appropriate to revisit due to the castration of the past 2 hours. Raise your hands if you still believe it's a guard's game. Then, take a double dose of Ex Lax and tell everyone around you to "take safety."
It's a guards game in the NBA (at least according to Shaq).
In college, I think the most important players are the 6'7" - 6'10" forwards.
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on March 12, 2010, 08:53:33 PM
It's a guards game in the NBA (at least according to Shaq).
In college, I think the most important players are the 6'7" - 6'10" forwards.
If height has everything to do with it, let's start Mbao...
Why do we have to go through this again?
College basketball is a guard game...anyone who says otherwise is a moron.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on March 12, 2010, 09:08:19 PM
Why do we have to go through this again?
College basketball is a guard game...anyone who says otherwise is a moron.
So you are obviously the expert.
I think the fact that MU and Nova combined to win 46 games this season pretty much backs up 1104's point.
I still don't see the point of debating a stupid cliche. All I care about is college basketball is a basketball game. The rest is all details.
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on March 12, 2010, 09:10:05 PM
So you are obviously the expert.
Compared to anyone who says "college basketball is a big mans game"...yes I am.
Quote from: ecompt on March 12, 2010, 09:18:51 PM
I think the fact that MU and Nova combined to win 46 games this season pretty much backs up 1104's point.
And Syracuse won the conference....
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on March 12, 2010, 09:27:32 PM
And Syracuse won the conference....
And UNC is 16-16...because their guards had a terrible year.
Georgia Tech has two of the best big men in college basketball...and are barely going to make the tournament.
Next year, UW will have 4 guys in the 6'10" to 7'1" range...Surely you are picking them to win the National Title?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on March 12, 2010, 08:51:34 PM
appropriate to revisit due to the castration of the past 2 hours. Raise your hands if you still believe it's a guard's game. Then, take a double dose of Ex Lax and tell everyone around you to "take safety."
Look to your left.
See the standings.
See the teams in 3rd and 5th,
See that neither of them have a single decent true big man.
Remove head from ass.
The best teams have both.
The worst teams have neither.
You can be mediocre with solid bigs, but no guards (see UNC).
You can be good with solid guards, but no bigs (see MU).
I am utterly amazed that GU found some big men in that last 2 months, because there is surely no way a team without a low post presence could beat a team with an All-American big man.
It's a shooters' game. I don't care how tall you are. MU shot 37% .. 30% from 3 land -- far below our season averages. Sure, crashing the lane amongst trees will lower your fg% .. but our 3s were open looks that didn't drop.
Might not have won, but we shoot closer to our average, and this is a 2-3 possession game at the end, just like every game this year.
4ever....did we beat Georgetown this year?
Did we finish ahead of them in the Big East?
How is North Carolina doing with their all-world bigs sans any guards?
I could go on and on
Talk to us when West Virginia loses by the round of 16 at the latest. They have garbage guards and will go down in the tourney.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on March 12, 2010, 09:08:19 PM
Why do we have to go through this again?
College basketball is a guard game...anyone who says otherwise is a moron.
Yes, it is a guards game. But, you have to have a big body or two. Tonight was a perfect example of that. And if you dont think so, you may want to rethink who is the moron.
Quote from: 79Warrior on March 12, 2010, 09:46:12 PM
Yes, it is a guards game. But, you have to have a big body or two. Tonight was a perfect example of that. And if you dont think so, you may want to rethink who is the moron.
Of course you need some size, thats not the issue.
Some people think that having good bigs is more important than having good guards...a premise that is so unbelievably false, it makes my head want to explode.
I thought we were revisiting the "fouling at the end of the game situation"...
You cant blame Buzz for having Junior foul here, give them the free throws, stop the clock, and try to get back into it
44-24 total rebounds
11-5 offensive rebounds
60-33 PIP+FTM
54%-37% FG%
4-1 Blocks
It may be a "guard's game" but I don't recall many NCAA tournament champions with out dominant big men. Good guard play in the tournament is essential, but when paired with poor interior play (like MU), it will be very difficult to make a deep run.
