• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Final score: Bradley 69 Missouri State 60

No, Linke should not be getting those minutes. It is almost looks like an act of desperation move to go to him. Although he may be understanding where to be on the floor, his talent level is very low and his athleticism is poor. He gets overmatched on defense and his offense is almost non existant. There was one play where he got the ball on the block, but immediately realized he couldn't do anything with it and passed it away and it wound up being an empty possession. Any of the other big men would have have scored on that. The effort is good, but it is effort x talent = performance, and talent=athleticism + sport IQ. The athleticism is low.

There is a coaching cliché that you can't coach size or speed. Meaning, if you have players with significant physical factors, you find a way to leverage that. We have Hannah, Thomas, Atlasan, and Jonovic with far more physical and basketball skills than Linke. However, the minutes for Hannah, Thomas and Atlasan were down, and Jonovic was nowhere. 7'1" planted near the basket on defense at times is a pretty considerable option. There is also the option of going small and forcing tempo. Intead we went with Linke who adds nothing and slugged out a game. We have barely beat teams that are in the lower half of the conference. They all know they can almost score at will inside. An answer needs to be found fast if we are to succeed through the conference grind and start playing top-half teams. But, at least we are winning. They guys play hard and have talent.

A lot of times coaches get fixated with playing kids who adhere to the system and know where to be on the field/court. They also fixate on who performs best in practice. That is good and understandable, but within reason. The objective is to play the best players who will perform better overall and win a game.

Last year we wound up giving Linke quite a few minutes and that was not a good sign down the stretch. Now we are putting him in early in the conference season. Next year we are very guard heavy with very few "big men." Not a good direction.

This is not doomsaying, this is still a very good team and it can win the regular season conference and it's post season. It also has the potential to win a couple games in the NCAA tournament. However, the pieces of the puzzle need to come together, and those pieces need to be the right ones.
 
ghunt said:
No, Linke should not be getting those minutes. It is almost looks like an act of desperation move to go to him. Although he may be understanding where to be on the floor, his talent level is very low and his athleticism is poor. He gets overmatched on defense and his offense is almost non existant. There was one play where he got the ball on the block, but immediately realized he couldn't do anything with it and passed it away and it wound up being an empty possession. Any of the other big men would have have scored on that. The effort is good, but it is effort x talent = performance, and talent=athleticism + sport IQ. The athleticism is low.

There is a coaching cliché that you can't coach size or speed. Meaning, if you have players with significant physical factors, you find a way to leverage that. We have Hannah, Thomas, Atlasan, and Jonovic with far more physical and basketball skills than Linke. However, the minutes for Hannah, Thomas and Atlasan were down, and Jonovic was nowhere. 7'1" planted near the basket on defense at times is a pretty considerable option. There is also the option of going small and forcing tempo. Intead we went with Linke who adds nothing and slugged out a game. We have barely beat teams that are in the lower half of the conference. They all know they can almost score at will inside. An answer needs to be found fast if we are to succeed through the conference grind and start playing top-half teams. But, at least we are winning. They guys play hard and have talent.

A lot of times coaches get fixated with playing kids who adhere to the system and know where to be on the field/court. They also fixate on who performs best in practice. That is good and understandable, but within reason. The objective is to play the best players who will perform better overall and win a game.

Last year we wound up giving Linke quite a few minutes and that was not a good sign down the stretch. Now we are putting him in early in the conference season. Next year we are very guard heavy with very few "big men." Not a good direction.

This is not doomsaying, this is still a very good team and it can win the regular season conference and it's post season. It also has the potential to win a couple games in the NCAA tournament. However, the pieces of the puzzle need to come together, and those pieces need to be the right ones.
Click to expand...

Interesting points. Almar fouls too much and when he isn’t making shots he isn’t helpful. Corey is our best combo of defense, physicality and offense. The starting lineup has 5 shooters so the offense has max flexibility.

Whether Linke plays will depend on matchups. We needed him to beat up on MSU’s big boy - and it helped. And face it, this team has enough firepower to sacrifice one spot on offense.

Meta is another matchup piece to use. He isn’t consistent enough to play for long stretches and sometimes we just don’t need him. He looked pretty good early in the season but Thomas has been the better option. Which puts Almar in the 2nd rotation - and we really want his shooting so he’s gonna play some minutes. There aren’t enough minutes for all the 5 men so, for now, Meta is sacrificed.

