Here's what the belief was on each player going into the season:
Butler: Project. Was going to take a couple years to be a regular contributor
Robinson: Very limited role (i.e. probably mostly garbage time) as a freshman, would develop into lead guard after that
Pierce: Hidden gem, better than the rankings, would play the most immediately
Obviously the biggest misevaluation there in year one is Pierce. What he is going forward, I don't know. Maybe he stays and turns into the player the staff thought he was last summer, maybe not.
But my other point here is that Butler and Robinson didn't play more this year than expected because they were way better. They played more because the team was dreadful and there was nobody else to play.
Before January 16 Butler had played double digit minutes in only three games. He played double digit minutes in 12 of 16 games after that. Not because he had shown incredible progress and they couldn't keep him off the floor but because Connor Vanover was a complete bust and Mabor Majak was Mabor Majak. In that increased playing time, he scored 10 points once, was scoreless eight times and had a high of five rebounds.
Anthony Robinson before the Kansas game: 9 games, 15.5 minutes, 5.7 points, 2.5 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals, 0.6 turnovers
Anthony Robinson from the Kansas game forward: 21 games, 12 minutes, 3.1 points, 1.5 rebounds, 0.5 assists, 1 steal, 0.3 turnovers
My point is this: We have no clue what these freshmen are. If you want to convince yourself that they were players who showed glimmers of hope that would turn into much more, you probably can. If you want to convince yourself that they're busts, you probably can. They struggled to find a role on an historically bad team. That doesn't mean they're destined to be terrible players. It also doesn't mean that there needs to be much consternation if they choose to move on. If the staff sees something in them and wanted to keep them all around, I'd have had no problem with it. If they all leave, there's no real problem with that either.
Butler: Project. Was going to take a couple years to be a regular contributor
Robinson: Very limited role (i.e. probably mostly garbage time) as a freshman, would develop into lead guard after that
Pierce: Hidden gem, better than the rankings, would play the most immediately
Obviously the biggest misevaluation there in year one is Pierce. What he is going forward, I don't know. Maybe he stays and turns into the player the staff thought he was last summer, maybe not.
But my other point here is that Butler and Robinson didn't play more this year than expected because they were way better. They played more because the team was dreadful and there was nobody else to play.
Before January 16 Butler had played double digit minutes in only three games. He played double digit minutes in 12 of 16 games after that. Not because he had shown incredible progress and they couldn't keep him off the floor but because Connor Vanover was a complete bust and Mabor Majak was Mabor Majak. In that increased playing time, he scored 10 points once, was scoreless eight times and had a high of five rebounds.
Anthony Robinson before the Kansas game: 9 games, 15.5 minutes, 5.7 points, 2.5 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals, 0.6 turnovers
Anthony Robinson from the Kansas game forward: 21 games, 12 minutes, 3.1 points, 1.5 rebounds, 0.5 assists, 1 steal, 0.3 turnovers
My point is this: We have no clue what these freshmen are. If you want to convince yourself that they were players who showed glimmers of hope that would turn into much more, you probably can. If you want to convince yourself that they're busts, you probably can. They struggled to find a role on an historically bad team. That doesn't mean they're destined to be terrible players. It also doesn't mean that there needs to be much consternation if they choose to move on. If the staff sees something in them and wanted to keep them all around, I'd have had no problem with it. If they all leave, there's no real problem with that either.