It's an inside-outside game. The key is to have at least two strong guards, one slasher, and one versatile big guy.
Quote from: GregClausenForever on March 12, 2010, 11:26:42 PM
It's an inside-outside game. The key is to have at least two strong guards, one slasher, and one versatile big guy.
Absolutely--you must have one rweliable big to score about 12+points and 9 rebounds. You have to have a low block presence--and that does not mean double down with your 5'8" guard to help your 6'6" center.
The last time we had two good bigs (Jackson and Merrit)--bingo--final 4.
Quote from: warriorsforever on March 12, 2010, 11:02:40 PM
It may be a "guard's game" but I don't recall many NCAA tournament champions with out dominant big men. Good guard play in the tournament is essential, but when paired with poor interior play (like MU), it will be very difficult to make a deep run.
No one has said differently. The issue is that you cannot win with good bigs alone. You can win with good guards sans good bigs. To win it all, you need both....no one has ever said that's not case. The problem is that MU has had that type of player in the last 25 years about 2 times. They are incredibly difficult to get
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 12, 2010, 09:44:39 PM
How is North Carolina doing with their all-world bigs sans any guards?
So when the All-American team is announced and none of the UNC bigs are on it, the reason will be because they're on the all-world team? Who fills out the all-world team with Ed Davis and Tyler Zeller? Christian Salecich, Scott Christopherson, and Oscar Schmidt's son, who is currently attending the Universidade de Brazil.
Blah, blah, blah. Balance is key, always will be, doesn't matter what sport you are playing. Look at the '03 team. Of course Wade & Diener were great, but R-Jax and Merritt were huge contributors on that team. If forced to choose, I would rather have stellar guards than posts, but balance is needed to make a great run in the tournament. Otherwise, you are at the mercy of favorable matchups. Remember Stanford?
Quote from: karavotsos on March 13, 2010, 09:27:40 AM
So when the All-American team is announced and none of the UNC bigs are on it, the reason will be because they're on the all-world team? Who fills out the all-world team with Ed Davis and Tyler Zeller? Christian Salecich, Scott Christopherson, and Oscar Schmidt's son, who is currently attending the Universidade de Brazil.
My point is that they have McDonald's All Americans and 5 star players at their bigs and it got them nowhere. In order for bigs to do well, they need guards to open up the lanes (i.e. shoot well from the perimeter) and deliver the ball to them in positions to score. Since UNC doesn't have good guards, their bigs (despite their pedigree) have no chance to excel. So you're right, they won't be making any All-American team because they don't get the chance to shine.
Think of it this way, if a football team had the best wide receiver in America but a quarterback that couldn't get him the ball, how good is that Wide Receiver going to look?
Isn't that what Randy Moss had when he was in Minnesota? None of the QB's he played with were any good. And he was unbelievable. That, to me, is the very definition of the word all-world. The first name that came to mind when I read all-world was David Robinson. Couldn't name one other player on his Navy team. Yet, they made it to the tourney. When else has Navy made it to the tourney? I have no idea. That's what all-world means to me.
I understand the bigger point. I just don't think UNC is a very good way to prove it. I have never been impressed with Davis when I watched him. I know he's a top recruit, but that doesn't make him a good college player. I'm sure at least some of their guards are top recruits as well -- they're at UNC. That doesn't make their guards good players.
And there is no way that Davis or Zeller should be considered great 'bigs.' I understand they are tall, but they play weak. So weak.
I have said this before regarding this issue. If a team had fantastic bigs left and right (lets say 6) and crap guards do they play G-F-F-C-C?
Answer: NO
If a team had fantastic guards left and right (lets say 6) and crap bigs do they play G-G-G-G-F
Answer: YES. We have seen it over and over again
I will not believe it is a bigs game until I see four of them on a court at one time.
