We need to play an actual front court

[navery12]

But they played forwards who could shoot. Calhoun was woefully behind the times when he tried to shoehorn Drummond and Oriakhi into the same lineup. That kind of early-90's basketball is dead. And I say that as someone who grew up watching the Ewing/Oakley/Mason Knicks.

You need 1 rebounder/rim-protector. Let's say you have 3 guards/wings on the floor.

The question basically boils down to: who do you want at the 4? What kind of player gives you the most marginal impact?

A) Another true big who isn't a threat from beyond the foul line
B) Another bigger wing type who can shoot and handle it a little

Ideally, you'd get a Draymond Green type who can defend true bigs, while being a threat from all over the floor. But if you have to choose, A doesn't give you very much -- there's only one rim to protect and one rebound to grab. That kind of guy at the 4 helps the opposing defense much more than your own defense. B is much more of a threat, while not giving up much on defense.

I think Martin fits the 4 you described pretty well. Obviously not Draymond Green level but I think he can defend 4's and brings a lot on offense that will help stretch the floor

 

[nelsonmuntz]

But they played forwards who could shoot. Calhoun was woefully behind the times when he tried to shoehorn Drummond and Oriakhi into the same lineup. That kind of early-90's basketball is dead. And I say that as someone who grew up watching the Ewing/Oakley/Mason Knicks.

You need 1 rebounder/rim-protector. Let's say you have 3 guards/wings on the floor.

The question basically boils down to: who do you want at the 4? What kind of player gives you the most marginal impact?

A) Another true big who isn't a threat from beyond the foul line
B) Another bigger wing type who can shoot and handle it a little

Ideally, you'd get a Draymond Green type who can defend true bigs, while being a threat from all over the floor. But if you have to choose, A doesn't give you very much -- there's only one rim to protect and one rebound to grab. That kind of guy at the 4 helps the opposing defense much more than your own defense. B is much more of a threat, while not giving up much on defense.

The problem with Ewing's Knicks was not the frontcourt. That team had 3 guards who couldn't shoot. A team isn't going to win a championship with that problem in any decade.

I get that better players should play more than worse players. Very insightful. My point is that a single trait, 3 point shooting percentage, has been prioritized among all others. A fourth 3 point shooter probably reduces a team's overall percentage while costing the team rebounding and defense.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I like having 4 shooters out there. As long as you rebound why go bigger, slower and less skilled?

basketball is an efficiency and 3 pt shooting games these days.

I am watching a mid-major pass the century mark of scoring against one of the bluest of blue blood programs. This mid-major is starting a front court of 6'10, 6'8 and 6'7. Do you mind if I copy and paste your posts into an email and send them to Mark Few to let him know that his offense must suck because he isn't playing 4 guards?

 

[Deuce]

I am watching a mid-major pass the century mark of scoring against one of the bluest of blue blood programs. This mid-major is starting a front court of 6'10, 6'8 and 6'7. Do you mind if I copy and paste your posts into an email and send them to Mark Few to let him know that his offense must suck because he isn't playing 4 guards?

I stopped reading after labeling the #1 team in the country a ‘mid-major’

 

[HuskyHawk]

Basketball isn’t static. We all know that 4 out one in, 3 point or layup is what the analytics have said is the way to play for several years. But we’ve seen the Lakers showtime, the Bulls triangle, Isolation, all sorts of trends.

What we just saw in the NBA was that the team with the best center won. Yes they also had the best player. But Miami won vs Boston because Boston had no answer for Bam inside. Then I watched the NBA draft and saw lots of big men going early. The reality is that any small ball team is very vulnerable to a team with skilled bigs who can score and protect the rim. It turns that layup or 3 offense into a 3 pointer or bust offense.

I have a hunch we are about to see the return of the center in basketball. I honestly think Dan knows this. Maybe you guys think it’s a coincidence that this year’s class has 2 centers and our #1 priority next year is another 7’ center. And the 2021 class has a 6’10 PF.

 

[JohnFSilver]

I am watching a mid-major pass the century mark of scoring against one of the bluest of blue blood programs. This mid-major is starting a front court of 6'10, 6'8 and 6'7. Do you mind if I copy and paste your posts into an email and send them to Mark Few to let him know that his offense must suck because he isn't playing 4 guards?

Sure. email away.

It isn’t 4 guards, it is 4 perimeter players that I like. I like versatile players.

He plays the exact style I would want. His 6-8 and 6-7 guys have perimeter skills. I would mention that Few and I have the same number of national titles, but that’s not fair. He’s a really good coach.

 

[JohnFSilver]

Shot charting does not tell the whole story about good and bad shots.

More on offensive rebounding.

The Evolving Tradeoff Between Offensive Rebounding and Transition Defense - Nate Duncan NBA

Over the last few seasons, NBA teams have shifted the personnel manning the power forward and center positions. At this point, few teams employ two traditional bigs who do not shoot three-pointers. Many teams don’t even play one in many of their lineups. Guys like PJ Tucker, Kevin Love, and...

nateduncannba.com

I will give this a read later after the food coma. I am open to changing my view.

 

[the Q]

Someone tell Villanova.

Nova’s starting 4 their last 2 titles were paschall and Jenkins.

Those dudes were tanks. Shorter yet stocky 4s who could shoot it a bit.

Not guards

 

[Huskyforlife]

Just for the cherry on top, Nova starts Caleb Daniels at SF, who's 6'4. Samuel's and JRE, who're 6'7 and 6'9. I think I'd have the right to insult Nelson at this point.

 

[superjohn]

Nova’s starting 4 their last 2 titles were paschall and Jenkins.

Those dudes were tanks. Shorter yet stocky 4s who could shoot it a bit.

Not guards

Kris Jenkins was a 6'5 stocky shooter who averaged 3 rebounds per game.
The biggest rotation player for Nova the past 3 years is 6-8/6'9.

 

[MuchoDogYears]

Having read all posts, I summarily declare that nelsonmuntz and huskyhawk are unequivocably the truthsayers. Furthermore, they are forecasting the future look of BB, not the past or present as others here are doing.

 

[BlueDogs]

A lot of "analytics" coaches are phys ed majors that don't understand statistics, or specifically the difference between dependent and independent variables. Watch how Nova plays a 4 out vs. a lot of other teams. They get a lot of touches on post ups and cuts. They don't just swing it around the perimeter hoping someone will be open. The more easy layups Villanova gets, the more open their 3 point shooters are. That is playing analytics basketball.

Also, the more players there are on the perimeter, the easier it is to play help defense and stop penetration. Truly "spacing the court" means players set up or cutting to the paint.

I’ll agree Hurley’s offensive schemes have lacked good player movement and floor spacing. It’s very much token ball movement around the perimeter which breakdowns into guard iso(s) with people standing around the 3 in the back-half of the clock. I’d like to see more purposeful offense attacks earlier in the possession with more midrange looks, back door and baseline screening and kickouts with players in position to crash the boards.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I’ll agree Hurley’s offensive schemes have lacked good player movement and floor spacing. It’s very much token ball movement around the perimeter which breakdowns into guard iso(s) with people standing around the 3 in the back-half of the clock. I’d like to see more purposeful offense attacks earlier in the possession with more midrange looks, back door and baseline screening and kickouts with players in position to crash the boards.

I don't hate Hurley's offense, but there are inconsistencies. If he is going to lean that heavily on dribble penetration, I would like to see more crashing the boards. When Whaley or Carlton are crashing, UConn is a tough team to stop. Sanogo will probably be better on the boards than either of them pretty soon. UConn has two 6'11 players that don't even get on the court.

If UConn had Gordon, Anderson, Hamilton and Napier on the perimeter, I would say don't bother with offensive rebounding, UConn won't need it. UConn doesn't have that kind of shooting. UConn is an OK 3 point shooting team. Hurley likes dribble penetration, which means we need someone at the weakside block for the dump or the rebound. A short shot has about a 36% chance of an offensive board. That drops to the low 20's on a 3 pointer. Bouk, and it looks like Cole, will leave short rebounds when they do miss, which are easy putbacks.

Better yet, it is going to be Whaley's man that switches over for help, so he is going to be open on the weakside block a lot, just like he was yesterday. I do agree 100% that our 4 out has a lot of standing around at the 3 point line, or guard/guard screens on the perimeter, which aren't typically effective for any team.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

One other things about Nova. When a team shoots as well as Nova, the middle is WIDE OPEN for cuts and flashes. The inside game helps the outside game, and the outside game helps the inside game.

 

[BlueDogs]

One other things about Nova. When a team shoots as well as Nova, the middle is WIDE OPEN for cuts and flashes. The inside game helps the outside game, and the outside game helps the inside game.

In fairness we have had little to work with. Pushing the ball into Josh has been ineffective when it has been tried. We also haven’t had a true lights out 3 baller to pull defenders out. But, that all speaks to more rotational movement of players. Way too much standing and shuffling around the 3. It’s hard to crash the boards 30 feet out of position.

 

[auror]

2) UConn was playing a bad Central CT team. They should not be dictating anything UConn does.

Let's be clear: CCSU did not dictate our lineup.

We took advantage of the ability to have a size advantage while also having our most dynamic players on the court. Hurley optimized.

When you're rebounding over a 6'4" guy, a 6'6" guy at the 4 who also happens to be more athletic and has a longer wingspan will not have trouble. Putting in a 6'11 guy who can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass, and can't defend the opponents at the point of attack or in space just so he will crash the boards and be a mediocre secondary rim protector when you're not forced to would be dumb. We got 19 offensive rebounds on 30 missed shots as is. The skill trade-off would not be worth it. We got to have our cake and eat it too.

Other games we won't be so fortunate. We'll have to play our less skilled and less dynamic bigs more minutes. Akok's return will help since he is both of those things. Villanova and Gonzaga are optimized with 3 forwards because they're all skilled. They're all triple threats to go along with their tree trunk legs and length. We don't have that luxury. We get closest to that personnel with 3 of Jackson/Polley/Martin/Whaley than by pairing any of our other bigs with Whaley at the 4.

