I d love to see clingan/Adama for 2-3 min a half

[3rdbass]

Why are people still so infatuated with the idea of playing a center at the 4 position? You guys watched last year's anemic ball movement offense, and then this year's top 10 offense in the country and think to yourself, "yeah, give me the anemic offense"..? Please stop bringing this up, it's beyond annoying at this point. It's just flat out stupid

I think some people just wonder using it against bigger teams that we might play. Maybe not the whole game but in certain conditions where the other team is killing us on the boards or inside. Defensively it might work when you have a PF like Akok Akok who really can't dribble pas his man. On offense Clingan would have to play on the top of the key for it work and give space for Sanogo to do his magic down low. We have used it in the Oregon game to some success and wouldn't mind to see it at certain moments but not the whole game.

 

[uconn_jack]

It's not going to happen, and shouldn't, at least until Johnson is in the rotation and proves he's capable. There is no reason to risk both Adama and Clingan getting into any kind of foul trouble unless Johnson is there to back them up.

 

[Kitaman]

All I do is think about it.

 

[cohenzone]

Why are people still so infatuated with the idea of playing a center at the 4 position? You guys watched last year's anemic ball movement offense, and then this year's top 10 offense in the country and think to yourself, "yeah, give me the anemic offense"..? Please stop bringing this up, it's beyond annoying at this point. It's just flat out stupid

I think the idea was for just a few minutes. Not like THE line up as a model for long stretches of a game. People are reading a lot more into the suggestion than I think was being made.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Maybe in the last 2-3 mins playing Purdue.

...joined by Samson, Richie, and Yarin: the B1G Go Home lineup.

 

[BlueMAB]

The problem remains nuance is lost on this board. Many people can't/won't accept that showing a lineup for a few minutes at a time (whether by necessity or not) does not drastically change our lineup.

They prefer to mock and ridicule those who suggest trying it out in small doses...something Hurley has already done twice....as if those people (who repeatedly suggest small doses) are arguing they should play 20 minutes together.

They call posters morons for suggesting something the coaches have already done. 100% on brand for the Boneyard.

 

[Hurleyman216]

The only scenario I see these 2 on the court together is if Jackson fouls out in a big game against a team with a physical 4 man that Karaban can’t handle defensively. We could then slot Sanogo in the 4 spot and play Clingan at the 5, but it’s very very dependent on what the opponents are putting out there at the 4 and 5.

 

[Malamute]

The problem remains nuance is lost on this board. Many people can't/won't accept that showing a lineup for a few minutes at a time (whether by necessity or not) does not drastically change our lineup.

They prefer to mock and ridicule those who suggest trying it out in small doses...something Hurley has already done twice....as if those people (who repeatedly suggest small doses) are arguing they should play 20 minutes together.

They call posters morons for suggesting something the coaches have already done. 100% on brand for the Boneyard.

Don’t see how it hurts to have as many game tested options as possible at your disposal. Like a fire extinguisher, break glass in case of emergency. No need to lean on it but should be available.

 

[mauconnfan]

I will say this. 9 minutes isn’t enough for DC. And you don’t want to take Sanogo out when he’s playing well so what’s the answer? Pretty simple.

 

[dogpause]

Who doesn't love a Freak Show? I want to see this out of curiosity at the very least, but I think it could have strategic value.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

The problem remains nuance is lost on this board. Many people can't/won't accept that showing a lineup for a few minutes at a time (whether by necessity or not) does not drastically change our lineup.

They prefer to mock and ridicule those who suggest trying it out in small doses...something Hurley has already done twice....as if those people (who repeatedly suggest small doses) are arguing they should play 20 minutes together.

They call posters morons for suggesting something the coaches have already done. 100% on brand for the Boneyard.

He tried it out twice and hasn’t gone back to it at all. That should be telling. If it’s used in a serious game, it would be in a VERY specific matchup situation, not something we’ll ever see consistently.

 

[BlueMAB]

He tried it out twice and hasn’t gone back to it at all. That should be telling. If it’s used in a serious game, it would be in a VERY specific matchup situation, not something we’ll ever see consistently.

Almost everyone who has asked for it has said it should be limited and specific.

 

[Huskyforlife]

I will say this. 9 minutes isn’t enough for DC. And you don’t want to take Sanogo out when he’s playing well so what’s the answer? Pretty simple.