Hannah plays as much as anyone when he doesn’t turn the ball over or play soft as he did in some previous games.

Lastly, a coach - at least a good coach - is not going to play kids who can’t perform in practice. That is how you earn playing time because you earn the coach’s trust. He - or she - is not going to put a kid in a game and hope they show performance that the kid hasn’t demonstrated in practice. That is career suicide. Lots of talented, athletic kids can’t crack a lineup because the coach doesn’t trust them.
 
BengalFan14 said:
...

Lastly, a coach - at least a good coach - is not going to play kids who can’t perform in practice. That is how you earn playing time because you earn the coach’s trust. He - or she - is not going to put a kid in a game and hope they show performance that the kid hasn’t demonstrated in practice. That is career suicide. Lots of talented, athletic kids can’t crack a lineup because the coach doesn’t trust them.
Click to expand...

Right... Coach Wardle said before the game that Linke was going to play. And, from what I heard, it was likely because of Linke's dedication to practice and his work ethic. Sometimes coaches reward the players for what fans don't see. And it benefits the team in the long run by inspiring the other players to put in the work.
 
Da Coach said:
Right... Coach Wardle said before the game that Linke was going to play. And, from what I heard, it was likely because of Linke's dedication to practice and his work ethic. Sometimes coaches reward the players for what fans don't see. And it benefits the team in the long run by inspiring the other players to put in the work.
Click to expand...

Coach Wardle said in postgame that his veterans told him that Linke needed to play. And I’m sure that is because of what you said Coach. Also, sometimes we need the steady things versus the sexy things. The kid was certainly steady last night. I’m happy to see the kid get a chance to contribute in an important game.
 
ghunt said:
No, Linke should not be getting those minutes. It is almost looks like an act of desperation move to go to him. Although he may be understanding where to be on the floor, his talent level is very low and his athleticism is poor. He gets overmatched on defense and his offense is almost non existant. There was one play where he got the ball on the block, but immediately realized he couldn't do anything with it and passed it away and it wound up being an empty possession. Any of the other big men would have have scored on that. The effort is good, but it is effort x talent = performance, and talent=athleticism + sport IQ. The athleticism is low.

There is a coaching cliché that you can't coach size or speed. Meaning, if you have players with significant physical factors, you find a way to leverage that. We have Hannah, Thomas, Atlasan, and Jonovic with far more physical and basketball skills than Linke. However, the minutes for Hannah, Thomas and Atlasan were down, and Jonovic was nowhere. 7'1" planted near the basket on defense at times is a pretty considerable option. There is also the option of going small and forcing tempo. Intead we went with Linke who adds nothing and slugged out a game. We have barely beat teams that are in the lower half of the conference. They all know they can almost score at will inside. An answer needs to be found fast if we are to succeed through the conference grind and start playing top-half teams. But, at least we are winning. They guys play hard and have talent.

A lot of times coaches get fixated with playing kids who adhere to the system and know where to be on the field/court. They also fixate on who performs best in practice. That is good and understandable, but within reason. The objective is to play the best players who will perform better overall and win a game.

Last year we wound up giving Linke quite a few minutes and that was not a good sign down the stretch. Now we are putting him in early in the conference season. Next year we are very guard heavy with very few "big men." Not a good direction.

This is not doomsaying, this is still a very good team and it can win the regular season conference and it's post season. It also has the potential to win a couple games in the NCAA tournament. However, the pieces of the puzzle need to come together, and those pieces need to be the right ones.
Click to expand...

Our post deficiencies are not new this year on both ends. Fouling issues also create situations where more guys have to play. Thomas is growing and getting better as his first D1 year goes on. He’s clearly our best option. Solid offensively and growing. Good rebounder and good defender.

Unfortunately, Almar really one has one position. He’s not quick enough or a ball handler enough for the three spot and he’s undersized strength wise and too perimeter oriented for a 5 man. But with Hannah wanting to be a four man, Almar is stuck as a five when they are in together. He is also struggling big time right now and I have to believe confidence is playing into that (partly stemming from his fouling issues which he seems frustrated with on the court and are partly because of playing out of position). I think we have to keep trying him though, as his shooting can be really valuable.

