6-9 235 Kirby should be our starting center as long as we have him, if the coach permits a real center to start. His stats at Coffeyville Community College (26-6 record, ranked #19) (where James & Petersen came from, both of whom also had good stats there - but nowhere nearly as good as Kirby’s rebounding stats).

He will be the best rebounder we have had in a long time. His stats:
14.8 points per 40 minutes
(Doyle & James are the only LU returnees with a higher pp40)
.538 FG %
(higher than any LU returnee)
14.7 rebounds per 40 minutes
(James’ 8.0 rp40 was the closest to Kirby)

Kirby’s 14.7 rp40 look good especially when you consider that the MVC’s top starting rebounders per 40 minutes last year were:

Mockevicius 13.0 (Evansville)
Cunningham 9.9 (SIU)
Lynch 9.3 (IL. St.)
Tuttle 9.2 (N. Iowa)
Carter 9.2 (Wichita St.)

As he did with James, Petersen, & Ingram, this season, the coach did a great job in signing Kirby for next season (Kirby originally was signed & red-shirted at the ACC’s Virginia Tech before he transferred to Coffeyville when a new V.Tech. coach arrived).

http://stats.njcaa.org/sports/mbkb/2014 ... ekirbycefi

Kirby's actual (not projected over 40 minutes) stats are less impressive: 8 ppg and 7.9 rpg. , as he only averaged 21.6 minutes per game.

This has me wondering why he sat so much. Is there an issue with stamina, did the coach spread the minutes around to showcase other players, or did he sit because the team played as well or better with him not on the floor?

I don't know the answer. I'm glad we signed Kirby, he seems like a great kid and has great size. I'm just not sure he's going to be quite as productive for Loyola as his stats projected over 40 minutes might suggest.

I can see him starting and getting relieved by Julius. In my head, I see this depth chart:

1: Keke/Richardson
2: Milt/Earl
3: Swaggy T/Ingram/Knuth
4: Montel/Adgei
5: Kirby/Julius


Who am I missing (not walk on)?

_________________
Cigarboy sucks!

You nailed it. 11/11.

http://www.ramblermania.net/extras/mbb- ... hip-chart/

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

Few big guys play much more than 25 minutes, for a variety of reasons-- fouls; the physicality of pushing, shoving and positioning under the basket; being conditioned for strength more than endurance, etc. Mockevicius for Evansville played 27.9 mpg this year, Reggie Lynch only 22.2. Tuttle was a rare big man who led his team in minutes played, but he still sat for nearly 25% of the games on a deep and experienced team, averaging 30.4 minutes. Another senior big guy on UNI, Nate Buss, averaged less than 18 mpg.

To me, it's a bad sign that your big guy averages any more than 30 minutes-- it means you rely on him too much, and getting him out of the game or in foul trouble can really change the dynamic.

Reggie Lynch sat a lot because he was constantly in foul trouble.

_________________
Let's go Braden!

This assumes that we're going back to a more traditional lineup, with more defined and discrete roles for point guard, shooting guard, power forward, etc. I think the key to our success this year was the versatility of each player, both on offense and defense. It allowed guys to not get trapped or steered into spots where they couldn't perform, and contributed to the active switching and help defense. Both on offense and defense, Loyola had players who were able to easily switch above or below their natural number on the floor to get the job done when needed. The whole scheme of how we won 24 games was really a stroke of genius on the part of the coach (granted, it was perhaps borne out of necessity), and fantastic buy-in by the players. It made us a really tough team to scout and game plan against.

Of the 11 players who saw an average of five minutes or more per game: only one didn't hit a three pointer (James, on zero attempts); we had nine players with more than 20 assists (only Knuth and Rajala had less); nine players had double digit steals; eight players had five or more blocks (surprisingly, Peterson only had four); four players had more than 100 rebounds (and two others had between 80-100). Five (!) guys had 49 or more assists with a better than 1.0 assist to turnover ratio. Our WORST three point shooter hit on 29% of them, and four guys had double-digit made threes while averaging over 40%.

I tend to agree, JCT.

I think the breakdown is more like you'll almost always have at three from this group [Keke, Richardson, Milt, Earl, Turk], and most times two from this group [Montel, Ingram, Julius, Knuth, Kirby, Adgei].

To me, Ingram's role is the most interesting. If we are able to play, say, Kirby and Montel with Ingram at the three, that would be great because Ingram can cause some problems for other teams as the 3. For instance, if we had Kirby this year, and him and Montel were good enough to both play against Wichita State, you'd have Ingram vs Wessel at the 3, which would fun.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

Kaminsky: 33.5 mpg

Okafur: 30.3 mpg

Oh, without a doubt. My little depth chart is more to illustrate what we have at each "position" and not to say that those slots will be used every time.

_________________
Cigarboy sucks!