those are really good numbers that I think while Abram has higher potential than Sturdivant, I would be surprised if he is better day one. Will certainly play though and I would expect a good chunk of time with both on the floor in some games.

Kelly obviously starts. I think it's also pretty guaranteed that Claude starts in some fashion at least to start the year (and very likely throughout the whole year barring injury or big surprised play).

Everything else is up in the air. The wing starter aside from Kelly is up in the air but we have plenty of good options.

The real issue for the team that I think comes down to the front court. I don't see the approach the article lists as working, for two reasons. The first is I don't think Dowuona is an ACC starter caliber player. He started 27 games as a soph for NCSU and averaged 4 and 4 in 25 min for a team that went 11-21. Last year his minutes fell to just 11 mpg when the team got significantly better. I can't see him being more than a back up player for us unless things really go wrong. The second reason is I am skeptical about having Claude playing alongside him. Offensively it doesn't make much sense as Claude is an interior scorer and so having Dowuona in just clogs things up, and from what I've seen Claude doesn't have much ability to step out and make things happen (shooting threes or driving). Defensively, putting Claude on a forward I think increases the likelihood of him picking up fouls which was somewhat of an issue with him last year anyways.

So I think, and believe most here probably agree, that Claude likely starts at the 5 with Dowuona coming off the bench in a back up role. But how do we handle the 4 spot. One way is to go closer to a traditional look with Ndongo or Gapare playing alongside him. Both have good size for the position and in theory could help with defense/rebounding using their size and length and seem to have a skillset more oriented towards play away from the basket than Claude. The problem is Ndongo is a true freshman and not the one and done variety. It's possible he adjusts well and contribute significantly right away. But it might also take him a year to adjust and he's not really ready to start until later. And Gapare was just not good last year for Umass. Between how much he needed to improve, and the step up in competition, I don't think we can expect much of him this year. Good potential to build on down the road though.

The other option, which I think has more traction here, is the idea of going small. The problem with that route is that Claude is already giving some height at 6-8. I know we just went through this with Franklin who turned into a rebounding monster for us last year down the stretch, but even with that rebounding was a big problem for us, and that is with Franklin working out as well as could be expected (other than an adjust period). Claude may, and hopefully does, adjust as well, but there is a possibility that he doesn't (think of Parham's change after transferring here). However even if he does work out well, we'd still be at a big disadvantage rebounding and interior defense with Coleman or Reeves. The idea is that what we lose in those areas we pick up in offense. Despite that it's probably the best bet to start the year if I had to guess, and to me if you go that route it makes more sense to go with the more efficient offensive player which would be Coleman, although I don't think that spot really go well with him. Also possible both start although I think Terry's shooting again is more valuable if that is the idea you are going for.

So I would guess a starting line up to begin the year as Sturdivant, Terry, Kelly, Coleman, and Claude with Abram and Reeves being the first off the bench on the perimeter (likely depending on who subs out and whether we need size or shooting) and Dowuona and Ndongo getting minutes off the bench in the front court. Hopefully as the year goes on Ndongo adjusts well as he could very well be that missing piece that the line up needs. That gives us a lot of experience, both in general but also playing together, with good tools off the bench for a variety of situations. Back court should be dangerous regardless and I think very likely Claude gives us a good counter balance of inside scoring to make the team dangerous. Defense and rebounding is the major concern I would have, but I don't see a real good way to address that this year unless we get a fairly big surprise player.

 

[57jacket]

I think it's very likely that Sturdivant starts the year as the starting PG.

He has more experience both in general and alongside Kelly/Coleman/Terry. He also really came on strong towards the end of last year. His last 12 games (yes a bit arbitrary I know) he averaged 12.6 points, 3 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 1.6 turnovers on 42.4/35.1/80.6 shooting in 33 mpg. Against almost all conference opponents (the one game against FIT doesn't change much if you want to go back and not include it). Those are really good numbers that I think while Abram has higher potential than Sturdivant, I would be surprised if he is better day one. Will certainly play though and I would expect a good chunk of time with both on the floor in some games.

