Quite frankly, you are correct.They're both listed at 6'8" but I think Vance has at least 2 inches on Mamadou.
Confirmed
Bunky's faultAnother Chiefism catching on.
Not sure how to feel about this:
![]()
Yeah facey looks like a completely new kidHard to tell from the pictures because they are action shots but Facey and Larrier look stronger.
Half the roster is over 6'8". Is this the year we get rebounds?
I would guess we'll see 3 of those 6'8+ guys starting every game with Larrier, Facey, and Brimah at the 3,4,5. And with Jackson and Durham's versatility I think there's some other lineups with those guys in where we could go with a big lineup.The problem is, if you play more than 1 or 2 of those 6'8 guys at once, the offense grinds to a halt.
We need the 1-2 bigs who are actually out there to have transformed into tough and instinctual rebounders.
Durham, Diarra, Jackson, and Larrier have never even played in a game for us.The problem is, if you play more than 1 or 2 of those 6'8 guys at once, the offense grinds to a halt.
Just thinking out loud here but I'd like to see them go really big similar to Kentucky a few years ago and play Durham at the 3 with Facey and Brimah, similar to how Kentucky played Lyles, Towns and Dakari Johnson together sometimes (at least I think they did). Might not work but worth giving a look early in the season and maybe create some mismatches
I talked to him and he said he could play the 3.Durham is like 6'10. If he plays the three for one second I will be shocked. Far more likely they go the other way with Larrier at the four and Durham/Brimah/Facey at the five.
I talked to him and he said he could play the 3.
I could be wrong here but I think after he committed here the consensus was that he would be playing the 3, at least some of the time, in college. Maybe it's not best for the team once it happens, but that seemed to be the plan for himI'm sure he "could" play the three in the same way Brimah can play the four and Purvis can run the point. But I don't think it's best for the team, though if he's the next Durant I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
I see whatcha mean, but the way he explained it to me is that he's just a tall 3, but prefers being a stretch 4. I agree with you that it's probably best if he doesn't play be 3.I'm sure he "could" play the three in the same way Brimah can play the four and Purvis can run the point. But I don't think it's best for the team, though if he's the next Durant I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
Yeah exactly, I don't want him playing the 3 a lot. I was just trying to come up with some crazy lineup to throw out for 2 minutes one game and see what happensI see whatcha mean, but the way he explained it to me is that he's just a tall 3, but prefers being a stretch 4. I agree with you that it's probably best if he doesn't play be 3.
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.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.I could be wrong here but I think after he committed here the consensus was that he would be playing the 3, at least some of the time, in college. Maybe it's not best for the team once it happens, but that seemed to be the plan for him
He's also not a 5. Told me specifically when I asked if he was a 5He'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 forumOllie 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.
I could be wrong here but I think after he committed here the consensus was that he would be playing the 3, at least some of the time, in college. Maybe it's not best for the team once it happens, but that seemed to be the plan for him
He's also not a 5. Told me specifically when I asked if he was a 5