|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 13, 2018 9:04:42 GMT -6
Honestly I’d be happy with a strong 6’7 kid who won’t get pushed around. There are 6’5 kids who bully us. That shouldn’t happen. They don't have to be great post up players, but we need rebounders, defenders who can hold position in the post, and guys who have some toughness to wrestle for position and grab the ball and hold on.
Whit likes a rim protector to go with the pack line idea, and help oriented defense. That is fine, and at his best Trey can be adequate there, but the cost of help defense (and of a zone) is that offensive players can get to the board. So you have to recover well, have to be aggressive when out of position. We lack that.
Trey is not blessed with very quick feet. He ends up out of position too often, can't recover. Teague who could be a decent shot blocker, and complements Trey well when both play hard, is still not able to fight for position and just gets beat to the block too often, and the aggressive offensive players draw fouls on him. If we need to play Teague inside he just isn't as good behind the post and isn't that strong bulky guy cardfan and I want. He'd pair well with a guy playing behind the post and we occasionally do see that when Trey is playing well.
Huggins actually has more promise as a defensive stopper, rim protector, more athletic, a little longer, but needs experience to improve his recognition. He's more aggressive but over reacts and gets too far from the basket some times. cardfan should not write him off. But I am right with Herman that we need a bulky guy who can block out, go hard to get back when he helps out, for lack of better words, tough and a bulldog underneath.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 13, 2018 9:08:14 GMT -6
You can give credit for selecting kids with good chances. But, these kids had some risk or they'd have had more offers. I don't think excuses have much to do with it. They hit when they took risks.
Buffalo has churned their roster a bit, used JUCO recruits, and hit on several there. With athletic HS players they probably not only did a decent job of player development but in a few cases won a bet on a risky kid who was not a sure thing but came through.
20-20 hindsight is great. They look like genius recruiters, but no coach will deny you just have to hit the lotto a few times on kids with potential that come through.
Yeah because Whitford isn't more than willing to reach in the knucklehead pile to sign guys. Good Lord, we hired a guy who worked for Sean "Thug Ball" Miller and you want to throw stones at Buffalo. I kind of agree with the first sentence, see nothing in the second. Whitford is clean, that's just a cheap shot and guilt by association.
Buffalo has taken chances on players not only in academics and character, but more on their chance to develop and cash in on athleticism. They have made good decisions and won the bets recently, no doubt.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 13, 2018 9:12:07 GMT -6
Yeah because Whitford isn't more than willing to reach in the knucklehead pile to sign guys. Good Lord, we hired a guy who worked for Sean "Thug Ball" Miller and you want to throw stones at Buffalo. , that's just a cheap shot and guilt by association.
Hey moron, who do you think recruited those goons Xavier was bringing in ?
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Dec 13, 2018 9:14:24 GMT -6
Honestly I’d be happy with a strong 6’7 kid who won’t get pushed around. There are 6’5 kids who bully us. That shouldn’t happen. They don't have to be great post up players, but we need rebounders, defenders who can hold position in the post, and guys who have some toughness to wrestle for position and grab the ball and hold on.
Whit likes a rim protector to go with the pack line idea, and help oriented defense. That is fine, and at his best Trey can be adequate there, but the cost of help defense (and of a zone) is that offensive players can get to the board. So you have to recover well, have to be aggressive when out of position. We lack that.
Trey is not blessed with very quick feet. He ends up out of position too often, can't recover. Teague who could be a decent shot blocker, and complements Trey well when both play hard, is still not able to fight for position and just gets beat to the block too often, and the aggressive offensive players draw fouls on him. If we need to play Teague inside he just isn't as good behind the post and isn't that strong bulky guy cardfan and I want. He'd pair well with a guy playing behind the post and we occasionally do see that when Trey is playing well.
Huggins actually has more promise as a defensive stopper, rim protector, more athletic, a little longer, but needs experience to improve his recognition. He's more aggressive but over reacts and gets too far from the basket some times. cardfan should not write him off. But I am right with Herman that we need a bulky guy who can block out, go hard to get back when he helps out, for lack of better words, tough and a bulldog underneath.
