Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2019 13:56:49 GMT -8
Some of Miller's best teams played mostly 6-7 players much of the time, I think I recall one game he didn't sub at all. Not that it's relevant to the conversation. It'll be interesting to see how the minutes work out this year. I'm wondering if the playtime issue hasn't been out of necessity. It's not like the team has been 10 deep in Pac 12 quality players the last several years. To me this team, the very little I've seen of it, seems deeper than any he's had at OSU. For me Warren Washington is the canary in the coal mine on this theory. Warren was 100% Pac-12 quality, had already show flashes and aptitude IN PAC-12 play, and yet still his minutes fell off to practically nothing as the season wore on. IIRC injuries and/or fouls thinned the rotation which led to WW's increased minutes to begin Pac-12 play, and even though he was more than holding his own, and helping in Pac-12 wins, for whatever reason (someone remind me, did Big G come back from injury orsomething? Did he find the doghouse for some reason?) the last 13 games of the season he got little more than token minutes. Not only is this a "fairness" issue (ok, ok, I know there is no such thing as "fair"), and a load management issue for the starters (which WT readily admits to), it is a developmental / recruitment / retainment issue. WW would be a HUGE boon to our front line right now! How good would a starting line up like this look! PG : Ethan SG : Zach (soon to be Jared?) SF: Tres PF: Warren WashingtonC: Kylor Then a second unit of: PG: Gianni/Vernon SG: Lucas SF: SMM Large Foul Soaker: Dastrup/Silva/Dearon Now that is starting to look like a deep team! i dont have the quote or the link but i saw an interesting offseason response by Wayne Tinkle when asked about defections. The answer was about adding players with the required toughness. I don't know how much practice time WaWa was missing. I do know he was unavailable for some games because of an injury.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Nov 7, 2019 14:11:08 GMT -8
Washington is a guy I really wish had stuck. He'd have probably been first guy off the bench this year assuming he applied himself and then a starter for two years.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 7, 2019 14:26:35 GMT -8
Some of Miller's best teams played mostly 6-7 players much of the time, I think I recall one game he didn't sub at all. Not that it's relevant to the conversation. It'll be interesting to see how the minutes work out this year. I'm wondering if the playtime issue hasn't been out of necessity. It's not like the team has been 10 deep in Pac 12 quality players the last several years. To me this team, the very little I've seen of it, seems deeper than any he's had at OSU. For me Warren Washington is the canary in the coal mine on this theory. Warren was 100% Pac-12 quality, had already show flashes and aptitude IN PAC-12 play, and yet still his minutes fell off to practically nothing as the season wore on. IIRC injuries and/or fouls thinned the rotation which led to WW's increased minutes to begin Pac-12 play, and even though he was more than holding his own, and helping in Pac-12 wins, for whatever reason (someone remind me, did Big G come back from injury orsomething? Did he find the doghouse for some reason?) the last 13 games of the season he got little more than token minutes. Not only is this a "fairness" issue (ok, ok, I know there is no such thing as "fair"), and a load management issue for the starters (which WT readily admits to), it is a developmental / recruitment / retainment issue. WW would be a HUGE boon to our front line right now! How good would a starting line up like this look! PG : Ethan SG : Zach (soon to be Jared?) SF: Tres PF: Warren WashingtonC: Kylor Then a second unit of: PG: Gianni/Vernon SG: Lucas SF: SMM Large Foul Soaker: Dastrup/Silva/Dearon Now that is starting to look like a deep team! Big G was injured and then game back which diminished Warren's minutes. Also, nice of you to just kick Hollins off the team in your above lineup.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Nov 7, 2019 14:31:54 GMT -8
atownbeaver -- While I appreciate the nuance and rationalism of your post, I think another look at the data is in order, as baseballll points out, WT IS an outlier. Especially when you start comparing him to other good coaches, not just other pac-12 teams. If anyone should be tempted to overuse players it should be the coaches that have a handful of 5 star one and done players, but even John Calapari, Bill Self, Mike Ksjaljihoiznejnxxa! (seriously I am not trying to spell his name, and am not going to look it up) don't player their starters 35+ minutes. 30-34 seems to be the going rate even for guys like Zion Williamson and RJ Barret, etc. baseba1111 -- Thanks for providing the data, and you are absolutely correct, however the delicious irony of this: being in a reply that is chastising someone, and also with the backdrop of your other ~8,000 posts, had me litterally laughing out loud, thanks for the hearty laugh, I needed it this morning There is probably an apropriete adage about planks and eyes, but I wouldn't want to chastise anyone While it would seem that coaches with one and doners would be more tempted to overuse them, you have to remember that schools like Duke have a bench full of reserves that were 4* recruits so drop off isn’t as drastic. Still last year Barrett averaged 35.3, Jones was 34.2, Zion 30 (and have to remember he had a game he barely played in when he got hurt plus I think they eased him back in on return), and Reddish 29.7. These top teams also have more blowouts when it is easier to rest players. So from that perspective I don’t have a huge problem with the use of the big 3 because you want to win and need your best players to do that. The problem as I see it isn’t TT playing 38 minutes in a 4-point win. The problem is him playing 36 minutes in a 20-point win. And that isn’t isolated. He played 35 against Riverside and Wyoming last year. That is the problem along with WT seemingly not having a plan on how to reduce their workload in games against lesser teams to get bench some development time. Scrub time in a blowout with all reserves on the floor is nice but has limited value for development. WT has to have a plan to get his top 3 or 4 reserves time in games with 4 or 3 other starters on the floor so they’re prepared when they have to go in because of foul trouble, a match problem or, heaven forbid, an injury.
|
|
|
Post by babeav on Nov 7, 2019 16:48:59 GMT -8
Washington, Wilson and Campbell all had Gregg Gottlieb as their primary recruiter see a pattern here. All are gone and Greg has relinquished his recruiting duties, good move coach.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Nov 7, 2019 16:57:08 GMT -8
Washington, Wilson and Campbell all had Gregg Gottlieb as their primary recruiter see a pattern here. All are gone and Greg has relinquished his recruiting duties, good move coach. That is quite interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2019 17:31:46 GMT -8
Washington, Wilson and Campbell all had Gregg Gottlieb as their primary recruiter see a pattern here. All are gone and Greg has relinquished his recruiting duties, good move coach. Noted. Not sure how that connects but it seems odd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2019 17:35:01 GMT -8
For me Warren Washington is the canary in the coal mine on this theory. Warren was 100% Pac-12 quality, had already show flashes and aptitude IN PAC-12 play, and yet still his minutes fell off to practically nothing as the season wore on. IIRC injuries and/or fouls thinned the rotation which led to WW's increased minutes to begin Pac-12 play, and even though he was more than holding his own, and helping in Pac-12 wins, for whatever reason (someone remind me, did Big G come back from injury orsomething? Did he find the doghouse for some reason?) the last 13 games of the season he got little more than token minutes. Not only is this a "fairness" issue (ok, ok, I know there is no such thing as "fair"), and a load management issue for the starters (which WT readily admits to), it is a developmental / recruitment / retainment issue. WW would be a HUGE boon to our front line right now! How good would a starting line up like this look! PG : Ethan SG : Zach (soon to be Jared?) SF: Tres PF: Warren WashingtonC: Kylor Then a second unit of: PG: Gianni/Vernon SG: Lucas SF: SMM Large Foul Soaker: Dastrup/Silva/Dearon Now that is starting to look like a deep team! Big G was injured and then game back which diminished Warren's minutes. Also, nice of you to just kick Hollins off the team in your above lineup. maybe he is just chilling on the O.B.F. practice squad and can be reactivated when its time for him to put 20 up on UCLA again.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 7, 2019 19:19:39 GMT -8
Washington, Wilson and Campbell all had Gregg Gottlieb as their primary recruiter see a pattern here. All are gone and Greg has relinquished his recruiting duties, good move coach. Noted. Not sure how that connects but it seems odd. Does it matter? Washington was the only potential pac 12 player
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Nov 7, 2019 22:07:23 GMT -8
Noted. Not sure how that connects but it seems odd. Does it matter? Washington was the only potential pac 12 player That in itself makes it matter considering that big men are the place where we are only an injury away from playing four guard lineups.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Nov 7, 2019 22:16:59 GMT -8
Does it matter? Washington was the only potential pac 12 player That in itself makes it matter considering that big men are the place where we are only an injury away from playing four guard lineups. I'll stand by the guess that Wilson is/would be better than Silva and Dastrup. He was slow, but had potential to be a Pac12 big. Only saw Campbell informally and in his limited minutes, but will also say I thought he was potentially better overall player than Hollins. As far as recruiting... WT has the final say. Doesn't matter who the lead guy is, he's the HC and no one gets a schollie without his approval.