Kelly obviously starts. I think it's also pretty guaranteed that Claude starts in some fashion at least to start the year (and very likely throughout the whole year barring injury or big surprised play).

Everything else is up in the air. The wing starter aside from Kelly is up in the air but we have plenty of good options.

The real issue for the team that I think comes down to the front court. I don't see the approach the article lists as working, for two reasons. The first is I don't think Dowuona is an ACC starter caliber player. He started 27 games as a soph for NCSU and averaged 4 and 4 in 25 min for a team that went 11-21. Last year his minutes fell to just 11 mpg when the team got significantly better. I can't see him being more than a back up player for us unless things really go wrong. The second reason is I am skeptical about having Claude playing alongside him. Offensively it doesn't make much sense as Claude is an interior scorer and so having Dowuona in just clogs things up, and from what I've seen Claude doesn't have much ability to step out and make things happen (shooting threes or driving). Defensively, putting Claude on a forward I think increases the likelihood of him picking up fouls which was somewhat of an issue with him last year anyways.

So I think, and believe most here probably agree, that Claude likely starts at the 5 with Dowuona coming off the bench in a back up role. But how do we handle the 4 spot. One way is to go closer to a traditional look with Ndongo or Gapare playing alongside him. Both have good size for the position and in theory could help with defense/rebounding using their size and length and seem to have a skillset more oriented towards play away from the basket than Claude. The problem is Ndongo is a true freshman and not the one and done variety. It's possible he adjusts well and contribute significantly right away. But it might also take him a year to adjust and he's not really ready to start until later. And Gapare was just not good last year for Umass. Between how much he needed to improve, and the step up in competition, I don't think we can expect much of him this year. Good potential to build on down the road though.

The other option, which I think has more traction here, is the idea of going small. The problem with that route is that Claude is already giving some height at 6-8. I know we just went through this with Franklin who turned into a rebounding monster for us last year down the stretch, but even with that rebounding was a big problem for us, and that is with Franklin working out as well as could be expected (other than an adjust period). Claude may, and hopefully does, adjust as well, but there is a possibility that he doesn't (think of Parham's change after transferring here). However even if he does work out well, we'd still be at a big disadvantage rebounding and interior defense with Coleman or Reeves. The idea is that what we lose in those areas we pick up in offense. Despite that it's probably the best bet to start the year if I had to guess, and to me if you go that route it makes more sense to go with the more efficient offensive player which would be Coleman, although I don't think that spot really go well with him. Also possible both start although I think Terry's shooting again is more valuable if that is the idea you are going for.

So I would guess a starting line up to begin the year as Sturdivant, Terry, Kelly, Coleman, and Claude with Abram and Reeves being the first off the bench on the perimeter (likely depending on who subs out and whether we need size or shooting) and Dowuona and Ndongo getting minutes off the bench in the front court. Hopefully as the year goes on Ndongo adjusts well as he could very well be that missing piece that the line up needs. That gives us a lot of experience, both in general but also playing together, with good tools off the bench for a variety of situations. Back court should be dangerous regardless and I think very likely Claude gives us a good counter balance of inside scoring to make the team dangerous. Defense and rebounding is the major concern I would have, but I don't see a real good way to address that this year unless we get a fairly big surprise player.

Wow! You have given this a lot of thought. All I see are a lot more talented players than last year. One big needs to shoot from decent range.

 

[78pike]

Like most people, this writer is guessing. I agree with his prediction about Kelly and Abram, but differ on the others. At least to some degree. I firmly believe, based on the interviews with CDS, that we will have four shooters on the floor. Abrams and Kelly and Coleman and Terry are our best shooters. I think that's why Murphy is on the team. All those bigs are going to be vying for one spot with lots of minutes and another with much fewer minutes. That lineup with two bigs starting and neither an outside threat is a 1950s lineup. It ain't flying in 2023 unless we don't have four shooters who can also play some D and run the floor.

