The Official “Regular Posters of the Basketball Forum” Thread

#5,358
#5,358
johnfnkelly said:
I'm imagining a small ball lineup that's perimeter centered and can shoot the 3. Fulkerson isn't that.
Click to expand...

And taking out the one player that demands a double team would take away open shots from the 3.

Fulky absolutely is apart of any lineup that gets good looks from 3
 
#5,360
#5,360
johnfnkelly said:
Ok lol.
Click to expand...

If you don’t think an inside presence is important to getting good looks from 3 you aren’t very basketball knowledgeable.

In fact I’d invite you to research how many times over the the last 5 years MR. Rick Barnes has discussed in great detail that his offense runs thru the post and the inside out 3 is a much higher % shot than one that is just initiated from the perimeter.

if you don’t accept that as the fact of how Barnes teams play I invite you to go follow Pearl and Auburn where the inside out post presence is irrelevant in his offense but this is a Vol discussion last I checked.
 
#5,361
#5,361
BruinVol said:
If you don’t think an inside presence is important to getting good looks from 3 you aren’t very basketball knowledgeable.

In fact I’d invite you to research how many times over the the last 5 years MR. Rick Barnes has discussed in great detail that his offense runs thru the post and the inside out 3 is a much higher % shot than one that is just initiated from the perimeter.

if you don’t accept that as the fact of how Barnes teams play I invite you to go follow Pearl and Auburn where the inside out post presence is irrelevant in his offense but this is a Vol discussion last I checked.
Click to expand...
are you okay?
 
#5,364
#5,364
johnfnkelly said:
Clearly not if you’re really this argumentative and willing to insult my intelligence over my preference of Pons being in a small ball lineup. Check yourself.
Click to expand...

Playing pons at the 5 isn’t worth a discussion unless the 4 is another 4 type player and your op didn’t have that.
 
#5,365
#5,365
johnfnkelly said:
Clearly not if you’re really this argumentative and willing to insult my intelligence over my preference of Pons being in a small ball lineup. Check yourself.
Click to expand...

Playing pons at the 5 isn’t worth a discussion unless the 4 is another 4 type player and your op didn’t have that. In fact you had a PG as the 4.

I could see Pons and the new grad transfer Playing the 4-5 at times
 
#5,368
#5,368
The best “small ball“ we have had under Barnes was with Grant and admiral at the 4/5

pons and EJA will be our best chance of matching that “small ball” approach
 
#5,369
#5,369
BruinVol said:
Tell me what our small ball lineup was last year?

And the year before?
Click to expand...
when did I say we’ve ever courted a small ball lineup? you’re taking this too far. literally just entertaining the concept of a small ball lineup on a message board. nothing more, nothing less. just breathe.
 
#5,370
#5,370
BruinVol said:
Playing pons at the 5 isn’t worth a discussion unless the 4 is another 4 type player and your op didn’t have that. In fact you had a PG as the 4.

I could see Pons and the new grad transfer Playing the 4-5 at times
Click to expand...
If you think Josiah James is a point guard then you aren’t very basketball knowledgeable.
 
#5,371
#5,371
johnfnkelly said:
when did I say we’ve ever courted a small ball lineup? you’re taking this too far. literally just entertaining the concept of a small ball lineup on a message board. nothing more, nothing less. just breathe.
Click to expand...

We have though you see. Grant and Admiral did it so well because they still could play thru the post and that’s the point.

Btw if you presented this discussion based on the assumption that Fulky wasn’t able to play for some reason it would be reasonable but for you to act like Fulky can’t be apart of a “small ball” lineup is ridiculous. He would make it better
 
#5,373
#5,373
I think that JJJ is quite capable as a PG. Probably better than many we've had there recently. I'd argue that he is better than Bowden and Turner, but not Bone. He was more under control than Vescovi. He might be a better distributor than KJ, Bailey, or JS if we get a season in less than 4 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruinVol
#5,374
#5,374
Thunder Good-Oil said:
I think that JJJ is quite capable as a PG. Probably better than many we've had there recently. I'd argue that he is better than Bowden and Turner, but not Bone. He was more under control than Vescovi. He might be a better distributor than KJ, Bailey, or JS if we get a season in less than 4 months.
Click to expand...
He’s better than Bowden for sure but I couldn’t agree with you on Turner unless you are comparing freshmen years and yes James was way better than Turner as a freshman Pg.
Turner turned into a dang good PG his junior and senior years. I do think James can be better than him quicker though
 
#5,375
#5,375
BruinVol said:
He’s better than Bowden for sure but I couldn’t agree with you on Turner unless you are comparing freshmen years and yes James was way better than Turner as a freshman Pg.
Turner turned into a dang good PG his junior and senior years. I do think James can be better than him quicker though
Click to expand...

Turner got better every year. But he was never THE PG for an entire season. I always thought of him as a shooting guard that wasn't real comfortable as the floor general primarily. But he did make strides last year when his shot went into the ****ter. Assist totals might not support it, but I always thought of him as a score first guard. Assist numbers can easily distort reality. Dumping passes into somebody like Grant can inflate them while extra passes by unselfish, well coached teammates reduce the stats. JJJ seems to be able to make those great passes, although it seems like his teammates had some trouble hanging onto his highlight reel feeds.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top