just heard cm on 104.5

#26
#26
zansdad said:
Not sure McRae starts next year. I think McBee has cemented himself at the 2 guard and Golden is obviously the PG. Maymon and Stokes of course, down low. That leaves the SF open for McRae, Richardson and probably the Juco kid to fight over as the starter. While I expect great improvement from McRae, I would also expect the same improvement from Richardson.
Click to expand...

I don't see anyone beating our jordy for the 3.

Also, if we sign Fabyon then trae starts at the 2 not mcbee and once again leaves jordy at the 3.

I fully expect jordy to be a starter and 30 minute a game guy next year.
 
#27
#27
phowell23 said:
If that's the case then we will do very well next season.
Click to expand...

This.

You know what you're going to get in the post, trae should improve his ball handling some but the scoring wil be here. The biggest question mark is at the 2 and 3, and if jordy is average 13-15ppg from the team we are very good IMO.
 
#28
#28
supersmo18 said:
I've been VERY pleased overall as of late with McRae. I don't think he was quite ready last season which is why CBP didn't play him much, but now that he's matured more, I'm thinking he's going to be a very valuable player in the future. If not as a starter, then definitely as a SOLID 2nd stringer.
Click to expand...

My my, what a nice avatar :) I agree though. Hit the weight room this year and next season he'll be good to go.
 
#30
#30
I like Martin's approach; however, you have to have guys who become great to win. I hope this doesn't turn into getting guys with less talent because they play hard, which I don't think it will. Sometimes you have to take risks to get a talented player out of high school. Look at DeMarcus Cousins for example. The one positive I see from this staff is their ability to truly develop talent. If we can land guys with all the intangibles Martin will get them to their full potential.
 
#31
#31
but look at where Tennessee's scoring is coming from this year - 4 stars Golden, McRae, Maymon and Hall before he was kicked and 5 star Stokes. Look who'll score the points next year - those guys again. Look at the roster of 90 pct of the teams which advance to the Sweet 16 - dominated by 4s and 5s. Look at who he's recruiting in 2013 - 4 stars Nichols, Nick King, Robert Hubbs, JWIII, Sindarius Thornwell, Kennedy Meeks.

You can recruit 2s and 3s to fill roles, but the majority of your roster has to be 4s and 5s if you want to compete at the highest levels.

I'm confident he knows that based on his Purdue years. When Cuonzo was at Purdue, they scratched around for 7 years with a record 3 games above .500 that whole time recruiting mostly 2s and 3s with 3-4 4 stars mixed in. It wasn't until the last class he recruited - with Painter as head coach - a class with 4 4 stars, that Purdue started making noise again.

Spartacavolus said:
He actually said he doesn't care if a player is 2 or 4 star and pays no attention to it. He judges by watching them play to see if they can be a piece of a puzzle for the team.
I like it. Outside of fluke ky, basketball needs role players--pickers, defensive players, rebounders, spot up shooters, etc. Too many chiefs and not enough Indians on the floor usually doesn't work out in college ball. Again, outside of kys developmental NBA team.
Click to expand...
 
#32
#32
germanicus said:
but look at where Tennessee's scoring is coming from this year - 4 stars Golden, McRae, Maymon and Hall before he was kicked and 5 star Stokes. Look who'll score the points next year - those guys again. Look at the roster of 90 pct of the teams which advance to the Sweet 16 - dominated by 4s and 5s. Look at who he's recruiting in 2013 - 4 stars Nichols, Nick King, Robert Hubbs, JWIII, Sindarius Thornwell, Kennedy Meeks.

You can recruit 2s and 3s to fill roles, but the majority of your roster has to be 4s and 5s if you want to compete at the highest levels.

I'm confident he knows that based on his Purdue years. When Cuonzo was at Purdue, they scratched around for 7 years with a record 3 games above .500 that whole time recruiting mostly 2s and 3s with 3-4 4 stars mixed in. It wasn't until the last class he recruited - with Painter as head coach - a class with 4 4 stars, that Purdue started making noise again.
Click to expand...


I agree, but I believe most 5 star guys aren't the knock down three guy we need. IMO, and I'd like to hear your take on this, you only need two big time guys to win, no matter the position. The rest of the guys should consist of: a great ball handler, a great rebounder/defender in paint, two very good spot shooters/hustlers, and another post who can score a little, maybe even just a spot up 10-15 foot type of guy/play defense/and rebound.
 
#33
#33
Just my opinion, but you need to have stars (by that I mean your best players) at the 2,3 and 4 spots on the floors. Those guys are like corner outfielders in baseball. Really need to be four tool guys - scoring, handling,rebound, defense. Most likely, those correspond to 4 and 5 star rated high school kids.The spots where - to me scouting is most important and where you can see a 3 star guy come in and be very good are the 1 and 5 spots - for totally opposite reasons. At 5, there aren't many of them and it's really difficult to project how a really big kid in high school is going to develop in college. At the 1, there are a ton of those kids playing and if, like appears to be the case with Landry, they are great ball handlers/distributors, they can make your team go without a lot of scoring.
keckjm said:
I agree, but I believe most 5 star guys aren't the knock down three guy we need. IMO, and I'd like to hear your take on this, you only need two big time guys to win, no matter the position. The rest of the guys should consist of: a great ball handler, a great rebounder/defender in paint, two very good spot shooters/hustlers, and another post who can score a little, maybe even just a spot up 10-15 foot type of guy/play defense/and rebound.
Click to expand...
 