|
|
|
Post by osubeaver2018 on Nov 7, 2019 23:00:35 GMT -8
That in itself makes it matter considering that big men are the place where we are only an injury away from playing four guard lineups. I'll stand by the guess that Wilson is/would be better than Silva and Dastrup. He was slow, but had potential to be a Pac12 big. Only saw Campbell informally and in his limited minutes, but will also say I thought he was potentially better overall player than Hollins. As far as recruiting... WT has the final say. Doesn't matter who the lead guy is, he's the HC and no one gets a schollie without his approval. Definitely agree I like what I saw from Campbell the little I saw of him. Think he had 9? points in very limited time in the last game he played in here, and played good hard D. Would have liked to have seen where he could've gone. He was also a good athlete and won the dunk contest before the season last year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2019 5:57:08 GMT -8
Does it matter? Washington was the only potential pac 12 player That in itself makes it matter considering that big men are the place where we are only an injury away from playing four guard lineups. Only foul trouble away. And teams are going to go right at KK because that's what you do to a shot blocker. Face it, small,fast, torrid pace, that's the way this team will have to win games.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 8, 2019 8:02:12 GMT -8
That in itself makes it matter considering that big men are the place where we are only an injury away from playing four guard lineups. I'll stand by the guess that Wilson is/would be better than Silva and Dastrup. He was slow, but had potential to be a Pac12 big. Only saw Campbell informally and in his limited minutes, but will also say I thought he was potentially better overall player than Hollins. As far as recruiting... WT has the final say. Doesn't matter who the lead guy is, he's the HC and no one gets a schollie without his approval. Campbell was a clone of Hollins with a little more aggressiveness on the offensive end. Great athlete, but not a great BB player. As far as Wilson, I didn’t see it. There’s a reason he ended up at Idaho.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Nov 8, 2019 8:55:32 GMT -8
I'll stand by the guess that Wilson is/would be better than Silva and Dastrup. He was slow, but had potential to be a Pac12 big. Only saw Campbell informally and in his limited minutes, but will also say I thought he was potentially better overall player than Hollins. As far as recruiting... WT has the final say. Doesn't matter who the lead guy is, he's the HC and no one gets a schollie without his approval. Campbell was a clone of Hollins with a little more aggressiveness on the offensive end. Great athlete, but not a great BB player. As far as Wilson, I didn’t see it. There’s a reason he ended up at Idaho. Completely agree on Wilson. Saw him get eaten up by 6”5” kids in HS with their quickness, and saw him sitting in the bench half the game either because he was gassed or because he hurt his team when both sides were getting up and down the court in a wide open game. I wish we’d go get a quick 6”8” 250 athlete that can bang, defend taller players and clean up boards. I recall playing against VCU and coveting their big. Would be a much better situation to have behind KK. It’s been an odd gap of WT teams - unless you considered Eubanks a PF, Jarmal Reid is arguably the best we’ve had at that position under WT, who was neither recruited by WT nor very good, yet would have been a very helpful body to have on all of WTs teams to date.
|
|