Practice | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Practice

Status
Not open for further replies.
aceboon said:
I don't recall that being the consensus at all, I see him playing more minutes at the 5 over his career than minutes at the 3, and personally I would be shocked if he ever plays 1 minute at the 3.
Expand ...

Yeah, this is actually the first time I've heard it. How many 6'10 college threes are there really?
 
He doesn't have 3 skills. His best attributes are his shot blocking and 15 foot jumper over the defense. Why would you put that one the perimeter guarding 6'5 guys.

We also run a guard dominant system. 6'4 in shoes Rodney purvis plays a good chunk of time at the 3.

I don't care what "he said." He's 18 years old. 18 year olds can say a lot of things, especially when bragging about themselves to random strangers.

Facey played some center when he was 6'9 and 200lbs soaking wet. I also would bank on him playing SOME--but not much--time at the 5. If brimah is in foul trouble and Enoch hasn't improved, we don't have much else.

Durham is a very skilled stretch 4. He will play at the 4. He is not and will not ever be a 3. In college a 3 is your other ball handler, someone who can 3-4 dribble drive and draw some fouls. NOT durhams strength.

You are making a foolish argument. Quit it.
 
husky429 said:
He doesn't have 3 skills. His best attributes are his shot blocking and 15 foot jumper over the defense. Why would you put that one the perimeter guarding 6'5 guys.

We also run a guard dominant system. 6'4 in shoes Rodney purvis plays a good chunk of time at the 3.

I don't care what "he said." He's 18 years old. 18 year olds can say a lot of things, especially when bragging about themselves to random strangers.

Facey played some center when he was 6'9 and 200lbs soaking wet. I also would bank on him playing SOME--but not much--time at the 5. If brimah is in foul trouble and Enoch hasn't improved, we don't have much else.

Durham is a very skilled stretch 4. He will play at the 4. He is not and will not ever be a 3. In college a 3 is your other ball handler, someone who can 3-4 dribble drive and draw some fouls. NOT durhams strength.

You are making a foolish argument. Quit it.
Expand ...
I'm not arguing, I'm just saying what he said buddy
 
.-.
I honestly don't care what position he plays, if Ollie puts him in anywhere then cool. I'm just posting what Juwan told me. Don't shoot the messenger.
 
Kemba'sYogurt said:
I'm not arguing, I'm just saying what he said buddy
Expand ...
I'm glad to hear the he sees himself having a broad range of skills. I expect he can do a lot of things on the court, but guard a smallish 3 on the perimeter is probably not one of them. But, hey, if he can move like that at 6'10", damn, he is going to be really good!
 
Me: Hey Juwan are you a stretch 4 or a 5?
Juwan: stretch 4
Me: you think you could play the 3?
Juwan: yeah, I'd be oversized though
Me: so not a 5?
Juwan: nah
 
  • Like
Reactions: caw
Dogbreath2U said:
I'm glad to hear the he sees himself having a broad range of skills. I expect he can do a lot of things on the court, but guard a smallish 3 on the perimeter is probably not one of them. But, hey, if he can move like that at 6'10", damn, he is going to be really good!
Expand ...
Haha yeah I'll take it!!
 
walker11 said:
In before tenspro gives us his thoughts on playing an oversized 3.
Expand ...

I mean, do you disagree with my thoughts? Durham is the ideal stretch-4 that Ollie has been looking for since Daniels was successfully re-cast from a 3 to a 4.

In the NBA you can get away with having a 6'8-6'9 guy at the 3, because he has the requisite skills (shooting, handle) -- though even the NBA is going away from that and playing guys like Durant and LeBron at the 4.

In college, if you play a guy with that kind of size, but without skill, at the 3, you kill your offense. The defense keys on the two guys who can actually do something with the ball, and their driving lane is clogged. Fortunately KO went away from this after the offensive disaster that we had in 2012 with Roscoe-Oriakhi-Drummond at the 3-4-5.