I disagree Linke is a problem as your few minute a half third 5 man. He’s not an offensive threat, but he knows that and doesn’t turn it over and makes good passes. I think both last year and last night he helped Bradley on defense and we played better as a whole. I think Brian was too stubborn both years waiting as long into the year not using Linke. Meta is the alternate and while he has size, he is no more athletic than Linke but is slower on defense to being in the right spot. Linke is also the better rebounder.

So in essence the choice is a couple easy post buckets Meta can get per game with his size and better offensive scoring and free throw drawing game than Linke, or Linke’s better rebounding and defense along with better ball security. There may be times to try Meta still, but in terms of what this team needs (we struggle with post defense and rebounding) I believe Linke is the better option. And both years the players seem to agree, because I’m almost positive I remember Brian saying they requested he play last year too when he started playing.

I’m always a fan of small ball lineups in college, but with their big men creating problems yesterday I don’t think it was an option. The game before we did try Davis as a four and Hannah/Thomas as five men with Three guards (I think it was Johnson/Deen, Burch/Dillon, Zek) and I think that lineup is good and offensively dangerous in the right matchup. I’ve long said Davis can be a good stretch four in the right matchups because he is tall enough and rebounds well enough. Zek has the height to be a typical three man as well.
 
To me our biggest problems lately have been the struggles to make shots in the first 10 minutes of the game. We need to have better starts period or we will continue to struggle with putting bad teams away early in each and every game. By allowing this to happen we are giving the opposing teams more confidence that they can actually win these games.
I thought last nights crowd looked like the biggest one of the season so the numbers do not match up with that at all for whatever reason. I know coach liked the defense we played last night yet to me we cannot let one player score that many points on a given night.
 
I just want to give a small shout out to Hannah for showing good sportsmanship. In the second half one of the Missouri State players went down hard near the base line. The play quickly moved towards our end of the court, and Hannah stayed behind long enough to offer a hand up to the MS player. (Who refused it.)

I thought Linke played very well. And as was mentioned earlier, in the post game Coach Wardle said his veterans were calling for him to insert Linke into the lineup.
 
We’re 13-2 and alone in first place, so hard for me to find much to complain about. The Drake game on Wednesday should really tell us more about this team, as we can’t allow them to come to our house and leave with a win.
 
BengalFan14 said:
Coach Wardle said in postgame that his veterans told him that Linke needed to play. And I’m sure that is because of what you said Coach. Also, sometimes we need the steady things versus the sexy things. The kid was certainly steady last night. I’m happy to see the kid get a chance to contribute in an important game.
Click to expand...

If that is what the Coach and players wanted, it is understandable. It just is it does highlight a weakness. We can disagree. Maybe some short bursts here and there under similar circumstances are reasonable, but I am trying to be nice, but honest, and just call out the reality of the situation.

The team is hard working and fun to watch. We are winning. I think Wardle, with all he has done, deserves to be here as long as he wants. He is a great coach and I am dang thankful we have him and he resurrected the program to new heights.

However, we have a weakness, Linke is not the size we need. We have played a weak schedule to this point. Teams have identified how to play us. Tougher conference teams are coming up. And, if we still navigate that, we have a post season against tougher teams. And, then we have the roster for next year.

I was just pointing out the obvious. Not saying the sky is falling. Not ripping on anyone. We need a 6'8"+ guy with some muscle at some point who can play defense and rebound, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
 
As has been stated before, we have what we have and have to play with what we have. Sure coach is aware of our needs for next year in regards to frontline players who can be impactful from the start. We are set for guards next year. Let's hope the staff can land what we need for next year.
​​​​​​
 
ghunt said:
We need a 6'8"+ guy with some muscle at some point who can play defense and rebound, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that is on the wish list of every NCAA team and their corresponding NIL affiliates.
 
Tommy said:
I'm sure that is on the wish list of every NCAA team and their corresponding NIL affiliates.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those guys are hard to find. Otherwise, we’d have one. I like our bigs. But our strengths are guards and wings. Every school has areas of strength. When we had Rienk, our best position was the bigs. Duke’s best player is a wing - who’s their big? Or point guard? What we have is versatility - which is huge. Let’s continue to focus on maximizing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top