equal if not more than stauskas as a freshman is how that was meant, in case anyone was about to jump on me.
equal if not more than stauskas as a freshman is how that was meant, in case anyone was about to jump on me.
Are you actually saying that Dawkins was equal to Stauskas as a freshman. Wow
I saw just as much potential in his play yes.
Also, Nik got to sit back and be the fourth or fifth option and just stand in the corner. I think dawkins in the same role with trey and co, would have done just as well.
Will he develop into a guy who can be a creator/ball handler, and very underrated passer like Nik? Not sure, but I donât think you should say âwowâ like nik was light years better than dawkinâs in the same stage last year.
Will he develop into a guy who can be a creator/ball handler, and very underrated passer like Nik? Not sure, but I don't think you should say "wow" like nik was light years better than dawkin's in the same stage last year.
Nik was light years ahead of Aubrey Dawkins, and I donât think many people would debate that to be honest.
I feel much, much better about this if he is re-classifying and going to a year of prep school. Bringing him in when Donnal and/or Doyle are seniors and Teske is a Sophomore seems like much less of a log jam.
I feel much, much better about this if he is re-classifying and going to a year of prep school. Bringing him in when Donnal and/or Doyle are seniors and Teske is a Sophomore seems like much less of a log jam.
Yes, definitely. It helps with the balance we were all worried about. If he comes in '17, redshirts for a year, then in 2018 he can start stealing minutes from Teske. No log jam at all in this scenario.
But more importantly it opens up an extra scholarship in 2016 for a PG/SG.
Exactly, if it doesnât impact the scholarship availability in 16, itâs not a big blow. Still donât like it, but it doesnât preclude flexibility for talent in the next 2 years. The big question though, will I that actually come to fruition?
Nik was a great shooting freshman. Who as a side kick to burke/hardaway did his thing and got a lot of great looks open from downtown, and he often made them. What nik became was a sophmore stunned me as I did not forsee him developing into the creator off the bounce/ passer he became off the pick and roll especially. I saw flashes of his ability to get to the rim. One thunderous dunk over west virginia comes to mind early in that year.
He was mostly a very good shooter as a freshman, who got a chance to shine with all the creators we had. Aubrey didnât get that chance, and what I saw in the second half of the year reminded me a lot of what Nik was doing as a freshman. Often aubrey was the go to guy in certain games, with no one to create for him to get him open, or to draw the d away from him.
The stat lines by minutes played arenât far off. I didnât look into anything advanced just percentages and points, rebounds,assists versus minutes played for the year. Niks year is obviously going to look better because he blew up on a team that got to the finals, and he torched flordia amongst others in big games that actually meant something. I guess we shall see what this year brings, but I think everyone is going to be happy dawkins is on our side when everything is said and done.
I will be here for you to rub it in my face if I am wrong over the next few years, but I am confident aubrey is going to come up big.
Nik was better pain PnR as a freshman than Trey Burke in a decent sample size around 100. He was able to create as a freshman, which is why nobody was really surprised to see him do it as a sophomore. Dawkins on the other hand, strictly catch and shoot. To compare the two, and explicitly state that Dawkinsâ value/game is approaching freshman level Stauskas is a bit misguided in my view, and probably the great majority of knowledgable people.
Exactly, if it doesn't impact the scholarship availability in 16, it's not a big blow. Still don't like it, but it doesn't preclude flexibility for talent in the next 2 years. The big question though, will I that actually come to fruition?
It will be interesting to watch his progression. It might be 4 years before we ever see Davis in action.
My biggest concern was about the logjam and inability to get playmakers at both PG and Wing. That concern appears to be settled (hopefully).
Is it an acquisition I like from a talent standpoint - no. BUT, if he comes in for 17, and takes a RS, then it makes a a bit more sense from both a roster balance and development standpoint. If he actually does remain in the 16 class, I think itâs downright horrible.
I havenât seem any film of him playing good, or even decent competition. Heâs certainly limited athletically and pretty slow of foot. I am not super excited about the pickup, but there are some positives.
On the plus side, he seems to have good hands, decent footwork, some post moves, and is not allergic to rebounding.
Heâs only 16, and according to reports has lost a considerable amount of weight recently. He is still probably getting used to his body. He could develop into a bit of a bruiser, which would be a nice change of pace. If he doesnât enroll until 2017, he still has a lot of time to keep developing.
I just crave ONE Cauley Stein type big - no offensive skill whatsoever, but will get you 11-13 ppg off putbacks and finishing PnR. Meanwhile he can check PGs and erase everything around the rim.
This is simply it. I have tremendous faith in Beillein's ability to coach, the man can go up against anybody and win, of that I have no doubt. But ffs, his recruiting leaves a lot to be desired. As you mention in your last line, it's completely aggravating to think of what he could do if he could recruit at the level that he coaches.I love Beilein and I just cringe thinking about what potential he could have with great talent. Thereâs a good reason Coach K dropped us from his schedule. Few coaches want to face Beilein in the tourney.
But what if he had better talent? I mean, seriously, he could load up his fingers with rings.
I just crave ONE Cauley Stein type big - no offensive skill whatsoever, but will get you 11-13 ppg off putbacks and finishing PnR. Meanwhile he can check PGs and erase everything around the rim.
I think weâd all love that. The problem is that 6â11" athletic freaks donât grow on trees. When they do come around, everyone is after them.
A more plausible target is a raw but athletic 6â8" or 6â9" guy. Lower floor and lower ceiling, but would still bring a different element to our team.
I just crave ONE Cauley Stein type big - no offensive skill whatsoever, but will get you 11-13 ppg off putbacks and finishing PnR. Meanwhile he can check PGs and erase everything around the rim.I think weâd all love that. The problem is that 6â11" athletic freaks donât grow on trees. When they do come around, everyone is after them.
A more plausible target is a raw but athletic 6â8" or 6â9" guy. Lower floor and lower ceiling, but would still bring a different element to our team.
Teske is close enough for me. He will deter plenty of shots
More likely that Hatch becomes a preferred walk-on than a medical. He can afford the tuition, and he could keep playing. This assumes that Beilein is thinking about using that scholarship.
Im not sure thatâs possible. At least it isnât in football.
People listen to Brian's opinion about basketball? Come on, really?Ohio Northern
You got me again!
And yes, me playing 4 years, 1 of those years for a coach in the hall of fame at lowly Ohio Northern makes me far more qualified to assess all aspects of the game of basketball over Brian at Mgoblog.
You use the term âplayingâ loosely! Every time I caught a game you were a mop up duty guy. You didnât have quite the highlight bench mob reel that Dakich has though! Everyone has things they can improve upon I guess!
Man, you got me again! Incredible! But comparing me to Dakich is unfair. Dakich played in the era of social media that allowed him to hone his craft riding the bench, I did not.