I don't see what's so controversial about this.
 
.-.
Tenspro2002 said:
I mean, do you disagree with my thoughts? Durham is the ideal stretch-4 that Ollie has been looking for since Daniels was successfully re-cast from a 3 to a 4.

In the NBA you can get away with having a 6'8-6'9 guy at the 3, because he has the requisite skills (shooting, handle) -- though even the NBA is going away from that and playing guys like Durant and LeBron at the 4.

In college, if you play a guy with that kind of size, but without skill, at the 3, you kill your offense. The defense keys on the two guys who can actually do something with the ball, and their driving lane is clogged. Fortunately KO went away from this after the offensive disaster that we had in 2012 with Roscoe-Oriakhi-Drummond at the 3-4-5.

I don't see what's so controversial about this.
Expand ...

I'm busting your chops because I have seen that argument from you so many times, which I do fully agree with.
 
The best possible case with Durham is if he can hang defensively at the 5.
 
It's possible I'm thinking of someone else, I didn't really see him as a fit at the 3. I'm trying to think of who else it could have been, maybe I'm thinking of Wenyen Gabriel who is more of a 3 than Durham.

Again since it seems like everyone misunderstood my post, NOT saying he should be playing any minutes at the 3, but was coming up with an absurd lineup that would never actually play but I would like to see for a few minutes for my own personal enjoyment
 
Tenspro2002 said:
I mean, do you disagree with my thoughts? Durham is the ideal stretch-4 that Ollie has been looking for since Daniels was successfully re-cast from a 3 to a 4.

In the NBA you can get away with having a 6'8-6'9 guy at the 3, because he has the requisite skills (shooting, handle) -- though even the NBA is going away from that and playing guys like Durant and LeBron at the 4.

In college, if you play a guy with that kind of size, but without skill, at the 3, you kill your offense. The defense keys on the two guys who can actually do something with the ball, and their driving lane is clogged. Fortunately KO went away from this after the offensive disaster that we had in 2012 with Roscoe-Oriakhi-Drummond at the 3-4-5.

I don't see what's so controversial about this.
Expand ...

I think of a stretch four as someone who can step out and shoot the 3 (usually the corner 3). I don't know if Durham has that range, but I'm fairly certain he will be playing nothing other the 4 and 5 for us. I'd be shocked if we see him slotted at the 3.
 
While it would seem stupid to play him at the 3 for so many reasons these kids are all basketball players. There will be situations which will have people playing positions which may not be their everyday spot. Listen 3-4-5 is pretty much whoever is playing the front court right - I mean when the announced the starting 5 of our last NC they called our 3 "Forwards" no centers. Ultimately our team will play Rodney at the 3 sometimes, Terry at the 3, Vance at the 3 and who knows Jalen too could see the 3 with Vital and 'Rique? So to see Juwan, Amida and Diarra/Enoch on the court as rare as it would seem, situations change things. Maybe they are practicing to play big at times and maybe drop to some zone. Can Juwan guard others 3's? Probably not great but maybe well enough to utilize the mismatch he brings on the other end?

Thing is there is so far to go still, so much to see let's not rule anything out. Won't be often I'm sure but I wouldn't rule it completely out is al I ma saying.
 
husky429 said:
He's not playing the 3. He's more likely to spot up at the 5. I will bet you every like I have on this forum ;)Ollie is ALL ABOUT DEFENSE. He has no shot of guarding a college 3. Many kids talk about playing a position lower than they should because of the small ball prevalence.
Expand ...
What did he play at VCU? I thought he was a 3. Are you saying he came here as a PF? DHam was a 3 but could really rebound.
 
.-.
Tenspro2002 said:
In college, if you play a guy with that kind of size, but without skill, at the 3, you kill your offense. The defense keys on the two guys who can actually do something with the ball, and their driving lane is clogged.
Expand ...