Quote from: karavotsos on March 13, 2010, 10:41:24 AM
The first name that came to mind when I read all-world was David Robinson. Couldn't name one other player on his Navy team. Yet, they made it to the tourney. When else has Navy made it to the tourney? I have no idea. That's what all-world means to me.
I could....Brian Gregory (Dayton head coach), Doug Wojick (Tulsa head coach) and Cliff Rees were on that Navy team. They had solid players around him....SMART solid players (you can see that two of them ended up as college coaches).
Quote from: karavotsos on March 13, 2010, 10:41:24 AM
Isn't that what Randy Moss had when he was in Minnesota? None of the QB's he played with were any good. And he was unbelievable. That, to me, is the very definition of the word all-world. The first name that came to mind when I read all-world was David Robinson. Couldn't name one other player on his Navy team. Yet, they made it to the tourney. When else has Navy made it to the tourney? I have no idea. That's what all-world means to me.
I understand the bigger point. I just don't think UNC is a very good way to prove it. I have never been impressed with Davis when I watched him. I know he's a top recruit, but that doesn't make him a good college player. I'm sure at least some of their guards are top recruits as well -- they're at UNC. That doesn't make their guards good players.
And there is no way that Davis or Zeller should be considered great 'bigs.' I understand they are tall, but they play weak. So weak.
I'd say the game has evolved just a tad since the Admiral was in college...
All I was saying is that UNC's bigs are not all-world. Not even close. I was trying to put a definition on who an all-world big man would be. That's all. If I said that Greg Oden was all-world with Ohio State, people would say that they also had Mike Conley and Dequan Cook, so he had to have good guards to be any good. Yet, Oden was about 90% of the reason that OSU was even able to stay in the finals game against Florida. OSU was not close to a Final Four team without him.
And those Navy players could be Randall Cunningham at 38, and Dante Culpepper. So you have guards who were probably average to above-average guards for Navy who were smart enough to pass the ball into one of the 50 greatest players of all time. Whoop-de-doo. What percentage of responsibility/credit goes to Robinson v. teammates for going to the elite 8, and where would you rank Navy's guards against other guards in the tournament. That's more the point. And consider you're probably over-rating Navy's guards because playing with Robinson made their lives easier, just like throwing to Randy Moss made Dante Culpepper's life easier.
I understand the importance of guards; saying the game is a guard's game disrespects the importance of all the other guys on the floor. Even if Coach K says it. I would have liked him to hear him say it after Duke got whooped by Tracy Smith.
Al Horford's response to the contention that the game is a guard's game is at about 2:40 left in the 2007 Sweet 16 game against Butler. I was looking for the clip on YouTube, but can't find it.
It most certainly is a GUARD game.
A 6'6" - 6'10" guard game.
It is a guard's game. Our guards got schooled on both ends of the floor. If our guards do their job then the ball doesn't get inside to a position where GU wants it.
GU's guards denied the three point line and put a guy in DJOs pocket.
GU is a very balanced team that has finally playing to its potential. No shame in losing to them. MU simply ran out of gas with about 12 minutes left.
Since D Wade stepped on campus, we've had a string of All-League level guards.
Wade - Diener - James - McNeal - Matthews
The two times we made some noise in March (94 Sweet 16, 03 Final Four) we were able to match guards with at least two competent to almost-all-league level bigs (Mac, Damon, Curry; Jackson, Merritt).
Based on the past teams and current recruiting classes, MU will not be without good guards in the near future.
The question is whether we'll be able to be a consistent threat in March without a couple big bodies who can do what Robert Jackson did:
>> Credibly play behind opposing bigs for some of the game
>> Consistent end defensive possessions with rebounds
>> Give us a scoring threat that prevents doubling down from the wing
I'm glad we're a guard program. The odds are simply better that we can consistently get guys who can create shots for themselves and others.
I, like all of us, just wish that once a year we could close the deal with a guy who could put up half of Jackson's production for 2-3 years.