Yep. That’s what I’m thinking. Doesn’t have to be a classic post up center, but rather a guy with bulk and toughness who can move his feet. Have a little mean steak. And can hit a damn bunny.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 13, 2018 9:26:21 GMT -6
That's why I thought BSU's offer to Dawand Jones was interesting. Unfortunately he will be playing football somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Dec 13, 2018 9:48:10 GMT -6
Dawand was very close to playing for us but then football took off.
|
|
|
Post by redbirdman on Dec 13, 2018 9:57:55 GMT -6
Jones is the type of player that if he doesn't see the FB field in the next 2 yrs you might find him transferring somewhere to play basketball. I still think he has a more likely chance of making money as a pro basketball player than in FB. (Note not NBA somewhere in the world in Bball)
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Dec 13, 2018 16:20:02 GMT -6
You can give credit for selecting kids with good chances. But, these kids had some risk or they'd have had more offers. I don't think excuses have much to do with it. They hit when they took risks.
Buffalo has churned their roster a bit, used JUCO recruits, and hit on several there. With athletic HS players they probably not only did a decent job of player development but in a few cases won a bet on a risky kid who was not a sure thing but came through.
20-20 hindsight is great. They look like genius recruiters, but no coach will deny you just have to hit the lotto a few times on kids with potential that come through.
And when Whit has taken risks he's mostly missed. Took a risk on Tyler. Tyler chose weed. Took a risk on Walker. Walker chose stupidity. Took a risk on Teague. Teague has been fine, but seems to lack the focus and/or coaching to reach his potential at this point. Took a chance on Acree. We'll see how that turns out. Unfortunately, what Whitford mostly takes chances and misses on are not kids with academic or character issues. I don't think the academic and character issue kids scare Whit as he's taken a shot at several. He just can't successfully recruit them.
|
|
lfbj00
Cardinal Recruit
Posts: 32
|
Post by lfbj00 on Dec 13, 2018 18:01:44 GMT -6
Honestly I’d be happy with a strong 6’7 kid who won’t get pushed around. There are 6’5 kids who bully us. That shouldn’t happen. They don't have to be great post up players, but we need rebounders, defenders who can hold position in the post, and guys who have some toughness to wrestle for position and grab the ball and hold on.
Whit likes a rim protector to go with the pack line idea, and help oriented defense. That is fine, and at his best Trey can be adequate there, but the cost of help defense (and of a zone) is that offensive players can get to the board. So you have to recover well, have to be aggressive when out of position. We lack that.
Trey is not blessed with very quick feet. He ends up out of position too often, can't recover. Teague who could be a decent shot blocker, and complements Trey well when both play hard, is still not able to fight for position and just gets beat to the block too often, and the aggressive offensive players draw fouls on him. If we need to play Teague inside he just isn't as good behind the post and isn't that strong bulky guy cardfan and I want. He'd pair well with a guy playing behind the post and we occasionally do see that when Trey is playing well.
Huggins actually has more promise as a defensive stopper, rim protector, more athletic, a little longer, but needs experience to improve his recognition. He's more aggressive but over reacts and gets too far from the basket some times. cardfan should not write him off. But I am right with Herman that we need a bulky guy who can block out, go hard to get back when he helps out, for lack of better words, tough and a bulldog underneath.
Let me preface this very long post with this statement...there is nobody on this board that is more critical of Trey than me. I’ve always laid it straight to him and his Dad when it comes to his play. That being said... Trey Moses up-to-date stats for 2018/19 season: 7.9 ppg 6.4 reb 1.7 asts .7 stls 2.2 blks If he plays in all games, he has at least 21 more games left in his career. If he only maintains his CURRENT avgs, which are the lowest since his Freshman year, then his season totals, coupled with his career totals he has up to this moment, he would have: 1166 pts (for 24th Place All-Time) 882 rebs (for 5th Place All-Time) 167 blks (for 2nd Place All-Time) 254 asts (for 2nd most All-Time of non-guards) 63 stls With just a little bit of a boost in rebounds he could jump into the Top 4, as they would only be separated by 3. He cannot go any higher than 2nd on block shots list, but he only needs 10 for 2nd place right now. He would be only the 7th player in Ball State history with at least 1000 points and 800 rebounds. He would be only the 3rd player in Ball State history with at least 1000 points, 800 rebounds, and 100 blocks. He would be the ONLY player in Ball State history with 1000 points, 800 rebounds, 100 blocks, and 250 assists. He will have played 131 career games, the most in Ball State history. Call him soft, unathletic, or whatever, but that is one hellacious career for a unranked/2star Center coming out of HS, who weighed close to 300 lbs, and played in the exact same high motion pick offense in HS. He’s never been the focal point of an offense, but he does have sufficient skills to play at a higher level.