I actually think it hurts your defense worse. A big tall 3 simply can't stay with his man in college game. Too fast, too quick, too good of handles. Those guys often become guards at the next level.
 
We're going to mix and match lineups that give the guards and Larrier the best chance to score. Who plays the 4 and the 5 will be determined strictly by defense and rebounding.
 
intlzncster said:
I actually think it hurts your defense worse. A big tall 3 simply can't stay with his man in college game. Too fast, too quick, too good of handles. Those guys often become guards at the next level.
Expand ...

When JC tried to shoehorn in these NBA-sized lineups from 2005-2012, this is the sort of size archetype he wanted to emulate:

PG: Chris Paul (6-2); Marcus Williams, AJP, Kemba
SG: Kobe Bryant (6-6); Denham Brown, Rashad Anderson, Dyson (somewhat shorter), Lamb
SF: LeBron James (6-9); Rudy Gay, Sticks, Roscoe
PF: Tim Duncan (6-11); Josh Boone, Jeff Adrien (much shorter), Oriakhi
C: Shaq (7-1); Hilton, Thabeet, Drummond

The problem is, those NBA SF's can shoot, handle, and have the lateral quickness to defend the perimeter. In college, similarly sized guys didn't necessarily have the requisite skill. We'd often outrebound teams, but offense sometimes suffered and we'd struggle to defend certain archetypes, like Joe Alexander, Otto Porter.

A typical college lineup, and closer to what KO actually runs, is basically shifted one position "smaller". Typically 2 PGs, a 6'4-6'6 wing, a 6'8 stretch 4 type that can shoot and handle, and a big man. Those have actually been our best lineups over the last 5 years.

For this year's team, that would look like:

PG: Gilbert (Vital)
CG: Adams (Vital)
Wing: Purvis (Vital; occasionally Larrier when we go big)
Stretch-4: Larrier (Durham, Jackson; occasionally Facey or Diarra when we go big)
Big: Brimah (Enoch)

Unless guys like Facey and Diarra can play the 5, they'll only be seeing minutes on those rare occasions when we go to paint-only 2 bigs at a time, which (I hope) will be rare.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
When JC tried to shoehorn in these NBA-sized lineups from 2005-2012, this is the sort of size archetype he wanted to emulate:

PG: Chris Paul (6-2); Marcus Williams, AJP, Kemba
SG: Kobe Bryant (6-6); Denham Brown, Rashad Anderson, Dyson (somewhat shorter), Lamb
SF: LeBron James (6-9); Rudy Gay, Sticks, Roscoe
PF: Tim Duncan (6-11); Josh Boone, Jeff Adrien (much shorter), Oriakhi
C: Shaq (7-1); Hilton, Thabeet, Drummond

The problem is, those NBA SF's can shoot, handle, and have the lateral quickness to defend the perimeter. In college, similarly sized guys didn't necessarily have the requisite skill. We'd often outrebound teams, but offense sometimes suffered and we'd struggle to defend certain archetypes, like Joe Alexander, Otto Porter.

A typical college lineup, and closer to what KO actually runs, is basically shifted one position "smaller". Typically 2 PGs, a 6'4-6'6 wing, a 6'8 stretch 4 type that can shoot and handle, and a big man. Those have actually been our best lineups over the last 5 years.

For this year's team, that would look like:

PG: Gilbert (Vital)
CG: Adams (Vital)
Wing: Purvis (Vital; occasionally Larrier when we go big)
Stretch-4: Larrier (Durham, Jackson; occasionally Facey or Diarra when we go big)
Big: Brimah (Enoch)

Unless guys like Facey and Diarra can play the 5, they'll only be seeing minutes on those rare occasions when we go to paint-only 2 bigs at a time, which (I hope) will be rare.
Expand ...