The answer? Keep winning every game by double digits? Play Clingan more in games where Sanogo struggles or is in foul trouble? The same formula that’s made us the best team in the country. Also, I think it’s important to remember he played less because of his repeated shots to the mouth.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Almost everyone who has asked for it has said it should be limited and specific.

The OP is saying every game multiple times per game.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

The OP is saying every game multiple times per game.

Are you sure? Here the OP:

Adama is so mobile and has shown he can hit 3 ball and drive from 3 point line

When karaban is off- why not go Adama 4 clingan 5? I mean just for a2-3 minute run?


It will ensure rebounding and rim protection will be at max capacity. It will also showcase Adama as a pro 4 man.

What do u guys think?

Unless Karaban is off every game multiple times per game, I'm not seeing what's written by @WhereistheDove?

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Are you sure? Here the OP:

Unless Karaban is off every game multiple times per game, I'm not seeing what's written by @WhereistheDove?

Read the thread title…

 

[bigknight3]

He tried it out twice and hasn’t gone back to it at all. That should be telling. If it’s used in a serious game, it would be in a VERY specific matchup situation, not something we’ll ever see consistently.

Could have been a trial run in preparation for specific situations and we haven't seen it again cause it needs more work in practice.

 

[UconnU]

AS shooting 43% from 3 and showing off ball handling. He wants to be a pro badly. Give him some minutes at the stretch 4 role. He can be a stationary 3pt threat If need be. Statistically I think our best lineup has DC at C? No? Maybe there’s bias because DC is playing against mostly backups?

 

[navery12]

This ridiculous idea should really be put to rest after the Georgetown game. If there was ever a team it could work against it's someone like Georgetown where they have a traditional C in Wahab and then play a 4 with very limited mobility like Akok. And despite that, our best lineup was when we went the complete opposite direction and had Joey Calcaterra guarding Akok and played 4 guards with a big

 

[jdb50]

There is no 4 on offense with this lineup. You have AS and DC changing places at the lowpost and highpost setting a screen and rolling to the hoop.. DC may be the better passer. Ajax, Hawk and Diarra or Ajax , Newton and Joe C. Need more than 9 minutes for DC.

 

[JohnFSilver]

I don’t l

Adama is so mobile and has shown he can hit 3 ball and drive from 3 point line

When karaban is off- why not go Adama 4 clingan 5? I mean just for a2-3 minute run?


It will ensure rebounding and rim protection will be at max capacity. It will also showcase Adama as a pro 4 man.

What do u guys think?

I don’t like it. Adama can play inside out and Clingan a good passer, but I don’t see the benefit of having. Those two in the lineup at the same time

What are you getting with two that you don’t get with one of them?

 

[JohnFSilver]

As far as Adama. He is an nba 5. I do like his footwork though and maybe he can be a stretch 5 at the nba level. I am thinking a bigger grant Williams type.

But, he does seem to be more of a backup, offensive 5 man.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Read the thread title…

I read the title and see 2 responses I could offer. One is arguably obnoxious, which I'd rather not be, and the other relies upon a combination of inference & fact. I think both would be accurate if I offered them. Neither is what I want to be doing right now.

What a dilemma.

 

[BlueMAB]

The OP is saying every game multiple times per game.

And the OP is “almost everyone”?

 

[tzznandrew]

The problem remains nuance is lost on this board. Many people can't/won't accept that showing a lineup for a few minutes at a time (whether by necessity or not) does not drastically change our lineup.

I think most people against this idea have a perfectly reasonable sense of nuance. We just think it's a bad idea for a variety of reasons, among the reasons is that 4-6 minutes a game together is 10-15% of the time, which is not insubstantial. It does change our lineup—and it has the possibility to do so even more if one of them gets into needless foul trouble.

I'd say the people advocating for this 2005 style offense are the one's who lack a nuanced understanding of basketball. Aside from the fact that it takes away the greatest strength's of our best player on offense, it disrupts our spacing all in the name of hitting some arbitrary minute total for another player. And then, uh...the defense? People advocating this are largely trapped in old thinking about positions. Many are the same people who scoffed at the idea of Jackson being the team's offense initiator when people suggested it last year. If you're married to positions, sure, he's not technically the point guard, but he's leading the team in assists, has a better A/TO ratio than our nominal PG, and we're best when he runs the offense.

The same old-style thinking that wants us to put two bigs on the floor is the same that poo-poo'd our obvious point forward.