Lineup for next game

[GuttyWolf]

With the caveat that your use of the triple negative makes the point of your first sentence entirely unclear, are you really saying that it doesn't help Miller's propensity to foul that Ollie won't play him after he picks up a couple fouls? Because it seems like taking him out of the game is the one thing that is guaranteed to mitigate his propensity to foul.

You can cite all the positive statistics you want. No one would dispute that Miller is one of, if not the most important players on the team. But if he can't stay on the court his statistics don't really matter. If your argument is that it's better for the team to let Miller play through his fouls and foul out in the first half, well, that's an argument, I suppose. But not a very good one.

My apologies for the triple negative, I guess I haven't put my Bachelor's degree from CLAS to much use post college.

I won't argue the hook with 2 fouls in the first half (JC staple) My biggest gripe was with the quick hook in the second half after the 3rd foul. We finally ran a set for him to open the half and he could not have scored any easier. That's what happens when you get #32 the ball. Show a little sense of urgency KO and have some faith in a 5th year Senior who is (and say it with me this time) the best player on the team. Miller ended the game with 3 fouls in case you missed it, so that might not have been the worst idea.

Bottom line, without Miller this team has 15 wins tops... He is the only consistent body we have, the misuse of him all year has been nauseating. He can get his shot on anyone at any time and does so while shooting 60% from the floor. I only wish our head coach knew what to do with him.

 

[Storrssouth]

My apologies for the triple negative, I guess I haven't put my Bachelor's degree from CLAS to much use post college.

I won't argue the hook with 2 fouls in the first half (JC staple) My biggest gripe was with the quick hook in the second half after the 3rd foul. We finally ran a set for him to open the half and he could not have scored any easier. That's what happens when you get #32 the ball. Show a little sense of urgency KO and have some faith in a 5th year Senior who is (and say it with me this time) the best player on the team. Miller ended the game with 3 fouls in case you missed it, so that might not have been the worst idea.

Bottom line, without Miller this team has 15 wins tops... He is the only consistent body we have, the misuse of him all year has been nauseating. He can get his shot on anyone at any time and does so while shooting 60% from the floor. I only wish our head coach knew what to do with him.

Don't worry, we hear you loud and clear, CLAS degree or not. Miller is the team's best player. Fair enough. Hard to dispute that. Guy is a much needed post presence on a team that is definitely lacking in that area (right now at least). Just to play devil's advocate, if you were KO, how would you utilize him differently? Would you run the offense through him? Give him 20 shots per game? When we're not shooting the 3 well, I am all for getting Miller more looks. He's the most reliable option when we're in a cold streak and need a bucket. Just wondering what head coach guttywolf would draw up

 

[intlzncster]

Fill me in who our best player is if it is not Shonn? Enlighten me. Take me to Church.

I'm not going to argue he doesn't not have the propensity to foul. It also doesn't help that Ollie has no faith in playing Shonn when he picks up a couple. Every time he got pulled against Houston, they made a run. Spoiler Alert, that's what happens when your best player isn't the game.

Oh and he leads the AAC in PER and is top 5 in any efficiency category and practically every traditional stat the league has. Take a look for yourself if you don't believe me.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/conferences/aac/2016-leaders.html

Here's an idea, which isn't much of a newsflash really. We don't have a 'best' player. We have a bunch of guys who are good at certain things, and not so good at others. No lead dog. No elite player. We're hoping we can toss some mix of them together and maybe produce something.

 

[GuttyWolf]

Here's an idea, which isn't a newsflash if you've been paying attention. We don't have a 'best' player. We have a bunch of guys who are good at certain things, and no so good at others. No lead dog. No elite players. We're hoping we can toss some mix of them together and maybe produce something.

Here's a newsflash, every team has a 'best' player. And #32 happens to be ours.

I didn't say he was Shabazz, but he is the best we got. And if we utilized his skill set all year, we might not be sitting squarely on the bubble in the AAC.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Bottom line, without Miller this team has 15 wins tops... He is the only consistent body we have, the misuse of him all year has been nauseating. He can get his shot on anyone at any time and does so while shooting 60% from the floor. I only wish our head coach knew what to do with him.

Unfortunately, the refs in each game seem to know exactly what to do with Miller, which has limited what Ollie or anyone else can do with him.

 

[intlzncster]

Here's a newsflash, every team has a 'best' player.

That's not true, but OK. You might have 3 good players, one who's the best scorer, one who's the best rebounder/defender, and one who is the best all around. Each guy impacts the game differently, but does not separate themselves appreciably on a game by game basis. They are of relatively equal value. This occurs all the time in middle of the pack teams.

I didn't say he was Shabazz, but he is the best we got. And if we utilized his skill set all year, we might not be sitting squarely on the bubble in the AAC.

The most important quality of any player is availability. And if he's consistently on the bench, he's not available; and he's useless at that point. Skills are ultimately irrelevant in this scenario. Your best player does not spend a lot of time on the bench. He has zero impact from there. Negative impact actually.