Well in fairness to JC, his teams during that time frame were pretty damn good, and in 2011, he actually dialed that methodology quite a bit and played Roscoe at the four for the majority of his minutes. And I'm inclined to give him a pass on 2012 - Oriakhi and Drummond were both so important to the team that you kind of had to experiment at least for a little. By the end of the season, he had abandoned the dual big lineup.

I don't know that the '06 and '09 teams are any better with downsized lineups. Size, length, and athleticism was the identity of the '09 team, and in '06, the lack of 1.) a secondary ball-handler, and 2) any sort of post defense against Mason were the two glaring problems, neither of which could be solved by small ball.

The one year that was really a disaster was 2010, when Stanley would regularly share the court with two of Gavin/Alex/Majok/Chuck. He was probably too stubborn that year and it cost us.
 
champs99and04 said:
Well in fairness to JC, his teams during that time frame were pretty damn good, and in 2011, he actually dialed that methodology quite a bit and played Roscoe at the four for the majority of his minutes. And I'm inclined to give him a pass on 2012 - Oriakhi and Drummond were both so important to the team that you kind of had to experiment at least for a little. By the end of the season, he had abandoned the dual big lineup.

I don't know that the '06 and '09 teams are any better with downsized lineups. Size, length, and athleticism was the identity of the '09 team, and in '06, the lack of 1.) a secondary ball-handler, and 2) any sort of post defense against Mason were the two glaring problems, neither of which could be solved by small ball.

The one year that was really a disaster was 2010, when Stanley would regularly share the court with two of Gavin/Alex/Majok/Chuck. He was probably too stubborn that year and it cost us.
Expand ...

Yes, that's true. He found a way to be successful with it, but it hinged largely on the NBA-sized 3-man actually possessing NBA-caliber skills. Rudy had that, but it got increasingly worse with Sticks and then with Roscoe. The caliber of those teams also diminished accordingly (or in 2009 was made up for by stellar play at every other position).

In 2006, the lack of another ballhandler was actually a symptom of this style of lineup, having an NBA-sized shooting guard (Denham or Rashad) that lacked NBA 2-guard handle. Of course, AJP being out for the year hurt, but it's not clear how much he would have played alongside MW rather than just back him up.

My point is: you can use, sometimes to great effect, a traditional NBA-sized lineup in college basketball as long as those players are sufficiently skilled. When they're not sufficiently skilled, it can get ugly on both sides of the ball.

It's an interesting debate though.
 
.-.
Tenspro2002 said:
When JC tried to shoehorn in these NBA-sized lineups from 2005-2012, this is the sort of size archetype he wanted to emulate:

PG: Chris Paul (6-2); Marcus Williams, AJP, Kemba
SG: Kobe Bryant (6-6); Denham Brown, Rashad Anderson, Dyson (somewhat shorter), Lamb
SF: LeBron James (6-9); Rudy Gay, Sticks, Roscoe
PF: Tim Duncan (6-11); Josh Boone, Jeff Adrien (much shorter), Oriakhi
C: Shaq (7-1); Hilton, Thabeet, Drummond

The problem is, those NBA SF's can shoot, handle, and have the lateral quickness to defend the perimeter. In college, similarly sized guys didn't necessarily have the requisite skill. We'd often outrebound teams, but offense sometimes suffered and we'd struggle to defend certain archetypes, like Joe Alexander, Otto Porter.

A typical college lineup, and closer to what KO actually runs, is basically shifted one position "smaller". Typically 2 PGs, a 6'4-6'6 wing, a 6'8 stretch 4 type that can shoot and handle, and a big man. Those have actually been our best lineups over the last 5 years.