 

[Ewekon]

I think we will eventually see Whaley/Sanago at the 5, Polley/Akok at the 4, Martin/Jackson at the 3 Bouknight/Adams at the 2 and Cole/Gafney at the 1. I think those lineups are plenty big and quick enough to compete.

Healthy AA will be literally a game changer

Just wait and then watch. His work ethic is outrageous.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Let's be clear: CCSU did not dictate our lineup.

We took advantage of the ability to have a size advantage while also having our most dynamic players on the court. Hurley optimized.

When you're rebounding over a 6'4" guy, a 6'6" guy at the 4 who also happens to be more athletic and has a longer wingspan will not have trouble. Putting in a 6'11 guy who can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass, and can't defend the opponents at the point of attack or in space just so he will crash the boards and be a mediocre secondary rim protector when you're not forced to would be dumb. We got 19 offensive rebounds on 30 missed shots as is. The skill trade-off would not be worth it. We got to have our cake and eat it too.

Other games we won't be so fortunate. We'll have to play our less skilled and less dynamic bigs more minutes. Akok's return will help since he is both of those things. Villanova and Gonzaga are optimized with 3 forwards because they're all skilled. They're all triple threats to go along with their tree trunk legs and length. We don't have that luxury. We get closest to that personnel with 3 of Jackson/Polley/Martin/Whaley than by pairing any of our other bigs with Whaley at the 4.

If smaller is better, how come there are any bigs in college basketball? Are all these other coaches idiots? Why is Hurley playing a center at all?

I think a lot of the hate of the bigs by posters on this board is the result of ignorance about what actually makes winning basketball.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think we will eventually see Whaley/Sanago at the 5, Polley/Akok at the 4, Martin/Jackson at the 3 Bouknight/Adams at the 2 and Cole/Gafney at the 1. I think those lineups are plenty big and quick enough to compete.

That is a decent sized lineup. I could live with that. I don't want 4 players parked on the perimeter though. It makes it harder to shoot 3's.

 

[metsfan2323]

Nova’s starting 4 their last 2 titles were paschall and Jenkins.

Those dudes were tanks. Shorter yet stocky 4s who could shoot it a bit.

Not guards

Jackson isn't a guard, He's a prototype forward with an NBA body. Even at the next level he will probably be a 3.

Bouknight can pass as a 3 at the college level. Think RIP Hamilton. JB is also a much better rebounder than RIP.

BTW Any UCONN fan worth their salt should walk the world preaching the 3 guard lineup. Traditional front court? Blasphemer!

 

[auror]

If smaller is better, how come there are any bigs in college basketball? Are all these other coaches idiots? Why is Hurley playing a center at all?

I think a lot of the hate of the bigs by posters on this board is the result of ignorance about what actually makes winning basketball.

I didn't say smaller is better. I said our smaller and medium guys are better than our big guys. Carlton isn't very good and Sanogo just played his first career game with little practice. Whaley is pretty good. The other 2 bigs are currently even worse.

 

[TheChamps990411]

I think a small ball of Ajax/TMart/Akok/Bouk/Cole would be extremely tough to deal with and could see Dan Hurley going with this combo with the 5 being interchangeable Whaley/Sanogo/Akok. Only issue would be shooting although Bouk/Cole and to some extent Tmart can hit from the outside.

 

[the Q]

Jackson isn't a guard, He's a prototype forward with an NBA body. Even at the next level he will probably be a 3.

Bouknight can pass as a 3 at the college level. Think RIP Hamilton. JB is also a much better rebounder than RIP.

BTW Any UCONN fan worth their salt should walk the world preaching the 3 guard lineup. Traditional front court? Blasphemer!

i think our best lineup will probably be gaff/Cole/bouk/polley/Whaley

but Martin and Jackson coming in to spell the first 4 names means we have a lot of flexibility and versatility in the lineup and matchups

 

[nelsonmuntz]

i think our best lineup will probably be gaff/Cole/bouk/polley/Whaley

but Martin and Jackson coming in to spell the first 4 names means we have a lot of flexibility and versatility in the lineup and matchups

A lineup with 6'1, 6'2, and 6'4 players is going to have trouble trying to defend anyone for more than a few minutes in a row. Does defense matter anymore?

 

[HuskyHawk]

i think our best lineup will probably be gaff/Cole/bouk/polley/Whaley

but Martin and Jackson coming in to spell the first 4 names means we have a lot of flexibility and versatility in the lineup and matchups

I think we are clearly worse with Gaff and Cole playing together, unless one is in for Bouk (which shouldn’t be needed since Adams seems to have learned to shoot). I can see that late in games holding a lead. Otherwise no.

If a contact shy 3 point shooter who is a poor rebounder is our 4, we need a physical presence at the 3. Martin or Jackson. Martin is probably a better 4 than Polley. Polley was more effective last year when he was moved to the 3. Ultimately I don’t think Polley is one of our 5 best players and should provide shooting off the bench. But we need to see Martin in action.