The Case for Starting Both Tyrique and Hankins

[xukeith]

I doubt they spend alot of practice time defending 2 bigs.

X can't practice defending 2 bigs as they have only 2 bigs.

Steele said preseason that if he played both, it would be 5-7 minutes. Afraid of foul trouble.

[Snipe]

Lol accuse others of what you yourself are guilty. Having a power forward and center was the gold standard 15 years ago.




Offense is about more than personal points per minute. Welage stretches the floor, opening up more space for driving and cutting. When a guy is that much of a threat from deep, he can impact the offense noticeably without taking a shot for an entire stint on the floor.



Yeah, they easily earned minutes at the 5. When it was the three of them and X was playing two bigs, though, the guy at the 4 struggled to guard wings. That's because they were much more suited to guarding other bigs. That also marked the last time we regularly saw two bigs on the floor, which is no coincidence.

Yeah I am the reactionary. In 2014-15 we were playing 2 big men on the floor all the time. Lets talk about the good old days of 2015. I wonder how we did it? It is a big mystery.

I am a big fan of Welage and we are fortunate to have him. I can't wait to see him go off again. I think once he gets comfortable and in the flow of the offense he will be special. It may take a minute for this team to get in rhythm. I like what he does, and yes he does give offense and affect defenses. My point is, so do our fine young post players. They also rebound.

Every team poses different matchup problems. Teams going up against us back then had to worry about the big men. We had to worry about smaller players and stretching the defense. This isn't new. If you have effective players, you play them. Zack Hankins was 9th on the depth chart in minutes going into Wisconsin. I would like to change that. This is all just on the margins. I want to get good players that can rebound, defend and score more minutes. Those guys are tough sons of bitches. My kind of guys. I got a title to defend.

[Snipe]

Haha I’m an idiot.

Eh maybe it could work against the right team for 5 minutes. I still think there’s defensive loss and little offensive gain on the whole. Unless one of them is a better passer than I’ve seen to nullify a double team. Nonetheless the one who draws the 4 should be able to overwhelm them in iso.

To think that we used to have success playing with that type of lineup just in 2015. I wish we would have known then what a waste of time it is then. Maybe we could have beaten Arizona.

[XUFan09]

To think that we used to have success playing with that type of lineup just in 2015. I wish we would have known then what a waste of time it is then. Maybe we could have beaten Arizona.

Snipe makes the best strawmen!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[paulxu]

Snipe has been day drinking

As you well know, I can appreciate that.

[XMuskieFTW]

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.

Seton Hall and Wisconsin can do it because one of their two bigs can shoot the 3. Both our bigs are great in the paint. You don't want either on the perimeter offensively. And if both are in the paint on offense, things get too clogged. Also throwing it into the paint to a big and having them look to score on a back down is a terrible way to play offensively. It produces 0.7-0.8 points per possession(Don't remember the exact decimal but it's 0.7something)

[XUFan09]

Seton Hall and Wisconsin can do it because one of their two bigs can shoot the 3. Both our bigs are great in the paint. You don't want either on the perimeter offensively. And if both are in the paint on offense, things get too clogged. Also throwing it into the paint to a big and having them look to score on a back down is a terrible way to play offensively. It produces 0.7-0.8 points per possession(Don't remember the exact decimal but it's 0.7something)

Yep. You don't want to toss out post play entirely, as it complements other components of the offense, but you don't want to lean on it so heavily.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[MHettel]

I doubt they spend alot of practice time defending 2 bigs.

X can't practice defending 2 bigs as they have only 2 bigs.

Steele said preseason that if he played both, it would be 5-7 minutes. Afraid of foul trouble.

I wasn't suggesting that X needs to practice against an offense that has 2 bigs. I'm suggesting that our opponents are probably not practicing against 2 bigs for the very reason that you point out.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Seton Hall and Wisconsin can do it because one of their two bigs can shoot the 3. Both our bigs are great in the paint. You don't want either on the perimeter offensively. And if both are in the paint on offense, things get too clogged. Also throwing it into the paint to a big and having them look to score on a back down is a terrible way to play offensively. It produces 0.7-0.8 points per possession(Don't remember the exact decimal but it's 0.7something)

Not that I think Hankins and Jones should play a lot together but to be fair, Happ cannot shoot the 3. He took 11 last year and made 1. He took zero as a frosh or soph, and he is 0/1 this year. The other big guy is better her was 12/47 last year.

[XUFan09]

Not that I think Hankins and Jones should play a lot together but to be fair, Happ cannot shoot the 3. He took 11 last year and made 1. He took zero as a frosh or soph, and he is 0/1 this year. The other big guy is better her was 12/47 last year.

Yeah, Happ is a unique player. He has a tight handle and can drive and pass from the perimeter, so you could treat him like a perimeter player, but man, he can't shoot

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk