Thompson...

[shaunguth]

I don't think Bradley has any better post depth this year than last.

Last year we had Egolf, Singh, and Thompson.

This year we have Egolf, Thompson (hopefully ready to contribute), Prosser, and Davis.

I'm pretty sure Prosser and Davis can combine to make up for the 2 points and 3 rebounds we lose from Singh.

As far as playing bigs just because they're big, I don't think that's the case. I think it has more to do with trying to get Egolf some minutes at his natural position and putting someone else in the post at that time.

Also, we are in BIG trouble if Milos is playing the post!

 

[ned]

So I take it you must be an insider, a coach, or on the team to know that the staff isn't crazy about Sticks so come clean w/ how you know this. Are you @ practices and workouts or is this just your own opinion or based on last season

Not on the team. Not a coach. Not at practices or workouts. Don't claim to be an insider. Why do I have to come "clean" with anything? I'm not telling you to believe it. I'm just telling you what I know. If you think the staff is relying on Sticks as a major cog in the rotation next year then I think you are fooling yourself. As always, the proof will be in the pudding.

Do you really think a coaching staff (at ANY school) is high on every single player on their roster? Come on now.

 

[ned]

Last year we had Egolf, Singh, and Thompson.

This year we have Egolf, Thompson (hopefully ready to contribute), Prosser, and Davis.

I'm pretty sure Prosser and Davis can combine to make up for the 2 points and 3 rebounds we lose from Singh.

As far as playing bigs just because they're big, I don't think that's the case. I think it has more to do with trying to get Egolf some minutes at his natural position and putting someone else in the post at that time.

Also, we are in BIG trouble if Milos is playing the post!

Last year you had two "knowns" in Egolf and Singh and a question mark. This year you have one "known" in Egolf and three question marks. What you DO know you have is three veteran, well seasoned senior guards. You have a very talented forward in Taylor Brown. You have two solid sophomore guards in DSE and Eastman.

Give the minutes to those guys instead of rolling the dice with the unknowns. I can't really say much more on the topic. ONLY play Thompson if he separates himself--don't play him just to play him.

 

[shaunguth]

Do you really think a coaching staff (at ANY school) is high on every single player on their roster? Come on now.

I've heard the staff wasn't too high on AW when he was trying to come back from his injury. I'm glad they decided to play him and hope they continue to do so. Things change and we should all hope AT has changed to the point of giving the coaching staff the confidence to put him in each and every game for limited minutes at least.

I would rather have a post rotation of AT, JP, and AD.....putting WE a little further from the basket, where he seems to be more comfortable getting the ball. Of course that would mean AT, JP, and AD are ready to contribute 40 minutes and combine for more than 11 points and 13 rebounds.

 

[ned]

I've heard the staff wasn't too high on AW when he was trying to come back from his injury. I'm glad they decided to play him and hope they continue to do so. Things change and we should all hope AT has changed to the point of giving the coaching staff the confidence to put him in each and every game for limited minutes at least.

I would rather have a post rotation of AT, JP, and AD.....putting WE a little further from the basket, where he seems to be more comfortable getting the ball. Of course that would mean AT, JP, and AD are ready to contribute 40 minutes and combine for more than 11 points and 13 rebounds.

Sure WE is more comfortable playing away from the basket. But it isn't about making him comfortable. Are you ok with Will playing 30 minutes away from the basket at the sake of Taylor, Andrew's, Sammy's, and Dyricus' minutes? I certainly am not.

Im not saying you Shaun but some people struggle to grasp there are only so many minutes to go around in a game. Why would you not want your best players on the floor for the majority of those minutes? It seems like common sense to me. This isn't about making players "comfortable". Its not about keeping the status quo. Its about winning a championship. I think we all agree on that. IMO, you are closer to a championship by playing your best players.

 

[shaunguth]

Give the minutes to those guys instead of rolling the dice with the unknowns. I can't really say much more on the topic. ONLY play Thompson if he separates himself--don't play him just to play him.

I am not/have not/never will say to play someone just to play them. I'm saying if he is putting in the work and doing what the NEW coaching staff is asking of him, then he should be in the game if that's what the staff believes.

My point was that I don't think it'll be too hard for JP and AD to combine for 2 points and 3 rebounds if given Singh's 14 minutes. And if AT has come along to the point of contributing positive minutes, then this team will be better for it and not worse.

 

[ned]

I am not/have not/never will say to play someone just to play them. I'm saying if he is putting in the work and doing what the NEW coaching staff is asking of him, then he should be in the game if that's what the staff believes.

My point was that I don't think it'll be too hard for JP and AD to combine for 2 points and 3 rebounds if given Singh's 14 minutes. And if AT has come along to the point of contributing positive minutes, then this team will be better for it and not worse.