For this year's team, that would look like:

PG: Gilbert (Vital)
CG: Adams (Vital)
Wing: Purvis (Vital; occasionally Larrier when we go big)
Stretch-4: Larrier (Durham, Jackson; occasionally Facey or Diarra when we go big)
Big: Brimah (Enoch)

Unless guys like Facey and Diarra can play the 5, they'll only be seeing minutes on those rare occasions when we go to paint-only 2 bigs at a time, which (I hope) will be rare.
Expand ...
Several corrections here...Denham and Rashad almost exclusively played small forward. Sticks, Roscoe and Hilton almost exclusively played power forward, and oriakhi almost exclusively played center. I'm going to guess based on your post that you never actually saw those teams play.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
When JC tried to shoehorn in these NBA-sized lineups from 2005-2012, this is the sort of size archetype he wanted to emulate:

PG: Chris Paul (6-2); Marcus Williams, AJP, Kemba
SG: Kobe Bryant (6-6); Denham Brown, Rashad Anderson, Dyson (somewhat shorter), Lamb
SF: LeBron James (6-9); Rudy Gay, Sticks, Roscoe
PF: Tim Duncan (6-11); Josh Boone, Jeff Adrien (much shorter), Oriakhi
C: Shaq (7-1); Hilton, Thabeet, Drummond

The problem is, those NBA SF's can shoot, handle, and have the lateral quickness to defend the perimeter. In college, similarly sized guys didn't necessarily have the requisite skill. We'd often outrebound teams, but offense sometimes suffered and we'd struggle to defend certain archetypes, like Joe Alexander, Otto Porter.

A typical college lineup, and closer to what KO actually runs, is basically shifted one position "smaller". Typically 2 PGs, a 6'4-6'6 wing, a 6'8 stretch 4 type that can shoot and handle, and a big man. Those have actually been our best lineups over the last 5 years.

For this year's team, that would look like:

PG: Gilbert (Vital)
CG: Adams (Vital)
Wing: Purvis (Vital; occasionally Larrier when we go big)
Stretch-4: Larrier (Durham, Jackson; occasionally Facey or Diarra when we go big)
Big: Brimah (Enoch)

Unless guys like Facey and Diarra can play the 5, they'll only be seeing minutes on those rare occasions when we go to paint-only 2 bigs at a time, which (I hope) will be rare.
Expand ...
Overall I think this is really a good analysis and makes a lot of sense. Two other factors I can think of. Sometimes a player who is really stepping up will force the lineup to change structure (norm) to accommodate their ability to dominate or otherwise make the team as a whole work out better. Not only playing well but helping others play better. The other factor which you more or less covered with options is the defense factor. Sometimes someone not only can turn an offense to turn around with contributions but also the same can happen on defense. Summary: If someone is really performing they are going to get minutes because they make the team better by all their contributions. Substance over form.
 
Thirty Three said:
Several corrections here...Denham and Rashad almost exclusively played small forward. Sticks, Roscoe and Hilton almost exclusively played power forward, and oriakhi almost exclusively played center. I'm going to guess based on your post that you never actually saw those teams play.
Expand ...

Sticks was our 3, wasn't he? Him, Adrien, and Thabeet were all starters in 2009 and played significant minutes together.
 
Rico444 said:
Sticks was our 3, wasn't he? Him, Adrien, and Thabeet were all starters in 2009 and played significant minutes together.
Expand ...

Sticks was an underrated defender, could guard multiple positions. Problem was he liked to slack a little looking to block some shots too. But he was a really good player for us.
 
Thirty Three said:
Several corrections here...Denham and Rashad almost exclusively played small forward. Sticks, Roscoe and Hilton almost exclusively played power forward, and oriakhi almost exclusively played center. I'm going to guess based on your post that you never actually saw those teams play.
Expand ...

On the 06 team, the only guard besides MW, DB and RA was Austrie, right. In that case, Denham or Shad must have played a lot of 2. And Oriakhi spent most of 12 at the 4. And besides 09, didn't Stanley play predominantly SF? I don't think anyone would argue about Hilton. You are correct on Scoe, though.
 
Rooting hard for Mamadou Diarra to have an impact for us early on in the paint area on both ends... Hoping he's this teams version of Toraino Walker.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,157
Messages
4,555,066
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom