Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Summer Scrimmage reports

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shockm
    commented on 's reply
    I will only say that Dexter is quite a bit thicker and more athletic than Ben and Wessel. But while I don’t mind him playing the 4 if it makes us better with our wealth of guards, his main value to us will be the 3.

  • ShockingButTrue
    commented on 's reply
    I have no problem with 2 6' guards on the floor if they're skilled. That's my model of choice (i.e., skilled).

    But I do stand by my post, without asserting whether I support it or not, in stating most teams don't start 6'4.5" power forwards who've participated in Final Fours... We sure didn't. Can you name any, excluding teams from the 50's and 60's?

    It was just a relevant point, that's all...

  • wufan
    replied
    It’s not a lack of imagination. I can imagine Dennis playing the 4, just like Ben Smith and Evan Wessel. Those were good teams! It’s that you loose certain advantages by playing small. All things being equal, more height is better, and even if your best team lacks height, you need to be able to play height in certain circumstances.

    Yes, Dennis can play the four, but this team would be better if he didn’t have to.

    BTW, Marshall started two 6-9 guys and brought three guys off the bench that were 6-7 to 6-9.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shockm
    replied
    Originally posted by ShockingButTrue View Post

    Agreed. If the model is tournament success and Final Fours, there won't be many lineups with a 6'4 or 6'5 power forward.
    While I think any team needs flexibility, the 4 guard lineup isn't a new strategy or a strategy limited to MVC schools.

    https://www.sfgate.com/sports/articl...ll-2439722.php

    It is being used more and more and also is being used by Power 5 schools. Ideally, you have taller lineups with taller guards. 6'4 and 6'5 point guards are becoming more plentiful in our current basketball environment, and 6'8 guards are becoming more plentiful as stretch forwards. However, Argh's statement about having perimeter players who can shoot it from 3 point land, and who also have the ability to get to the rim (and also for the best stretch players can shoot it from mid-range) are what is becoming more popular as opposed to stretch players who can post up and "clog" up the lane and prevent offensive movement. Additionally, players who are flexible, and guard multiple players and who can all rebound are part of what teams are striving for.

    Good coaches don't limit teams because "this is the way we've always done it". Your lack of imagination to one post and 4 guards is similar to a lack of imagination of using two 5'11 or 6' guards when they are your best players as Toronto did with Fred and (the other small point guard's name slips my mind), did to win the NBA Championship.

    Leave a comment:


  • ShockingButTrue
    replied
    Originally posted by jcdshocker View Post
    A 6-4 or 6-5 Four Man worked in the Valley. Not so much in the AAC. Not to say it can’t. It simply will be more of a match up problem in our current league. Several teams had 6-9 and 6-10 power forwards.
    Agreed. If the model is tournament success and Final Fours, there won't be many lineups with a 6'4 or 6'5 power forward.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan
    commented on 's reply
    Dennis should only play the 4 in spurts, depending on matchup. IPBC, Gordon and Wade should be the main guys at the 4. Also keep in mind we will run AM and JE together in some circumstances.

  • Dan
    commented on 's reply
    It’s been said Etienne is the most college ready player GM has ever signed. He may play 25 min a game by himself.

  • Aargh
    replied
    The 3-point shot has changed the game. The game is moving to 4 guys at the 3-point line and a post player setting screens for driving perimeter players or trying to seal his guy for an entry pass. The 5 is more important as a shot blocker than as a scorer.

    Marshall (the school) beat the Shox by having 4 guys on the 3-point line. The moment a perimeter player beat their primary defender with a drive, there was always a dish to an open 3-point shooter when the Shox had to drop a defender to cover the driver.

    Leave a comment:


  • jcdshocker
    replied
    A 6-4 or 6-5 Four Man worked in the Valley. Not so much in the AAC. Not to say it can’t. It simply will be more of a match up problem in our current league. Several teams had 6-9 and 6-10 power forwards.

    Leave a comment:


  • wufan
    replied
    Let’s say that two of Fernandes, Sheffield, and Etienne are drastically underrated, and are NBA bound prior to their senior season. That makes them good for 60 minutes a game. Then Stevenson plays 10 mpg at the 2 and 15 mpg at the three. Burton plays 10 mpg at the 1 and 15 mpg at the 3. That means Dennis covers 10 mpg at the 3 and 20 at the 4. Wade covers the rest of the PF minutes. In order to make Dennis work at the 4 we need 60 minutes from our freshman! 60! .........effing 60!

    I hope Dennis is forced to play the 4.

    Leave a comment:


  • wufan
    replied
    Originally posted by im4wsu View Post
    What a great discussion, but what if we paly a 5-3-3-1-1- lineup?
    No issues with that as long as one of the threes is 6-8, 235, and one of the ones shoots 45% from 3.

    Leave a comment:


  • ShockingButTrue
    commented on 's reply
    Yep.

    It's a game of skill.

  • Signman
    commented on 's reply
    And the Raptors.

  • ShockingButTrue
    replied
    Originally posted by im4wsu View Post
    What a great discussion, but what if we paly a 5-3-3-1-1- lineup?
    It's worked for the Warriors.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cdizzle
    replied
    Originally posted by im4wsu View Post
    What a great discussion, but what if we paly a 5-3-3-1-1- lineup?
    I think we'd get in trouble for 13 men on the court. I'm also not sure why we'd commit 5 to defense. Seems defeatist.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X