|
|
|
Post by CallingBS on Dec 13, 2018 19:56:52 GMT -6
Recruiters recruit and good coaches (especially mid major) develop players. We do neither.
|
|
|
Post by thebsukid on Dec 13, 2018 21:12:25 GMT -6
New 247 suggests we have best MAC 2019 recruiting class! Recruiters recruit
|
|
|
Post by david75bsu on Dec 14, 2018 7:35:54 GMT -6
They don't have to be great post up players, but we need rebounders, defenders who can hold position in the post, and guys who have some toughness to wrestle for position and grab the ball and hold on.
Whit likes a rim protector to go with the pack line idea, and help oriented defense. That is fine, and at his best Trey can be adequate there, but the cost of help defense (and of a zone) is that offensive players can get to the board. So you have to recover well, have to be aggressive when out of position. We lack that.
Trey is not blessed with very quick feet. He ends up out of position too often, can't recover. Teague who could be a decent shot blocker, and complements Trey well when both play hard, is still not able to fight for position and just gets beat to the block too often, and the aggressive offensive players draw fouls on him. If we need to play Teague inside he just isn't as good behind the post and isn't that strong bulky guy cardfan and I want. He'd pair well with a guy playing behind the post and we occasionally do see that when Trey is playing well.
Huggins actually has more promise as a defensive stopper, rim protector, more athletic, a little longer, but needs experience to improve his recognition. He's more aggressive but over reacts and gets too far from the basket some times. cardfan should not write him off. But I am right with Herman that we need a bulky guy who can block out, go hard to get back when he helps out, for lack of better words, tough and a bulldog underneath.
Let me preface this very long post with this statement...there is nobody on this board that is more critical of Trey than me. I’ve always laid it straight to him and his Dad when it comes to his play. That being said... Trey Moses up-to-date stats for 2018/19 season: 7.9 ppg 6.4 reb 1.7 asts .7 stls 2.2 blks If he plays in all games, he has at least 21 more games left in his career. If he only maintains his CURRENT avgs, which are the lowest since his Freshman year, then his season totals, coupled with his career totals he has up to this moment, he would have: 1166 pts (for 24th Place All-Time) 882 rebs (for 5th Place All-Time) 167 blks (for 2nd Place All-Time) 254 asts (for 2nd most All-Time of non-guards) 63 stls With just a little bit of a boost in rebounds he could jump into the Top 4, as they would only be separated by 3. He cannot go any higher than 2nd on block shots list, but he only needs 10 for 2nd place right now. He would be only the 7th player in Ball State history with at least 1000 points and 800 rebounds. He would be only the 3rd player in Ball State history with at least 1000 points, 800 rebounds, and 100 blocks. He would be the ONLY player in Ball State history with 1000 points, 800 rebounds, 100 blocks, and 250 assists. He will have played 131 career games, the most in Ball State history. Call him soft, unathletic, or whatever, but that is one hellacious career for a unranked/2star Center coming out of HS, who weighed close to 300 lbs, and played in the exact same high motion pick offense in HS. He’s never been the focal point of an offense, but he does have sufficient skills to play at a higher level. Good summary of his contributions to Ball State basketball. When it’s all done, I am glad this quality person has dressed in Cardinal & White.
|
|
|
Post by basketbull on Dec 14, 2018 8:35:58 GMT -6
Yeah because Whitford isn't more than willing to reach in the knucklehead pile to sign guys. Good Lord, we hired a guy who worked for Sean "Thug Ball" Miller and you want to throw stones at Buffalo. I kind of agree with the first sentence, see nothing in the second. Whitford is clean, that's just a cheap shot and guilt by association.