I think Reeves works on his outside shot all summer and makes the starting lineup because of his length and ability to take it to the hole. That could move Coleman to the 4 if coach values his shooting over rebounding. Otherwise Claude at the 4 and Dowuona at the 5.

 

[78pike]

So I would guess a starting line up to begin the year as Sturdivant, Terry, Kelly, Coleman, and Claude

You are basically saying we should go with 4 of the guys that only won a few games for us last year and then substituting a center that is not as good as the guy that played that spot last year. I just don't see that happening. I think Sturdivant is experienced enough to accept the role of coming off the bench (that goes for Terry too). CDS seems to really like Abram's shiftiness and said his shooting is better than he anticipated so that tells me he gets the start. Coach also really likes the length and defense from Reeves so if his shooting improves I see him starting. Terry and his shooting makes him a great option off the bench after coach sees how the other team is defending us. Don't forget CDS doesn't use the ironman approach of our previous coach. We will most likely see starters and bench players getting equal minutes. I can see the 4 spot changing starters throughout the season depending on matchups. And I see the 5 spot going to the guy that ends up being our best rim protector and that will play out during the preseason.

 

[Steverc]

You are basically saying we should go with 4 of the guys that only won a few games for us last year and then substituting a center that is not as good as the guy that played that spot last year. I just don't see that happening. I think Sturdivant is experienced enough to accept the role of coming off the bench (that goes for Terry too). CDS seems to really like Abram's shiftiness and said his shooting is better than he anticipated so that tells me he gets the start. Coach also really likes the length and defense from Reeves so if his shooting improves I see him starting. Terry and his shooting makes him a great option off the bench after coach sees how the other team is defending us. Don't forget CDS doesn't use the ironman approach of our previous coach. We will most likely see starters and bench players getting equal minutes. I can see the 4 spot changing starters throughout the season depending on matchups. And I see the 5 spot going to the guy that ends up being our best rim protector and that will play out during the preseason.

I agree. That looks like a 10 win starting 5. I hope we have better players this year than last year.

 

[Root4GT]

I think it's very likely that Sturdivant starts the year as the starting PG.

He has more experience both in general and alongside Kelly/Coleman/Terry. He also really came on strong towards the end of last year. His last 12 games (yes a bit arbitrary I know) he averaged 12.6 points, 3 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 1.6 turnovers on 42.4/35.1/80.6 shooting in 33 mpg. Against almost all conference opponents (the one game against FIT doesn't change much if you want to go back and not include it). Those are really good numbers that I think while Abram has higher potential than Sturdivant, I would be surprised if he is better day one. Will certainly play though and I would expect a good chunk of time with both on the floor in some games.

Kelly obviously starts. I think it's also pretty guaranteed that Claude starts in some fashion at least to start the year (and very likely throughout the whole year barring injury or big surprised play).

Everything else is up in the air. The wing starter aside from Kelly is up in the air but we have plenty of good options.

The real issue for the team that I think comes down to the front court. I don't see the approach the article lists as working, for two reasons. The first is I don't think Dowuona is an ACC starter caliber player. He started 27 games as a soph for NCSU and averaged 4 and 4 in 25 min for a team that went 11-21. Last year his minutes fell to just 11 mpg when the team got significantly better. I can't see him being more than a back up player for us unless things really go wrong. The second reason is I am skeptical about having Claude playing alongside him. Offensively it doesn't make much sense as Claude is an interior scorer and so having Dowuona in just clogs things up, and from what I've seen Claude doesn't have much ability to step out and make things happen (shooting threes or driving). Defensively, putting Claude on a forward I think increases the likelihood of him picking up fouls which was somewhat of an issue with him last year anyways.

