Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 92
  1. #31
    Supporting Member D-West & PO-Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montgomery
    Posts
    17,038
    Quote Originally Posted by GoMuskies View Post
    Well, I guess theoretically one of them could be out there at all times, but if that's the case they won't be playing together very often. So then what would be the point of starting both anyway?
    Yeah exactly.

    I dont think its realistic for them to both start. Can both of them play together for some spurts during games yeah but our lack of a 3rd big doesnt make it realistic for them to both start. Plus I think Travis likes the small ball style of play.
    "I’m willing to sacrifice everything for this team. I’m going to dive for every loose ball, close out harder on every shot, block out for every rebound. I’m going to play harder than I’ve ever played. And I need you all to follow me." -MB '17

  2. #32
    Supporting Member D-West & PO-Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montgomery
    Posts
    17,038
    Quote Originally Posted by X-man View Post
    Why does that follow?
    Because neither one can play the entire game. And if you say they dont have to both be on the bench at the same time then that means one would always have to be out there. So then you would just fall into them alternating rests which what they are already doing.

    I think best you could hope for if you want them to play together is a spurt here or there, and that doesnt make a whole lot of sense to do that at the start of the game.
    "I’m willing to sacrifice everything for this team. I’m going to dive for every loose ball, close out harder on every shot, block out for every rebound. I’m going to play harder than I’ve ever played. And I need you all to follow me." -MB '17

  3. #33
    All-Conference XUFan09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    7,064
    Quote Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z View Post
    Yeah exactly.

    I dont think its realistic for them to both start. Can both of them play together for some spurts during games yeah but our lack of a 3rd big doesnt make it realistic for them to both start. Plus I think Travis likes the small ball style of play.
    Yep. There could be spurts where it's effective, but 1) lack of depth makes it not viable for longer stretches and 2) it moves the team away from a small-ball concept that gives the offense better floor spacing and the defense more versatility.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  4. #34
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XUGRAD80 View Post
    It is an interesting idea, and one I’ve had also. However, how do you practice it? The roster is so thin in that area, how could you test it in practice against any real competition? Perhaps they should try it out in some games against some lesser competition for a few minutes and see how it works. It worked pretty good in the past with some other players. I just wish they had one more player that could fill the role for 5-8 minutes a game.
    I thought the same thing. How in the hell would you practice it? Who would that team go up against in practice? We are thin indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caf View Post
    The only point I can think of that hasn't already been mentioned is defense. So far our 3pt defense has been non existent. If a team has a 4 who plays outside we'd be even more screwed on that front than we already are.
    I don't remember the last time our defense was good defending the 3, Sean Miller maybe? At least this team would be better rebounding the 3, and that is no small thing. Defense doesn't matter unless you get the ball back.

    Quote Originally Posted by mistabeecee41 View Post
    yup, this is why this can't happen. our two bigger problems have been defending the 3 and defending ball screens. having both of them on the court at the same time would make it even worse.

    I think having both of them on the court would make our defense better and not worse, so I disagree. That is what I judge to be one of the benefits.

    Quote Originally Posted by XU 87 View Post
    Xavier would have to go back to the double low post offense for this to work. On defense, and as noted above, whoever is at the 4 would have to be guarding guys out on the perimeter.
    Dust off the old playbooks? Might be able to come up with some play diagrams. The person playing the 4 has to guard guys on the perimeter now. How is that working out for ya?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muskie View Post
    I could see stretches where this COULD work. I think you have three problems:

    1. Our offense is not currently set to run like this (we can debate whether that is good or bad)
    2. What happens when inevitable foul trouble occurs with at least one?
    3. Which leads into, who comes off the bench to give these guys a rest?

    I didn't anticipate that playing a classic power forward would upset the applecart so much that it takes us out of our offense. Maybe we could get the ball inside to Tyrique a lot more, or if he is covered get the ball to Hankins. Maybe they could kick it out. It would be nice to have an extra big man inside to get the rebound if someone misses.

    Maybe it is a bigger deal than I imagined and will throw our offense out of whack. I would think Travis would be able to diagram some plays to see if we can take advantage of matchups. Those matchups go both ways. People are carping about Tyrique guarding someone out on the perimeter, well I salivate thinking of him posting up on a perimeter player.


    In my scenario we would still platoon them, just start and play them together for the first 5 minutes of each half. So one of them would still always be on the floor. And the same people playing now would be playing when they are not together on the floor.

    Quote Originally Posted by drudy23 View Post
    I don't think them starting together makes much difference.

    But playing them both at certain times could make all the difference.
    I agree. It isn't who starts literally. I just want the two guys to combine for more than 39.3 minutes of playing time. I have a hard time with that given their output. Give me 50 minutes instead of 40. To do that, that have to play together. Steele could play them together at any point of the game and I would be happy.

    When Tyrique had a monster game Hankins only got 11 minutes. I think that is the thing that needs to end. Hankins needs to play regardless, because he is a player. Anything that increases his playing time without taking away from Tyrique is what I am after.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  5. #35
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Caf View Post
    It's hard to imagine either of them consistently breaking 30 minutes and we definitely can't field a lineup with both of them on the bench. Using that framework it's hard to imagine getting more than 5 minutes of overlap.

    Just looking at their histories, Jones has never broken 25. Maybe Hankins is more viable, he obviously played a ton at Ferris State. They're both in great game shape, so foul trouble would be the biggest limiting factor to me.
    Two games ago, he played 29 minutes against Evansville. I mentioned it in the post.

    If you can't imagine a framework that I have already explained to you, you have a reading comprehension problem. If you can't imagine it on your own, you are a poor conceptual thinker and bad at math. This isn't rocket science.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  6. #36
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XMuskieFTW View Post
    This would only work against teams who also play two bigs. Would've liked to have seen it against Happ and Reuvers. Would also work against a team like Seton Hall. Won't work against 80% of teams though. We'll get bombed from 3 if anyone starts 4 guards and we play that line up.
    Is that the way it works? How can Wisconsin do it? How can Seton Hall do it? How can many other teams start a center and a power forward? And why is it Xavier that absolutely must let the other team dictate what our lineup is? What about Auburn? Is Auburn a candidate? Just curious what this camp of thinking thinks about that matchup.

    Matchups go both ways. A disadvantage on one end can be an advantage on the other.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  7. #37
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XUFan09 View Post
    Yes, I can. At least, he's not laterally quick enough to consistently defend on the perimeter. Tyrique can jump high and has impressive fast-twitch muscle, but that doesn't mean he can move his feet fast against a speedy perimeter player.
    How do other teams do it? It is the gold standard, having a power forward and a center isn't some radical revolutionary concept. Didn't we just get beat by a team with a power forward and a center.


    What a bunch of reactionaries.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  8. #38
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Muskie View Post
    How many extra fouls per game will Ty get defending quicker guys on the perimeter? He doesn't have fouls to give.

    Maybe he would foul less. He has been prone to foul, and that has impacted his playing time. To date, he has been fouling playing the 5. You seem to think if he played the 4 he would foul even more. Had we put Hankins on Happ, I believe it would have been the opposite. Tyrique only played 12 minutes. Start him at the 4 against Whisky and I feel he could have played more minutes. What makes you so sure?
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  9. #39
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XUFan09 View Post
    I'm confident that Welage with one of them is distinctly better offensively than Hankins and Jones together. I'm also confident that Hankins and Jones together is not going to provide some notable offensive lift over most other normal roster combos. That's pretty easy to see.

    "Best 5 players"

    That's simplistic because you have to consider how they complement each other or don't.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Both Hankins and Jones average more points per minute than Welage. In fact, they average more points per minute than ever other player on our roster. You can look it up. After all, it is in my original post on this thread.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

  10. #40
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XUFan09 View Post
    Yep. And it's not like we don't have evidence of Tyrique struggling to defend wings. He's been switched on to them enough for us to see how it works. He's not as bad as Stainbrook or even Farr or Reynolds, but he's hardly good at it either.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    And yet Stainbrook, Farr and Reynolds contributed enough to warrant playing time.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •