It is telling that even after another season of basketball, a google image search produces the same pictures of Tyler Roche. Instead of being a coming out year, Roche stagnated. By the end of the season his regular minutes were gone.
Roche is out there to hit perimeter shots. He made a few but was mediocre for the most part. His 3-pt percentage of .338 trailed Rice, Oates, Sanders and Raji. He's supposedly a good foul shooter, yet he only made five of his 11 attempts. I don't know what frustrates me more: 1. that he only got to the line 11 times or 2. that he didn't bury each shot.
I'd like to point out the positives but there weren't many. I guess you could say his early season play was better. Does that offset his lackluster play down the stretch? On the defensive side, you could point to his improved rebounding, especially on the longer rebounds.
I still believe Roche has some tools and value. But the clock is ticking. He still hesitates to take open shots. He never drives towards the basket. That can't happen next year.
It will be interesting to see what happens with Roche. Speculation is that he is coming back. But to do what? Unless he makes major improvements, I don't see him getting much playing time next season.
Season Grade: C
Posts
14 comments:
Probably your most generous grade yet, this man brings nothing productive.
With all that criticism, you still gave him a "C"? What good stuff are you smoking. He was by far the worst and most disappointing player on BC this year.
Worst scholarship player in the ACC.
c??????????????????
d- - no doubt in my mind
Bravesbill!
Always coming out of the woodwork for that neagtive-kick-a-man-when-he's down comment.
With that said, Roche is solid "D" material. Respect the optimism though in the grading, Bill.
It does nothing for Roche's confidence for him to get blasted and raked over the coals for being who he is. It's unfortunate that he never developed into Redick-lite as I hoped he would, but I imagine it's been hard on Tyler to step onto the court for BC and find himself miles out of his depth. I hope his grades are spectacular, because at least it wouldn't feel like a completely wasted BC scholarship.
^ ^ ^ ^
Agreed. Roche came billed as a "poor man's Tyler Coppenrath". Easy to say he's fallen tragically short of expectations. Here's hoping for monumental improvement next year.
Anything higher than an F would be generous. Tyrelle Blair deserved a C-/D and Roche should've been a full letter grade below him. Raji on the otherhand deserved that B or maybe higher.
In defense of Roche and my own grades, I didn't expect much of him. I expectd Blair to make a leap in performance. He didn't, hence the C+. Roche I just expected to be OK. He started most of the season and was passive. But he wasn't a game killer either. He just took up space.
bcmike- are you referring to Taylor Coppenrath? Roche was never compared to him- Coppenrath was a 6-9 PF... I think the Redick comparison is more appropriate. Either way, Roche proved to be a massive disappointment.
"But he wasn't a game killer either. He just took up space."
I think wasting space is a game killer--it failed to provide others with experience. F-
In 17.2 minutes per game, he compiled these horrid numbers. There is no rational way that they translate into a C.
2007-08 STATS
PPG APG 3P% RPG BPG SPG
3.8 1.6 .338 1.9 0.4 0.4
No more QBs from Maine and no more basketball players from New Hampshire. The competition level does not prepare them for the ACC.
Yea too bad he got the nod over Marquez Haynes, who is killing it on the scout team for 16 seed UTA. He'll probably be their best player next year. And we're stuck with Tyler Roche. Thanks Skinner.
Best case scenario for Roche as a player is to not play at all next year, somehow develop the shot he was supposed to have and come in on a very limited basis (5 mins a game) his senior year. He is the worst player to start an ACC game in the last 20 years.
Post a Comment