If we were to start a 3 forward lineup of Butler, Fulce, and Crowder, is that tall enough to compete in the BEast? We would be bigger than last year. A healthy Otule and a focused Williams as the first two bigs coming off of the bench as a change of pace.
Interesting question, but I'll respond with a similar question: Was our starting lineup in each of the last few years tall enough to compete in the BEast? The answer before those previous seasons was typically "probably not" but, nevertheless, we were competitive each of those seasons. If your 3 forward lineup shows the tenacity and has the success at rebounding, creating mismatches and defending bigger guys, then, yes, we will again compete in the BEast.
I think it is big enough to be competitive. More importantly, as opposed to last year, we will have enough size at the guard position to keep some of the opposing guards out of the paint. Cubi and Mo got lots of steals and played their guts out, but when an opposing PG wanted to muscle their way into the paint, our guys couldn't keep them out. Assuming that this year's bunch plays defense with the same tenacity, closes on 3 pt shooters, and gets in passing lanes, a 3 forward starting lineup should be big enough.
With the extra depth this season's squad has I think the answer is yes. The team has some fouls to give up front. Defensive pressure shouold be even more intense and there will be a good level of quickness to compensate for height.
Quote from: tower912 on October 05, 2010, 07:31:13 AM
If we were to start a 3 forward lineup of Butler, Fulce, and Crowder, is that tall enough to compete in the BEast?
yes it is.....
Quote from: tower912 on October 05, 2010, 07:31:13 AM
If we were to start a 3 forward lineup of Butler, Fulce, and Crowder, is that tall enough to compete in the BEast?
Yes. Sure the opposition would have the advantage height-wise, but we'll more often then not have the advantage in athleticism and quickness. It's a mismatch both ways, not just for us.
he good thing is that both Butler and Fulce have a nose for the ball for rebounding, and the word is Crowder does too. That will help us a lot. And they haveleaping ability to block on defense if needed. Scoring through BEast bigs tho - hmmm - they will have to be faster getting to the hole, etc. The biggr guards we have and their ability to penerate and get to the rim should open up some nice shots for Butler, Fulse and Crowder. So it could work. Ideal, no. But it could work.
On defense we should be the same or better off than last year with the same size (or better when Otule or even Gardner are in the game) + the extra fouls to give.
My bigger concern is on offense. Lazar was such a big 3 pt threat that (as was the rest of the team) that the other 4 or 5 man HAD to come out and play him at the 3 point line. If Crowder is only a margin 3 pt threat and Jimmy is no better than last year the other 4/5 men can sag in the lane to contest drives and be in rebounding position. To play like we did last year 2 of the 3 primary forwards need to be above average 3 point shooters (for forwards).
Agree that taller guards and more guards will help on D as you can extend the D making entry passes a lot harder.
Maybe Triple G can inform us who we're competing against.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on October 05, 2010, 10:07:00 AM
Maybe Triple G can inform us who we're competing against.
He's too busy out there in NYC being better than everyone else (and letting them know about it, too).
Wait a minute, wheres my girlfriend?
If we do play the Fulce/Crowder/Butler lineup (which we will have to for large chunks of every game, as even the most optimistic view of Otule has him getting max 20 mpg), we will only have a significant size disadvantage at the 5. Crowder and Butler will more than hold their own against other teams' 3s and 4s. Fulce should be able to provide solid minutes at the 5, especially if he can continue to hit that baseline 15 footer off of penetration. He is so athletic and scrappy that him giving up a few inches won't kill us, especially if we can time his and Otule's minutes so CO plays against bigger lineups.
As tower said, one of the biggest factors this year will be that we will have much bigger players on the perimeter than last year. Our starting guards (DJO and Cadougan) may not provide a size advantage, but they are at least average height and have stocky builds that will prevent them from being pushed around like last year's diminutive guards were at times. We can also bring in taller guards like Buycks, Blue, and Jones and create a size advantage on the perimeter. Our guards this year will be able to block passing lanes and penetration much better. All in all, I think size will be much less of a concern this year, although it will still be a problem in some matchups.
Not seeing Fulce as a starter, and if he gets 20 to 30 minutes a game, we are in the hurt locker. He is a role player at best.
Erik Williams should see some time on the interior as well.
At least Buzz has a few players he can put on the frontline rather than playing Jimmy and Lazar basically the whole game with some breaks from Fulce. At least the players won't be as worn down.
But, this frontline will give us the chance to basically match our previous win total and lose in the first of second round. It could be a lineup that gets over the hump to the sweet 16, but it is something to overcome.