#34
#34
germanicus said:
Just my opinion, but you need to have stars (by that I mean your best players) at the 2,3 and 4 spots on the floors. Those guys are like corner outfielders in baseball. Really need to be four tool guys - scoring, handling,rebound, defense. Most likely, those correspond to 4 and 5 star rated high school kids.The spots where - to me scouting is most important and where you can see a 3 star guy come in and be very good are the 1 and 5 spots - for totally opposite reasons. At 5, there aren't many of them and it's really difficult to project how a really big kid in high school is going to develop in college. At the 1, there are a ton of those kids playing and if, like appears to be the case with Landry, they are great ball handlers/distributors, they can make your team go without a lot of scoring.
Click to expand...

That's a great post. I completely agree.
 
#35
#35
germanicus said:
Just my opinion, but you need to have stars (by that I mean your best players) at the 2,3 and 4 spots on the floors. Those guys are like corner outfielders in baseball. Really need to be four tool guys - scoring, handling,rebound, defense. Most likely, those correspond to 4 and 5 star rated high school kids.The spots where - to me scouting is most important and where you can see a 3 star guy come in and be very good are the 1 and 5 spots - for totally opposite reasons. At 5, there aren't many of them and it's really difficult to project how a really big kid in high school is going to develop in college. At the 1, there are a ton of those kids playing and if, like appears to be the case with Landry, they are great ball handlers/distributors, they can make your team go without a lot of scoring.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but I do believe the PG spot is the most important spot on the floor. Your PG is the general of the team. He's the coach on the floor. If you don't have a guy who can facilitate the offense your doomed. This can be seen in Golden early in the year. When he played bad the team played bad, and we lost to very bad teams. I'm not saying you have to have a 5 star PG, but you do have to have a smart, great ball handling, and aggressive guy back there. IMO the two best players on the field scoring wise should be your 2 and 4 positions. You have that and add a efficient PG, a big rebound/defending center, and a SF who can penetrate and defend and you have a great line up. Great post by the way though.
 
#36
#36
A pg that can handle the rock like it's on a string and can get by people makes everyone better.

That could be a 2-5 star. Is Teague a 5 star? I'd take a lot of lower rated pg's over him. Like the kid that plays for whomever beat Ole Miss this week. He ate them up with his ballhandling.
 
#39
#39
I am not calling McRae a bust, either. Maybe if CCM can give Kenny Hall an attitude adjustment he could have a decent senior season. He has made better players out of Maymon, McBee, McRae and even Tatum. We could have a formidable front line next year with Maymon, Stokes, Yemi, Hall, Miller and whatever newcomer signs on. Golden, McBee, McRae and Richardson will all be back after a full year of CCM coaching.

Woolridge is the poster boy of what is wrong with the "star" system. He got a high rating because of the name recognition of his dad. I believe he is a good kid, but really doesn't fit into CCM's system.
 
#40
#40
phowell23 said:
We have certainty had a string of 4 stars that have not panned out to their hype:

Renaldo Woolridge 4* (ranked #53 overall in the nation)
Philip Jurick 4*
Kenny Hall 4* (ranked #74 overall in the nation)
Jordan McRae 4* (ranked #47 overall in the nation)
Click to expand...

Lets not forget top 10 5* Hopson.
 
#41
#41
Coach Zo is doing it the right way - to build a program instead of Cal's NBA method.

I am in the McRae camp as well. If he does things in the off-season to strengthen his body and starts playing better within the system he can be All SEC by his senior year. Great upside.
 
#42
#42
Oh look at all the McRae bandwagoners now.

Just saying, I was still with McRae in January when you all bailed. :)
 
#46
#46
zjcvols said:
Sarcastic post was sarcastic. :)
Click to expand...


I meant in general. Seems like a lot of people are expecting big things. I'm just not sure. Some streaky stuff is there and he's athletic, but he's mentally weak as well. I think he is going to be like Cam. I hope I'm wrong. And God bless Cam. Just need more.
 
#47
#47
Spartacavolus said:
I meant in general. Seems like a lot of people are expecting big things. I'm just not sure. Some streaky stuff is there and he's athletic, but he's mentally weak as well. I think he is going to be like Cam. I hope I'm wrong. And God bless Cam. Just need more.
Click to expand...

Possible, but he's been one of the more positive members of the team. I think he's just wildly inconsistent because of his game. Like I said, he was immature coming to UT. He's matured off court, but he has work to do on court.
 
#48
#48
zjcvols said:
Possible, but he's been one of the more positive members of the team. I think he's just wildly inconsistent because of his game. Like I said, he was immature coming to UT. He's matured off court, but he has work to do on court.
Click to expand...

He has to be able to play and not let his streaky offense affect his d, boxing out, focus, etc. Hopefully he can get it fixed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top