Lotta bickering.
We want to be as good as we can be?
Get the best players possible. Period.
We don’t have luxury of choosing. They choose us.
We take the best that wanna come here. pretty simple.
Lots of people on here that think they are smart…kinda funny.
Ben, that is what I’m trying to get at.
Stretch 4s can typically play the 3 spot, as well. 6 spots for your weakest position isn’t a crazy assertion. 7 spots for 3 positions with 4 players getting all the minutes is even more inane.
You think our team would be better with two stretch fours and a true big in? I don’t. PG/Wing/Wing/Stretch 4/Big.
I’d rather play a wing (Chatman, GRIII, Irvin, Novak, etc.) at the stretch 4 than a stretch 4 on the wing.
You think our team would be better with two stretch fours and a true big in? I don't. PG/Wing/Wing/Stretch 4/Big.I’d rather play a wing (Chatman, GRIII, Irvin, Novak, etc.) at the stretch 4 than a stretch 4 on the wing.
Explain to me how you find minutes for a wing and a combo?
Walton, Spike, Combo
Levert, Irvin, Combo, Wing
Nik, Irvin, Wing, Chatman
One of those players will not see any minutes that season so it would be useless to sing a player you won’t use when you have a frontcourt that is unproven and has holes. A combo is more than enough. Now if someone like Dante Exum to come then we make room but I don’t see us taking two of any of the combos and guards we are on.
Also, you consider that 6’7’’ kid out of Illinois a true big?
We have two scholarships combo/ true big , replace whatever leaves.
No, I consider the 6’7 kid out of Illinois a stretch 4. I don’t know much about the kid, so I wasn’t advocating offering him a scholarship, I was just astonished that you consider a 6’7 220lb 16 year old a “tweener” at the stretch 4 position.
Regarding minutes, I’ve already said that I’d love to have Chatman at the stretch 4, like GRIII this year. I don’t know why we wouldn’t. He has the size, length, shot, and athleticism to play stretch 4, so why not take advantage of it? Especially when you consider the log-jam with Irvin/Stauskas/LeVert.
How do you explain minutes for Levert/Irvin/Stauskas/Chatman at the 2 and 3?
So using that logic, how does adding a combo AND a wing make sense, even if you mvoe Chatman to the stretch 4 STRICTLY. I doubt Chatman is going to be there strictly and figures to get minutes at the 3, too.
Because you’d rather have a freshman wing on the bench for depth than sophomore Chatman as wing depth while starting a freshman stretch 4.
Also, like I said, if Stauskas, Irvin, and LeVert are all on the 2015 roster I will never post again. I strongly believe one of those three will go pro after next season, it just isn’t clear who yet.
What about Chatman makes him a bad candidate for the stretch 4? I see you (and others) repeatedly listing him as a 3. He’s already got more size than GRIII and can shoot. Why not utilize that?
Because you'd rather have a freshman wing on the bench for depth than sophomore Chatman as wing depth while starting a freshman stretch 4.Also, like I said, if Stauskas, Irvin, and LeVert are all on the 2015 roster I will never post again. I strongly believe one of those three will go pro after next season, it just isn’t clear who yet.
No, I never advocated for any type of Stretch 4. Did you not see me saying comb and true big after considering everything?
You can’t recruit NOW with the assurance that one of our wings leave. We deal with that when the issue comes but for now we have two obvious needs.
Chatman isn’t a bad stretch 4, as I think he plays that freshmen year, but the 2/3 makes use of his abilities a bit more in the long term. I also think Wilson is going to be awesome.
If we only have two scholarships, I’d agree that we should go Combo / Big. Combo can get minutes at the wing and be groomed to take over the PG spot.
If we only have two scholarships, I'd agree that we should go Combo / Big. Combo can get minutes at the wing and be groomed to take over the PG spot.
All that needed be said.
That was fun.