Jump to content

Trendon Watford Commits to LSU


Hoosierhoopster

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

That's the exact four I want. Carton, Newman, Brooks, TJD. Franklin if we can't get Carton.

There are so many great possibilities on the radar and I'd be happy with them all, but yeah...those four/five are high on my list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2018 at 3:02 PM, dbmhoosier said:

TJD, Franklin, and Newman and I'll be thrilled.   Brooks just doesn't do much for me.  We'll already have Hunter and Smith. 

Hunter and Smith don't play the same position no matter how much it is relate repeated on this board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Hunter and Smith don't play the same position no matter how much it is relate repeated on this board. 

No but they play the 3 and the 4.  As does Brooks.  I expect both to start next season and I doubt Brooks wants to come off the bench. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dbmhoosier said:

No but they play the 3 and the 4.  As does Brooks.  I expect both to start next season and I doubt Brooks wants to come off the bench. 

Smith doesn't play the 3 and 4. He plays the 4, which is very different in our system than the 3. Brooks and Hunter play the 3, but could conceivably both play the 2 in our system because the 2 and 3 are very similar just like 4 and 5 are. 

I dont think Brooks or Hunter will play 4 for us. Their skillset is very different than our current 4s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Smith doesn't play the 3 and 4. He plays the 4, which is very different in our system than the 3. Brooks and Hunter play the 3, but could conceivably both play the 2 in our system because the 2 and 3 are very similar just like 4 and 5 are. 

I dont think Brooks or Hunter will play 4 for us. Their skillset is very different than our current 4s. 

Hunter is a 3 as is Brooks.  He could possibly play the 2 in stretches but he's likely our starting 3 next season and Smith at the 4.  Brooks is going to want to go somewhere that he's guaranteed to start.  I just don't think Archie can guarantee that.   Most likely starting 5 is Carton or Phinesee, Green, Hunter, Smith, and TJD or Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

What makes you say that? I hope the answer is at least something besides height...

His height, his ballhandling skills, the fact that he profiles as a shotblocking rim protector on defense... I get that positionless basketball is all the rage these days, and I’m largely on board with that as well.  But I do think that people might be going a little overboard with that in regards to players like Brooks and potentially Jerome Hunter, as mentioned above.  There is still a difference between a “guard” and a “forward,” and I don’t think Brooks falls into the former category.

Two-guards need to be able to handle the ball and be mobile enough to defend on the perimeter.  I don’t see those really being areas of strength for Brooks, either now or in the future.  To me, he looks like a 3 or a stretch 4, in the mold of a player like Keita Bates-Diop.  Can you name a player like Brooks that has ever played the majority of his time at the 2 in college basketball?  Or in the NBA, for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

His height, his ballhandling skills, the fact that he profiles as a shotblocking rim protector on defense... I get that positionless basketball is all the rage these days, and I’m largely on board with that as well.  But I do think that people might be going a little overboard with that in regards to players like Brooks and potentially Jerome Hunter, as mentioned above.  There is still a difference between a “guard” and a “forward,” and I don’t think Brooks falls into the former category.

Two-guards need to be able to handle the ball and be mobile enough to defend on the perimeter.  I don’t see those really being areas of strength for Brooks, either now or in the future.  To me, he looks like a 3 or a stretch 4, in the mold of a player like Keita Bates-Diop.  Can you name a player like Brooks that has ever played the majority of his time at the 2 in college basketball?  Or in the NBA, for that matter.

He doesn't project as a rim protector. He is a good weak side shot blocker,  but he isn't a guy you anchor under the rim on defense. 

His length will be extremely disruptive on the perimeter. He isn't going to be a primary ball handler, but if last year was any indication he is going to play more like Rob Johnson on offense than Juwan Morgan. Maybe our offense shifts, but I dont see a great reason to think it will. 

I see a lot of Paul George in his game offensively at this stage. Paul was a 2 when he came in the league and is definitely not a 4 now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched him play in the Adidas games a few weeks back and he isn’t close to being a 2 guard. I thought that he played very well and absolutely love Brooks motor! That being said, he is a forward... whether it's at the 3 or 4, well, that’s irrelevant in this era. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Danomatic said:

I watched him play in the Adidas games a few weeks back and he isn’t close to being a 2 guard. I thought that he played very well and absolutely love Brooks motor! That being said, he is a forward... whether it's at the 3 or 4, well, that’s irrelevant in this era. 

Maybe it’s irrelevant on some teams, but I thought there was a clear difference in the roles of the 3 and 4 in Archie’s offense last year.  But that could very well change with different personnel.  With Anderson, Hunter, Forrester, Thompson, Smith, Moore, and Davis, we will be HUGE in 2019-2020 if we land both TJD and Brooks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Maybe it’s irrelevant on some teams, but I thought there was a clear difference in the roles of the 3 and 4 in Archie’s offense last year.  But that could very well change with different personnel.  With Anderson, Hunter, Forrester, Thompson, Smith, Moore, and Davis, we will be HUGE in 2019-2020 if we land both TJD and Brooks.  

When Davis went down, our 4 & 5’s were forwards, because we didn’t have a prototypical big man. Juwan played the 5 and a combination of Smith, McSwain, Hartman, McBob etc. all played 3/4 and a little bit at the 5. We played 3 guards the majority of the time. 

Looking forward, sure, if Davis is healthy and Forrester, Thompson or Moore develop as anticipated... there might be a noticeable difference. However, I just don’t see a clear cut difference in our 3/4 at the moment. 

You’d obviously would like for your 3 to be your lock down perimeter defender, that can shoot from distance and has the ability to drive/slash when needed. And in that scenario, I could see Brooks playing the 3, as long as he continues to develop of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Danomatic said:

Looking forward, sure, if Davis is healthy and Forrester, Thompson or Moore develop as anticipated... there might be a noticeable difference. However, I just don’t see a clear cut difference in our 3/4 at the moment. 

I doubt that you ever really will on a regular basis. Archie likes long, athletic, versatile players who can play multiple roles. Based on how he built his teams at Dayton and what he has talked about, 2s should either be versatile enough to fill in at the 1 or 3 for short periods, 3s either the 2 or 4, 4s either the 3 or 5. The 1 is the most rigid position with the 5 being a distant second. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/2/2018 at 11:00 AM, hoosierBGH said:

I doubt that you ever really will on a regular basis. Archie likes long, athletic, versatile players who can play multiple roles. Based on how he built his teams at Dayton and what he has talked about, 2s should either be versatile enough to fill in at the 1 or 3 for short periods, 3s either the 2 or 4, 4s either the 3 or 5. The 1 is the most rigid position with the 5 being a distant second. 

Completely agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...