 

[GuttyWolf]

Unfortunately, the refs in each game seem to know exactly what to do with Miller, which has limited what Ollie or anyone else can do with him.

Does Shonn foul a lot? Yes, he does. Is Ollie clueless on how to utilize him? Yes, to that as well.

He had 3 fouls last game and took 6 shots (1 oh which was a late tip in) Let's not act like he was saddled with 4 the whole second half. Get that man the pill and good things happen.

 

[David 76]

The most important quality of any player is availability. And if he's consistently on the bench, he's not available; and he's useless at that point. Skills are ultimately irrelevant in this scenario. Your best player does not spend a lot of time on the bench. He has zero impact from there. Negative impact actually.

Gotta disagree Int. Best is not available. Miller is our most consistent, productive, best player. DHam is our most talented until/if Jalen passes him.

 

[intlzncster]

Gotta disagree Int. Best is not available. Miller is our most consistent, productive, best player. DHam is our most talented until/if Jalen passes him.

I didn't say most talented. The point is, if he can't get the minutes because of constant foul trouble, what use is being really good? It's actually a negative impact on the team. And he loses 'best player' points, for lack of a better expression.

It's kind of like if a star player is always injured. He can't be your best player, because you can't count on him. I realize it's kind of semantics, but an all around decent player, who is always available, is more useful to a team.

I also realize this is a Bill Belichick maxim, so you won't agree by default.

 

[David 76]

First, Bill Belichick is my Godfather and I love the guy!
I called him and he said being able to count on Miller 100% while he is on the floor is better than being able to have 50% trust in DHam for his 35 minutes.

 

[Danzz]

Gibbs
Adams
Miller
Brimah
Hamilton
Can't take Miller out of the lineup he is our most consistent player.

 

[Com'rGordon]

Start Rodney instead of Gibbs and lets have some fun

 

[JSM1970]

Adams
RP
Omar
Miller
Brimah

Hamilton does a lot on the floor but not sure it results in an efficient offensive design. And he's a TO machine and not a great defender. Still would see him playing 20-25 mins at 3 or 4.

 

[tjc1888]

Adams
RP
Omar
Miller
Brimah

Hamilton does a lot on the floor but not sure it results in an efficient offensive design. And he's a TO machine and not a great defender. Still would see him playing 20-25 mins at 3 or 4.

We don't start Hamilton we get killed on the boards. Simple as that.

 

[Tdaley]

The only change you can make is at the shooting guard position. Omar, Gibbs or Puris. Overall, in my mind Gibbs is still the best all around player of the 3. Puris's lack of transition d in the past couple of games hasn't earned him anymore mins even though he defends the perimeter better than the other two. Maybe starting Omar might provide us with a marginal improvement ( especially if he hits a couple of early shots) although his lack of athletic ability is a drawback. I would stick with Brimah, Miller, Adams, Hamilton and Gibbs. Its still our best overall lineup despite its many weaknesses.

 

[TasteofUConn]

We don't start Hamilton we get killed on the boards. Simple as that.

Right on.

Let's play a game.
There are two groups. They are:
GROUP 1 - Purvis, Adams, Nolan, Brimah, Facey, Enoch.

Group 2 - Miller, Hamilton.

For the players in one of the two groups, it is arguable who should get time. For the players in the other group, all the players have to play most of the game for us to have a chance to win. MATCH the group to the description.

Honestly, it's appalling that anybody, at this point in the season, thinks that sitting either Miller or Hamilton is the answer to any question other than, "how do we lower our chances to win?"

 

[intlzncster]

Right on.

Let's play a game.
There are two groups. They are:
GROUP 1 - Purvis, Adams, Nolan, Brimah, Facey, Enoch.

Group 2 - Miller, Hamilton.

For the players in one of the two groups, it is arguable who should get time. For the players in the other group, all the players have to play most of the game for us to have a chance to win. MATCH the group to the description.

Honestly, it's appalling that anybody, at this point in the season, thinks that sitting either Miller or Hamilton is the answer to any question other than, "how do we lower our chances to win?"

Exactly, and quite frankly, I don't think the starting lineup thing is all that hard. People are making a mountain out of a mole hill:

Adams
Purvis/Gibbs (tossup depending on matchup or need)
Hamilton
Miller
Brimah

 

[tjc1888]

Exactly, and quite frankly, I don't think the starting lineup thing is all that hard. People are making a mountain out of a mole hill:

Adams
Purvis/Gibbs (tossup depending on matchup or need)
Hamilton
Miller
Brimah

This. Also does it really matter which one starts (Gibbs vs Purvis). See who is playing better throughout the game and give them more mins down the stretch.

 

[lange10]

Idc who starts but at the end of the game I want
1. Adams
2. Calhoun
3. Hamilton
4. Miller
5. Brimah

Gibbs and Purvis aren't getting it done late