Quote from: willie warrior on October 05, 2010, 10:58:35 AM
Not seeing Fulce as a starter, and if he gets 20 to 30 minutes a game, we are in the hurt locker. He is a role player at best.
That's what a lot of people, especially you, said last year about Acker and Cubillan.
Don't see what Acker and Cubillan have to do with Fulce playing forward/Center.
I guess that is your way of slamming the analysis.
I stand by what I said, Fulce is a role player. If he plays 20-30 minutes in the BEast we are in the hurt locker.
Quote from: willie warrior on October 05, 2010, 11:54:49 AM
Don't see what Acker and Cubillan have to do with Fulce playing forward/Center.
I guess that is your way of slamming the analysis.
I stand by what I said, Fulce is a role player. If he plays 20-30 minutes in the BEast we are in the hurt locker.
I'm saying that just like last year, people are underestimating a senior who has not played a huge role in the past but could step in and provide valuable minutes this year. I could very easily see Fulce playing 20 to 25 minutes and MU doing just fine.
It is, if we want to stay where we are in 5th-8th place. Its not, if we want to compete for a double bye.
Quote from: willie warrior on October 05, 2010, 11:54:49 AM
I stand by what I said, Fulce is a role player. If he plays 20-30 minutes in the BEast we are in the hurt locker.
I agree with this. Many people seem to think Fulce will step up similar to what Butler did last year, but I don't see it. Fulce is a good energy/ role player like he did last year. He gets over powered and out quicked by 4's and 5's. If we are depending on Fulce to be a key post player and rebounder, we will be in trouble.
Quote from: hairyworthen on October 05, 2010, 12:19:10 PM
I agree with this. Many people seem to think Fulce will step up similar to what Butler did last year, but I don't see it. Fulce is a good energy/ role player like he did last year. He gets over powered and out quicked by 4's and 5's. If we are depending on Fulce to be a key post player and rebounder, we will be in trouble.
I think it depends on your definition of post player. He's not going to be successful guarding most other teams' PFs/Centers on the low block...he's to thin and not strong enough to do that. Good thing the back-to-the-basket center/PF is rare breed these days. He's quick/athletic enough to guard a face-up PF.
On offense, he can spread the court, hit some outside shots and allow our slashers to drive to the basket. Plus his energy and knack for rebounding are big positives. He's not going to be our leading scorer, but I could easily see him putting up 10 a game.
Quote from: tower912 on October 05, 2010, 08:11:40 AM
I think it is big enough to be competitive. More importantly, as opposed to last year, we will have enough size at the guard position to keep some of the opposing guards out of the paint. Cubi and Mo got lots of steals and played their guts out, but when an opposing PG wanted to muscle their way into the paint, our guys couldn't keep them out. Assuming that this year's bunch plays defense with the same tenacity, closes on 3 pt shooters, and gets in passing lanes, a 3 forward starting lineup should be big enough.
100% CORRECT!!
It wasnt necessarily our lack of size from 3-4-5...but also the fact that our 1-2 at times were EASILY the two shortest/smallest players on the court.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on October 05, 2010, 10:07:00 AM
Maybe Triple G can inform us who we're competing against.
It's a big fracking world out there...
I think years past have proved that it's big enough, but as many have mentioned, the questions don't just come on defense. We know Butler and Fulce are efficient rebounders. And while neither were frequent sharpshooters, Butler shot 50% and Fulce 36.4% from 3-point range last year, both better marks than Hayward's 34.9%. According to the NJCAA, Crowder shot 36% from 3-point range while putting up 18.9 ppg and 9 rpg (LINK (http://www.njcaa.org/colleges_college_player.cfm?category=stats&sid=4&divid=1&slid=2&collegeId=1310&teamid=92405&athleteid=284980&seasonselect=471)) so he at least has the potential to add what we need up front both in terms of offense and defense.
The bigger question I feel is if we go with those three as the starters, will we get effective bench minutes from guys like Otule, Gardner, and Williams? We'll be aided greatly if those three can combine for 15-25 mpg while giving solid defense, effective rebounding, and timely fouls. Of course, I think Otule has a shot still to start, so it's all up in the air, but considering how well we competed last year with no real bigs and the overall upgrade in athleticism that this year's team has, I think we'll be fine.
Quote from: hairyworthen on October 05, 2010, 12:19:10 PM
I agree with this. Many people seem to think Fulce will step up similar to what Butler did last year, but I don't see it. Fulce is a good energy/ role player like he did last year. He gets over powered and out quicked by 4's and 5's. If we are depending on Fulce to be a key post player and rebounder, we will be in trouble.