So I think, and believe most here probably agree, that Claude likely starts at the 5 with Dowuona coming off the bench in a back up role. But how do we handle the 4 spot. One way is to go closer to a traditional look with Ndongo or Gapare playing alongside him. Both have good size for the position and in theory could help with defense/rebounding using their size and length and seem to have a skillset more oriented towards play away from the basket than Claude. The problem is Ndongo is a true freshman and not the one and done variety. It's possible he adjusts well and contribute significantly right away. But it might also take him a year to adjust and he's not really ready to start until later. And Gapare was just not good last year for Umass. Between how much he needed to improve, and the step up in competition, I don't think we can expect much of him this year. Good potential to build on down the road though.

The other option, which I think has more traction here, is the idea of going small. The problem with that route is that Claude is already giving some height at 6-8. I know we just went through this with Franklin who turned into a rebounding monster for us last year down the stretch, but even with that rebounding was a big problem for us, and that is with Franklin working out as well as could be expected (other than an adjust period). Claude may, and hopefully does, adjust as well, but there is a possibility that he doesn't (think of Parham's change after transferring here). However even if he does work out well, we'd still be at a big disadvantage rebounding and interior defense with Coleman or Reeves. The idea is that what we lose in those areas we pick up in offense. Despite that it's probably the best bet to start the year if I had to guess, and to me if you go that route it makes more sense to go with the more efficient offensive player which would be Coleman, although I don't think that spot really go well with him. Also possible both start although I think Terry's shooting again is more valuable if that is the idea you are going for.

So I would guess a starting line up to begin the year as Sturdivant, Terry, Kelly, Coleman, and Claude with Abram and Reeves being the first off the bench on the perimeter (likely depending on who subs out and whether we need size or shooting) and Dowuona and Ndongo getting minutes off the bench in the front court. Hopefully as the year goes on Ndongo adjusts well as he could very well be that missing piece that the line up needs. That gives us a lot of experience, both in general but also playing together, with good tools off the bench for a variety of situations. Back court should be dangerous regardless and I think very likely Claude gives us a good counter balance of inside scoring to make the team dangerous. Defense and rebounding is the major concern I would have, but I don't see a real good way to address that this year unless we get a fairly big surprise player.

I just don’t see enough talent on your proposed roster to get out of the bottom 1/3rd of the ACC. The transfer ins overall have higher ceilings than many of the returning guys.

Likely lots of experimenting the first 6-7 games. Should be fun to see how it plays out.

I hope your prediction is way off after 10 games.

 

[lv20gt]

You are basically saying we should go with 4 of the guys that only won a few games for us last year and then substituting a center that is not as good as the guy that played that spot last year. I just don't see that happening.

As opposed to what? Going with players who played on other teams that only won a few games instead? I believe the only player we have on a team who made the NCAAT last year was Dowuona and I think his situation pretty clearly shows why he isn't an ACC caliber starting player.

Sturdivant/Coleman/Terry/Kelly played for a 15-18
Abram played on a 12-21 Ole Miss team.
Reeves played on a 16-17 Flordia team.
Gapare played on a 15-16 Umass team.
Claude played on a 18-16 WCU team
Forest played on a 5-27 Presbyterian team.

We won't be fielding a starting 5 with players from teams with a bunch of success last year so that point doesn't seem to really mean much to me.

Also, when you look at our issues last year it was mostly, although not entirely, in the front court. Once Franklin adjusted and played better the team played significantly better. Hopefully Claude can step in and replicate that, and hopefully adjust better. I don't really see any alternative though. I think the belief that Dowuona is a starting caliber center is a pipe dream. The other issue was we really didn't have a good situation at the 4 spot. Moore wasn't ready, and Meka was a bad fit offensively. Coleman clearly wasn't that comfortable at the spot and it looked like his offense game was affected by it somewhat. But I don't see Gapare being anywhere near ACC ready, and none of the other transfers seem to address that issue either. I don't think Reeves is any better a fit for that spot than Coleman and he's just a more inefficient offensive player.

Could our back court improve? Sure. But it isn't like we're bringing any proven all conference level players or something.

