+2

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

The big guy thing doesn't sit well with me. It is a problem across college basketball. The number of skilled big guys has always been on the low end. So the number of people who can actually coach the nuances of the position tend to be on the low end. 95% of college coaches don't have a member of their staff who can actually state 'I've been successful at grooming and teaching guys over 6'8'. I have my bias about little guys thinking its easy to coach up a big man but the reality is that it's the hardest position to teach in the game. Footwork, position, and angles all become more pronounced when you have to operate in such small spaces. It's why you see some big men wanting to step away from the hoop and play farther out.
Here's a great example that will demonstrate what i'm talking about. Look at the way our big guys box out.
1. they try to find the guy they are guarding from a help position.
2. they turn away from the man and try to make contact.
3. after making contact they try to push them away from the hoop using their backside.
why this is wrong
1. its a game involving a ball. KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL AT ALL TIMES.
2. see rule number 1
3. if you know where the ball is it will give you a greater chance to rebound the ball.
4. when the ball comes off the rim you are now in position to get the ball.
5. this is the time you use the sense of who's around you to box out.
6. why waste the effort of boxing out if your man isn't going to get the ball, you box out the guy who is in position to grab the rebound.
None of this is rocket science. yet this escapes most college coaches and almost every high school coach.
Watch how many times our bigs are pushing guys away from the basket and someone else comes in and gets a board.
if Julius just watched where the ball was coming off the rim he might avg a dozen boards a game. Would you give up 2 offensive rebounds by his man to have the 12? Our guys get benched for having that happen once.
This frustrates me watching hoops in general. I'm reminded of Porter demonstrating on how to hold the ball when trying to dunk to one of his players. What does a guy who has never dunked know a single thing about it.

I completely agree about the talent. For some reason, we played as a unit last year. Maybe it was CT, maybe just one of those years. Maybe as limited as Crisman was he still was solid. This team doesn't gel. Their lack of talent also shines through. The comment about Peterson was a little harsh BUT he's not the type of player that will lead us to a top-half finish in the MVC. The bigs are simply not good except Montel, but he's not playing right now. I am with the poster regarding Milton. I want us to have the conference elite player. I want Milton to be a phenom. Instead, he's a shooting star. A first baseman who hits .220 with 180 strikeout, 25 errors, but 42 HRs. He can be fantastic, but he is not an elite player enough of the time. Milton has played GREAT very, very few minutes this year and look at the teams we've played so far. Everyone can say it's not talent, but even in the comments, the excuses were "there is talent, but they just aren't ball handlers" "The bigs aren't terrible, their skill set just isn't at the same level yet..." Rajala and Kirby are not strong players. Yes, Peterson is my favorite player but can he truly get us deep into St. Louis? And I just don't get Richardson. On paper, he has lots of skills. Within the scope of his talent, he's like Milton. There are times that he looks great, but way too many times that he makes dumb and careless plays. Lastly, you can blame coaching, but 3 sec, 5 sec, 10 sec violations, turnovers, lack of rebounding, dumb fouls, etc. fall on the players too. I thought this team might finish as high as 4th in the MVC. I fear it's bottom half now.

I don't question the talent or heart of this team or its players. I firmly believe both are there and could show itself in the conference season. The last game was a definite egg layer...but looking back some of our other games show what this team can be capable of. We were disappointed about our play against UNCA, thought that was a terrible loss...but they may not be the bottom feeder team we thought. They just beat Georgetown today to win their fifth straight. And we know we should've won that game. Creighton played very well against #3 Oklahoma on the road this afternoon (the final score won't indicate how close the game was for most of the second half). I think they'll finish better than expected in the Big East. Call me foolish, but I'm not giving up on this team. Now, if we lose today.......well, that wouldn't be good for numerous reasons. Go Ramblers.