Before the usual suspects accuse me of some anti-Butler agenda, keep in mind that I probably had higher regard for him than anyone last season based on his outstanding offensive rating (top 10 nationally) and great play over the final dozen games in 2009.
That having been said, Butler didn't improve last year so much as he simply played more minutes and received more touches (because both were available following the departure of the Amigos).
Virtually every stat that was
not a function of minutes played showed amazing consistency year over year.
To avoid the impact of cupcakes, I'll compare conference stats (courtesy of statsheet.com):
- Offensive rating declined from 132 to 125
- FT% up from 76.7 to 78.8
- Rebounds per 40 minutes were down from 9 to 7
- A/T ratio up from 1.4 to 1.7.
- Net FG% down from 50.0% to 48.7% (2 point FG% declined more, 3 point improved)
The big change in his line? Minutes increased from 20 per conference game in 2009 to 37 per game in 2010. And possession percentage increased from 14% to 20%. Oh, and points per game increased from 5.8 to 14.7. In other words, Jimmy played more minutes and he touched the ball more often. Therefore, he scored more. Not surprising given the graduation of the Amigos.
In fact, when you adjust for the 85% increase in minutes and the 43% increase possessions, his 5.8 ppg league scoring average could be projected to come in at about 15 ppg--pretty close to his actual 14.7 ppg.
So given that Fulce is two years older now than Butler was last year, I think we've seen all that Fulce is capable of. As a 23 year old, he's probably past the point of additional physical development. So if he were to double his minutes and see a similar increase in touches as Butler did, we'd only get about 9 ppg from Fulce. Nice, but not the breakout that I think some people are projecting.
The question is whether Fulce has a reasonable shot at double the minutes.
We essentially have Hayward's 33 minutes to reallocate (assuming that Fulce starts with the 11 he had last year and Butler gets his 35+. Competing for Hayward's 33 minutes are Fulce, Williams, Crowder, Jones and Otule.
Frankly, I don't see Fulce getting another 11 mpg with that competition. I think Crowder will get close to 20 of them, and Otule probably about 10. Maybe Fulce will carve a couple of minutes out of a 3-guard backcourt and can get an extra 5/game.
That would bring him to 15 or 16 minutes, and 6 to 8 points.
I'm in no way accusing you of an anti-Butler bias, but I do take issue with the idea that when a player doubles his minutes (or at bats, carries, etc) and also doubles his stats it equates to no improvement. When you're always fresh playing against guys who might not be and when you're an afterthought to the defense rather than someone they "game plan" for it's tough to keep your averages per minute the same. There's more to it than math.
Regarding Fulce, I tend to agree with one caveat - if his knee was still a problem last year but is 100% this year he could improve significantly.
Jimmy led the team in +/- last season...and even though statsheet does not have complete + /- stats from the previous year, we can assume this was a vast improvement from the limited game stats they compiled. Lazar was the star and leader, but Jimmy was MU's best overall player last season on both ends of the court. That was the biggest difference in JFB's game.
Junior has a long way to match Mo or Cubes, but he has the chance on O the way he runs the point. Crowder will be strong on the plus side, but Zar strong? Doubtful. Joe needs to improve his D. I think he can do it on O as he is very efficient. What is the better alternative to these three starting with DJO and Junior?
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=david-cubillan&jimmy-butler=2009-2010&p1=jimmy-butler&p2=lazar-hayward&p3=darius-johnson-odom&p4=joseph-fulce&p5=maurice-acker
Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 05, 2010, 10:55:06 PM
I'm in no way accusing you of an anti-Butler bias, but I do take issue with the idea that when a player doubles his minutes (or at bats, carries, etc) and also doubles his stats it equates to no improvement. When you're always fresh playing against guys who might not be and when you're an afterthought to the defense rather than someone they "game plan" for it's tough to keep your averages per minute the same. There's more to it than math.
Regarding Fulce, I tend to agree with one caveat - if his knee was still a problem last year but is 100% this year he could improve significantly.
Your point might be true for a player who played scant minutes and always against the 2nd or 3rd string on the opposition.
But in 2009, Butler was part of the primary rotation. He came to MU with an outstanding reputation as a scorer in Juco, and tape from his early games (including his very first game where he put up 10 points in 24 minutes), should have been enough to indicate to opposing coaches that they have to consider him in their game planning.
Butler was one of only 5 players on the team to play in every game (James would have made it 6)--he was typically first man off the bench, and wound up 5th in minutes & points.