 

[slugboy]

Since we’re going to play a different offense and defense than last year, with a different coaching staff, and about half the roster changed, I hope last year’s individual stats aren’t that useful in predicting our upcoming season

 

[78pike]

As opposed to what? Going with players who played on other teams that only won a few games instead? I believe the only player we have on a team who made the NCAAT last year was Dowuona and I think his situation pretty clearly shows why he isn't an ACC caliber starting player.

Sturdivant/Coleman/Terry/Kelly played for a 15-18
Abram played on a 12-21 Ole Miss team.
Reeves played on a 16-17 Flordia team.
Gapare played on a 15-16 Umass team.
Claude played on a 18-16 WCU team
Forest played on a 5-27 Presbyterian team.

We won't be fielding a starting 5 with players from teams with a bunch of success last year so that point doesn't seem to really mean much to me.

Also, when you look at our issues last year it was mostly, although not entirely, in the front court. Once Franklin adjusted and played better the team played significantly better. Hopefully Claude can step in and replicate that, and hopefully adjust better. I don't really see any alternative though. I think the belief that Dowuona is a starting caliber center is a pipe dream. The other issue was we really didn't have a good situation at the 4 spot. Moore wasn't ready, and Meka was a bad fit offensively. Coleman clearly wasn't that comfortable at the spot and it looked like his offense game was affected by it somewhat. But I don't see Gapare being anywhere near ACC ready, and none of the other transfers seem to address that issue either. I don't think Reeves is any better a fit for that spot than Coleman and he's just a more inefficient offensive player.

Could our back court improve? Sure. But it isn't like we're bringing any proven all conference level players or something.

You sound like you don't think our new coach is a good judge of talent. Why would he bring these guys on board if they are not capable of playing against ACC competition? Judging their ability based on what the overall record of their teams were doesn't make much sense. The starting lineup you propose has already shown that they couldn't get it done against ACC competition on a regular basis. "If it ain't broke don't change it" doesn't apply to our team. It obviously needs to change. That started with changing the coach. I will agree that we have some talent returning from last year's team. And I hope that talent improves under the direction of our new coach and his offensive and defensive schemes. But I just don't think he brought all these new players on board to sit behind last year's team. I believe we will see a mix of the new players and the returning players on the starting five and not just at the center position.

 

[lv20gt]

Judging their ability based on what the overall record of their teams were doesn't make much sense.

But it was fine when you did it for our returning players?

 

[78pike]

But it was fine when you did it for our returning players?

Let me start by saying that I have long enjoyed your posts and I look forward to future ones. You seem to be taking my responses as a personal affront and I assure you they are not intended as such. I just happen to disagree with your conclusion in this case and some of the logic you used to reach that conclusion. The point of my response was that coach recruited these players to join our current players because he believes they can play against ACC caliber players. You surmised the transfers aren't talented enough to start because of the records of the teams they came from. So to think he brought all these guys here simply to sit behind the guys that started last year is, to me, a bit naive. If you read the statements that CDS has made about some of these new guys, Abram and Reeves in particular, he believes they have skill sets that our lineup last year didn't possess. I already stated that we have talent returning from last year's team and those guys will be significant contributors. I just feel that infusing some of the new talent with some of the returning talent could make us a more explosive team and harder to defend. I'm not knocking the returning players, I'm just saying I think they the team might benefit from them accepting different roles than they had last year. Logic tells me that we won't be starting the same guys we started last year because it didn't work and I'm not sure they all fit the profile of the type of players that CDS prefers. I'm pretty sure they will all be contributors, but not all as starters.

You made sound points in your original post that led you to think that our starting lineup would consist of Sturdivant, Terry, Kelley and Coleman. I just happen to believe it will be different from that and include both Abram and Reeves. I just took issue with you assuming the talent of these new players is somehow tied to the record of the teams they played for last year. I saw every game we played last year and the combination of the four guys that you are predicting to start this year rarely got it done on a consistent basis which is why I think we will see a different combination of starters the year. You may end up being right or maybe I will or maybe neither of us will. I just hope the combination of new players and a new coach results in a much more successful team next year.

 

[Root4GT]

Let me start by saying that I have long enjoyed your posts and I look forward to future ones. You seem to be taking my responses as a personal affront and I assure you they are not intended as such. I just happen to disagree with your conclusion in this case and some of the logic you used to reach that conclusion. The point of my response was that coach recruited these players to join our current players because he believes they can play against ACC caliber players. You surmised the transfers aren't talented enough to start because of the records of the teams they came from. So to think he brought all these guys here simply to sit behind the guys that started last year is, to me, a bit naive. If you read the statements that CDS has made about some of these new guys, Abram and Reeves in particular, he believes they have skill sets that our lineup last year didn't possess. I already stated that we have talent returning from last year's team and those guys will be significant contributors. I just feel that infusing some of the new talent with some of the returning talent could make us a more explosive team and harder to defend. I'm not knocking the returning players, I'm just saying I think they the team might benefit from them accepting different roles than they had last year. Logic tells me that we won't be starting the same guys we started last year because it didn't work and I'm not sure they all fit the profile of the type of players that CDS prefers. I'm pretty sure they will all be contributors, but not all as starters.

You made sound points in your original post that led you to think that our starting lineup would consist of Sturdivant, Terry, Kelley and Coleman. I just happen to believe it will be different from that and include both Abram and Reeves. I just took issue with you assuming the talent of these new players is somehow tied to the record of the teams they played for last year. I saw every game we played last year and the combination of the four guys that you are predicting to start this year rarely got it done on a consistent basis which is why I think we will see a different combination of starters the year. You may end up being right or maybe I will or maybe neither of us will. I just hope the combination of new players and a new coach results in a much more successful team next year.

If our starting lineup has 4 guys who started last year by mid Dec we will be a bottom half ACC team for sure.

We needed a significant upgrade in talent to compete as an upper half ACC team. Hopefully some of the transfers in will be the talent upgrade we need.

I would expect Terry, Sturdivant and Coleman to be contributors for sure but not be our best players after Kelly. If they are, well rinse and repeat last year

 

[lv20gt]

If you think that team success is a bad evaluative measure of individual talent then that's perfectly fine and I would agree. I didn't talk about team success at all in my initial breakdown. But you were the one who brought team success in with "4 of the guys that only won a few games for us last year" as a response to my starting line up. I think the point is flawed on its own because I think by and large our returning players weren't the issues plaguing our team last year. But it also doesn't make sense if you apply the same standard to the incoming transfers. I do have a problem with seemingly using team success only to one group of players though.

You say logic tells you we won't be starting the same players as last year. Logic tells me we will start the best players we have. I said I thought Abram had higher potential than Sturdivant but I think Sturdivant was a better player at the end of last year (and so would expect him to be better to start next year) and provided stats to justify that. If you think Abram is going to be better day one than Sturdivant then go ahead and make the argument. But don't use a standard for one player that you aren't willing to apply to another.

Same with Reeves. If you think he's better than Coleman/Terry than argue it. To me, I see a player who shot more frequently than anyone in our rotation last year at %s worse than anyone in our rotation last year while also having a sub .5 assist to turn over ratio. His rebounding and defensive numbers look okay but nothing noteworthy. He has a ton of athletic potential but that doesn't seem like it's translating to effective play yet. If you see something different then what?

I don't agree with the whole change for the sake of change premise. The changes need to make sense and address issues the team had. The biggest issue we had last year was with interior defense and rebounding. That got somewhat better once Franklin hit his stride but was still an issue. I don't see Abram or Reeves really helping with that though. I also don't think we have a particularly good answer for that issue at the moment. But IMO if you're looking at a newcomer to actually make a big difference with a change that will address the issues it wouldn't be Reeves or Abram. It'd be Ndongo. But he's a true freshman and it's notoriously hard to project how well recruits will adjust to the college game even if they are highly thought of.