Agreed. If AT has taken HUGE strides and has separated himself as a top tier player then, by all means, play him. That would be a great problem to have. Am I confident that it will happen? No but I've been wrong before.

 

[shaunguth]

Sure WE is more comfortable playing away from the basket. But it isn't about making him comfortable. Are you ok with Will playing 30 minutes away from the basket at the sake of Taylor, Andrew's, Sammy's, and Dyricus' minutes? I certainly am not.

Im not saying you Shaun but some people struggle to grasp there are only so many minutes to go around in a game. Why would you not want your best players on the floor for the majority of those minutes? It seems like common sense to me. This isn't about making players "comfortable". Its not about keeping the status quo. Its about winning a championship. I think we all agree on that. IMO, you are closer to a championship by playing your best players.

I just don't think the answer is by playing SM, AW, TB, DD, and DSE all 40 minutes a game. I don't even like to see players get over 30. I just don't. I would rather see some balance. Based on last season, I guess we should all give up on Milos? Good luck getting him more than 9-10 minutes as long as TB is here.

 

[LittleBrave]

Last year you had two "knowns" in Egolf and Singh and a question mark. This year you have one "known" in Egolf and three question marks. What you DO know you have is three veteran, well seasoned senior guards. You have a very talented forward in Taylor Brown. You have two solid sophomore guards in DSE and Eastman.

Give the minutes to those guys instead of rolling the dice with the unknowns. I can't really say much more on the topic. ONLY play Thompson if he separates himself--don't play him just to play him.

Yes, we have experienced guys, but we should distribute their minutes at the guard position. We have little chance if we have rebounding problems and match-up issues again this season. With bigger bodies on the floor, we can lessen the chance of these problems. We do have 6 quality guards. But just because of this, I'm not in favor of playing 4 of them at a time. I don't want to see SM winded, sore, and ailing as the season progresses from playing almost the entire game.

 

[amckillip]

Rick. I understand your point. I do. In a vacuum and ideal world you would play with three perimeter type guys and two post guys. However, I don't want to play a guy who is a "big" just because hes a big. If he isn't any good then how exactly does that help you win?

Its not like you can just throw a guy out there because hes big and it will make everything better. It doesn't work that way. Good players win games. Bradley and Jim Les need to win games. I don't want our 2nd and 3rd best players not playing just so we can play the 9th best player only because he fits some physical description but has no ability.

Great post, good to hear this coming from someone else too.

 

[BU RICK]

I am not/have not/never will say to play someone just to play them. I'm saying if he is putting in the work and doing what the NEW coaching staff is asking of him, then he should be in the game if that's what the staff believes.

My point was that I don't think it'll be too hard for JP and AD to combine for 2 points and 3 rebounds if given Singh's 14 minutes. And if AT has come along to the point of contributing positive minutes, then this team will be better for it and not worse.

I like our new assistant coaches too, I think that's something we haven't factored in. I remember CB used to run the practices which freed up JL to get to his office and concentrate on recruiting.....etc.

ned, I consider TB a big and one of our best players - no way he's going to lose minutes with 2 other bigs and two guards in the game.

 

[ph]

Sure WE is more comfortable playing away from the basket. But it isn't about making him comfortable. Are you ok with Will playing 30 minutes away from the basket at the sake of Taylor, Andrew's, Sammy's, and Dyricus' minutes? I certainly am not.

Im not saying you Shaun but some people struggle to grasp there are only so many minutes to go around in a game. Why would you not want your best players on the floor for the majority of those minutes? It seems like common sense to me. This isn't about making players "comfortable". Its not about keeping the status quo. Its about winning a championship. I think we all agree on that. IMO, you are closer to a championship by playing your best players.

I mostly agree with that theory. It is hard to imagine WE as more productive than SM or AW.

But, I do think there is an opportunity to have SM and AW playing more like 30 super productive minutes vs 38 productive minutes (with the increased wear of those extra minutes)

if we could have a 4 running the pick-n-roll (like the best combo in NBA history that JL personally experienced) instead of our 5. Then our 5 is closer to the basket, to get boards, kick out missed shots to an open SM or AW for 3.....money. (Instead of one-and-done possessions where we are back on D)

 

[basketball nut]

Not on the team. Not a coach. Not at practices or workouts. Don't claim to be an insider. Why do I have to come "clean" with anything? I'm not telling you to believe it. I'm just telling you what I know. If you think the staff is relying on Sticks as a major cog in the rotation next year then I think you are fooling yourself. As always, the proof will be in the pudding.

Do you really think a coaching staff (at ANY school) is high on every single player on their roster? Come on now.