Buffalo has taken chances on players not only in academics and character, but more on their chance to develop and cash in on athleticism. They have made good decisions and won the bets recently, no doubt. Not really fair to take offense to the statement when applied to your own team and then turn around and say the same thing about another team with little to support it. UB's last player with character concerns was Justin Moss, and he was given no leniency even after being named MAC player of the year. Since Oats has been the head coach, there has really been no issue to speak of. It's easy to just extrapolate that the reason they have good players in the MAC is character concerns but there's really no evidence behind it. They aren't overlooked by other schools, they're just legitimately winning recruiting battles because they have developed a winning tradition, they play an up tempo style that appeals to high school players, and a high percentage of alumni go on to play professionally overseas. They've been going up against high major schools for recruits and even when they don't land the big fish they've been doing a good job filling out the roster with athletic JUCOs who may not fit into a traditional position that other teams are looking for.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 14, 2018 9:07:07 GMT -6
Recruiters recruit and good coaches (especially mid major) develop players. We do neither. That is not true.
The complaints here are that recruiting big men has not been good, not a blanket criticism of recruiting. We have a good team, near the top of our conference, that means we have good players. Maybe not enough to push us over the top or beat an unusually good MAC team in Buffalo this year. So whether it is as good as you want or not, either the recruiting was pretty good or the development was good, we have too many good players otherwise.
We have used transfers well, and I count that as recruiting.
As far as player development goes, naysayers have said among other things that Mallers would never be a good player, poor talent, etc. He must have developed pretty well... Teague used a redshirt year well. Hollywood was coming along well. Red shirt players have contributed using their year well. That counts as development in all cases, two starters. Our juniors seem to be doing pretty much what you would want juniors to do, our seniors are good players. In previous years we have seen player improvement from other players, notably Bo Calhoun. This all seems to me to be player development however you count it. Not no player development as you claim.
It is a bit early to declare player development a failure for freshmen who redshirt, or sophomore players who are not starters. Most of us find Ish has disappointed, but he has contributed, Gunn has worked on his physical development and has contributed, plays behind 3 good forwards. Huggins is reportedly on track to contribute next year.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 14, 2018 9:20:41 GMT -6
I kind of agree with the first sentence, see nothing in the second. Whitford is clean, that's just a cheap shot and guilt by association.
Buffalo has taken chances on players not only in academics and character, but more on their chance to develop and cash in on athleticism. They have made good decisions and won the bets recently, no doubt. Not really fair to take offense to the statement when applied to your own team and then turn around and say the same thing about another team with little to support it. UB's last player with character concerns was Justin Moss, and he was given no leniency even after being named MAC player of the year. Since Oats has been the head coach, there has really been no issue to speak of. It's easy to just extrapolate that the reason they have good players in the MAC is character concerns but there's really no evidence behind it. They aren't overlooked by other schools, they're just legitimately winning recruiting battles because they have developed a winning tradition, they play an up tempo style that appeals to high school players, and a high percentage of alumni go on to play professionally overseas. They've been going up against high major schools for recruits and even when they don't land the big fish they've been doing a good job filling out the roster with athletic JUCOs who may not fit into a traditional position that other teams are looking for. I don't disagree. If you read my post above it is pretty much what I said. Some academic risk, some character risk, and they have hit when recruiting athletic players, and used JUCO players well.
Buffalo has some things going for it, no doubt about it. OTOH recruiting is a crap shoot, and those excellent athletes who work out well, they have hit a bit more than their share. Is it good judgment? A good run of the cards with players signed working out well? A very favorable environment relative to some MAC schools based on recent winning history that attracts talent? Undoubtedly a mix of all three.
Enjoy your current success. But beware, it is not unlikely that soon enough you will be cursing the coaches as idiots and/or cursing the administration for allowing good coaches to leave, and not finding better to replace them.
|
|