|
Post by lmills72 on Nov 30, 2015 20:18:42 GMT -6
This question occurred to me after the Valpo game: Would you rather ...
A. Have a team with a definite leading man (aka Valpo and Alex Peters)? The guy you can go to when you really need a bucket? The guy the other team really doesn't have an answer for?
or
B. Have a team without a leading man but maybe with as many as six players who are going to average around 8-12 ppg, aka BSU? Sure, one of them might go off for 18-20 points some night, but could be back to scoring 6 the following game while a teammate goes off.
I'm not suggesting one team's makeup is superior to the other; both can be winners, but I was just wondering if people had a preference.
Personally, I've always kinda favored A. While theoretically I enjoy the the "team" game, I've always wanted that true "go-to" guy who you could pretty much always depend on to deliver.
I think that preference is related to the idea that when you have many possible weapons to use on a particular night it can sometimes take time to find out which one is loaded. Nevertheless, it looks like that's how the Cards are going to be this year, so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.
|
|
|
Post by DickHunsaker on Nov 30, 2015 20:20:53 GMT -6
I enjoy B. I like having a team that's full of decent scorers where any of them can break out in any game. I think A is more exciting, but B is more sustainable
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 30, 2015 20:49:14 GMT -6
I like to win, and I have seen plenty of teams win each way, so I have no preference.
|
|
|
Post by thebsukid on Dec 1, 2015 12:38:17 GMT -6
Either way CAN work....team from Terre Haute was pretty good with that Bird Kid!
|
|
|
Post by steve on Dec 1, 2015 17:48:03 GMT -6
Recruiting purposes, it might be better to have option a. I feel some recruits might not buy into the team concept, but I'm fine with either option, as long as Ball State wins....
|
|