First of all just got back on the board and seen your post. I never said and haven't seen anyone else say that AT was going to be a major cog as you say. I have said that no one knows until the season starts what these young men will do (that is for each one of our bigs icluding WE although I don't have any doubt he will be OK). I am saying that I hope he can help out. You are the one that said not to expect anything out of him and the fact that the staff didn't like him. If the staff didn't like him then why would they renew his scholarship as they don't have to do that? They must see something to keep him here is all I am saying.

 

[Dallas Brave]

I'm for starting the best "combination" of 5 players who can score, defend, and rebound ... maybe that is the 5 best individual players, maybe not ... it is a team game, not a game of HORSE

I really hope to avoid watching another season where the Braves rank 305th among Div 1 teams in offensive rebounding % as they did in 2009. Very painful.

More 2009-10 team stats here
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Bradley

 

[LittleBrave]

I'm for starting the best "combination" of 5 players who can score, defend, and rebound ... maybe that is the 5 best individual players, maybe not ... it is a team game, not a game of HORSE

I really hope to avoid watching another season where the Braves rank 305th among Div 1 teams in offensive rebounding % as they did in 2009. Very painful.

More 2009 team stats here
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Bradley

Maybe more painful was watching opponents grab offensive rebounds at liberty - some games more than others.

 

[AZ BU Fan]

JL--like most coaches, says one thing in the offseason and changes course during the season when he sees his team on a daily basis (alot of guys do this). I don't want him playing more "bigs" just for the sake of playing more bigs. He needs to play his best players the most minutes.

There are guys like Taylor, Sammy, Andrew, and Dodie who will play a LOT of minutes. Add Dyricus to that mix. Add Eastman to that mix. There just aren't that many more minutes to go around.

I don't want Bradley to weaken itsself just to say "we play more bigs" and I don't think Jim Les wants that either. Play your best players. Don't try to fit some "model".

One could argue that BU's best players are SM, DD, DSE, AW and TB. Should this be their starting line up?

IF BU is getting killed on the boards, allowing opposing guards to drive down the lane unobstructed, or leaving open 3 pt shooters on the wings because smaller BU players have to double team opposing post players, I say, go bigger.

 

[Dallas Brave]

Maybe more painful was watching opponents grab offensive rebounds at liberty - some games more than others.

Rebounding at both ends was pitiful. We ranked 178th among Div 1 teams at defensive rebounding. The team was athletic, fast, and occasionally hard-nosed ... maybe, just maybe, it was the height factor. :?

I hear that height sometimes helps when fielding a basketball "team"

 

[ned]

Rebounding at both ends was pitiful. We ranked 178th among Div 1 teams at defensive rebounding. The team was athletic, fast, and occasionally hard-nosed ... maybe, just maybe, it was the height factor. :?

I hear that height sometimes helps when fielding a basketball "team"

Height helps. If the "height" can play. If it can't then you aren't exactly helped. I think people assume that just because a tall guy plays over a smaller guy that you would be automatically better. Or even a better rebounding team.

Ok, so Bradley is a little better rebounding team. But at what expense? You can't just assume that going "bigger" makes things better. Its a cost/benefit analysis thing.

AZ BU Fan---I wouldn't have a problem with that lineup. Would we struggle with bigger teams? Yes. But they sure as heck would struggle guarding us. That goes both ways.

 

[Braves4Life]

One could argue that BU's best players are SM, DD, DSE, AW and TB. Should this be their starting line up?

Though these may be the 5 most talented players I would like to see either DD or DSE come off the bench as a 6th-man "super sub". I think it will be critical to start WE against most teams.

I think part of BU's problem is they have so many similar players of similar ability..... it really makes for an interesting and difficult substitution dilemna..... one that Les has yet to master.

I would love it if JP and AT could play together without embarrassing themselves. One lineup I would absolutely love to see is WE, AT, JP, TB, with AW running the point. Can you imagine?

 

[basketball nut]

Height helps. If the "height" can play. If it can't then you aren't exactly helped. I think people assume that just because a tall guy plays over a smaller guy that you would be automatically better. Or even a better rebounding team.

Ok, so Bradley is a little better rebounding team. But at what expense? You can't just assume that going "bigger" makes things better. Its a cost/benefit analysis thing.

AZ BU Fan---I wouldn't have a problem with that lineup. Would we struggle with bigger teams? Yes. But they sure as heck would struggle guarding us. That goes both ways.

1 problem I see w/ your phelosophy is this team doesn't shoot like the JC teams did. Is that a rip on this team not at all but this team relies on the pull up 15' jump shot as much as the 3 pointer. If some of these guys get their 3 point sooting down then yes we could go smaller but not the way this team is set up right now. Their are plenty of minutes to play some bigger line ups. What about a front rotation to WE, TB and one of the bigs w/ WE going to the 4 to rest TB? Just a thought because Milos may improve enough that he becomes the back up to TB.