Honest question. The games last night, whether Power 5 or not, suggested that we are significantly lacking in athleticism. Is anyone else seeing this?
Do we have a big man who can dunk off a standstill?
- Thread starter Anilspider
- Start date
Yes, we have a severe lack of athletic 6-6, 6-8 guys. Most other good D-1 teams have a minimum of 3-4 guys who fits this mold.
I have been saying this for a few years now, where are the 6-7 to 6-9 long guys that have lateral quickness and explode. I do think GG is quite athletic and strong, but where are the rest? I was hoping Solly would fit the bill this year.
If Phoenix is that type of athlete and can contribute next season, that would be huge. I have not seen him yet to determine this, hope you are right.
Hopefully in the fall Ulla can give us some insight.
I mentioned this on another tread but we are really lacking a 6'8-6'9 big who can protect the rim. Someone who can get off the floor quickly who blocks and alters opponent's shots. Someone like Darrius Garrett would really compliment Grant inside and significantly improve our team defense. Frankly, an explosive guy like that also provides a ton of "energy" plays (Blocks, follow dunks, alley oop dunks) that can ignite teammates and the home crowd and demoralize the opposition. Garrett is still playing overseas as far as I know so that shows you the value of his skill set.
Grant was 5th in the A10 in blocks. Cayo was right there with him in terms of blocks per minute. They definitely aren't as good as ANO and Garrett were at blocks and altering shots though, and the overall lack of size has made interior defense as a whole very bad.
Disappointed we lost two guys who stood a credible chance of throwing one down during an actual game. Seems like a couple were high on Ford. Oh well.
If you're a 6'4 D1 scholarship player, you better be able to dunk.
There's also a big difference between guys that can dunk when the lane is open, they get a full run up and no one challenges versus the guys that can gather a tough board and then explode up, in traffic, for the slam.
There's also a big difference between guys that can dunk when the lane is open, they get a full run up and no one challenges versus the guys that can gather a tough board and then explode up, in traffic, for the slam.
I think the irony of this post was that a few years back, we were dinging CM for recruiting "athletes" who were not necessarily accomplished basketball players (i.e. Trey Davis, Deion Taylor, etc.). Now it seems like our recent recruits are neither.
Yes, really we need to recruit guys that are both. You can sprinkle in the other guys for depth, and hope to develop a more raw athletic player, but better if you can recruit this type of player. I would say on current roster Golden, Gilyard and Buck are good examples.
Seems like we did this with Ford (more of an athlete than a baller), and see where that got us. At least Ford had some athleticism, seems like some of our recent bigs (Big Luke, PF, Kwesi, and the kid from Chicago State) were lacking in both areas.
And Buck not really on our current roster anymore.
And Buck not really on our current roster anymore.
Mooney's system to me always was more of a natural fit for guys who might be a little less athletic but were great shooter. Kind of like Davidson's roster.
TJ Cline was probably the ultimate "Mooney System" player. By the time he was a senior, Greg Robbins was also one of our best "Mooney System" players. What's odd is that I don't think we have really had that many players who were/are an obvious natural fit for his system (whatever tha actually is). Perhaps Dan Geriot would be another.
Geriot for sure. Butler was also a great Mooney system player. I think a great Mooney system player has to be a great shooter from multiple places on the court, a great passer and a guy who can defend within our system.
Right now, the closest I can think of a great Mooney system player fit is Sherod. Sherod is not a great individual defender but I think he can understand our system and become a better defender within it.
I think Mooney is going back to recruiting guys who fit his system, which is where he started 14 years ago with. Problem is, we could all stomach a rebuild back when he started, the appetite for another now is just not there.
I would say Grant seems to be a good fit as well. And pretty much any PG under 6'0, they seem to do very, very well in Mooney's system.
Every time i read the title to this thread, I see it as
"Do we have a big man who can dunk while standing?"
Grant is great offensively, defensively though, I don't think he has the understanding of our complex system yet.
Today, I'm not sure we really have any archetypical "Mooney System" players. I was happy with the JG, GG, DMB, and NS group because despite not being classic CM system guys, they are all good players.
NS is a CM system player in my mind solely based on his shooting. He doesn't really defend well in CM's scheme, and he's nowhere near the passer that TJC, Geriot, Butler, SDJ, or others have been. He also doesn't work particularly hard to get open shots either.
I never figured out if being a sub 6-foot PG has been a requirement in the CM system, or if CM and staff have just had a knack for recruiting rough diamonds that no one else wanted because they were small (KA, K0, SDJ, JG). Cedrick Lindsay was a good PG in our system, even though he was a big 6'1".
I actually think our small guards are real detriment to the defensive system we run. We switch constantly on defense, so other teams could set up plays to get our small guards paired up with a taller player. With the exception of KA, who was a great defender, all of the other guys were great scorers/offensive weapons but left us with some level of imbalance on defense because of their height.
Looking forward to our first game tomorrow night and the chance to assess our dunking potential. Attrition definitely cost us some precious athleticism. Of the new guys, it seems that Sal would be capable of an in-game dunk, but not sure about any of the others.
As long as we have more points, I’m fine with them all being layups.
Believe this to be accurate. As stated previously, Andre G. looked far more athletic in the exhibition than I expected. He used his athleticism to show signs of very good defensive potential. He had a few young, inexperienced player moments in the exhibition, BUT, overall I was more impressed with him than expected. I will be screaming with disgust if he doesn't get the early minutes that he needs to speed his development. He has a lot of upside potential.
I think you will be happy and accurate on both fronts at the end of the night.
Longwood with a massive dunk on the break. Exciting. None for us yet. But Gustavson hasn’t gotten in yet.
Yes, Longwood longer and more athletic all over the court. Not a very good team at all. will be a "LONG" wood year for the Spiders.
In his 1 plus minute, Andre G. made a very poor pass that was intercepted. You may recall that I told everyone that he had same issue in exhibition game (2 intercepted passes and 2 deflections). Clearly is a concern.
Mooney yanked him quick after the bad pass, and then buried him on the bench. Understand that he has a passing issue, and he needs to improve, no question. But, it won't happen from the deep end of the bench. Mooney never even considered sniffing him again, which means that poor coaching will create a wasted year for a decent prospect.
Mooney yanked him quick after the bad pass, and then buried him on the bench. Understand that he has a passing issue, and he needs to improve, no question. But, it won't happen from the deep end of the bench. Mooney never even considered sniffing him again, which means that poor coaching will create a wasted year for a decent prospect.
So the Lancers had 2 slams by my count. None for the Spiders unfortunately. Hopefully we can work on the explosiveness. Not looking good. Maybe Gustavson gets more minutes. Disappointing the “Sal” had no PT after all the hype. I thought he could slam it down.
Similar threads
