No big man

[acgclone]

Meh, I'd take less TO's in this game before any of UT's posts. A big guy does not get the ball when you turn it over. Last game I would take poor shooting (which would have been an improvement) over a big guy.

We have recruited talented big guys, they just signed elsewhere.

You can play the "if we take care of the balll....."

or

"If we hit our 3's...."

or

"If we just hit our FT's...."

or

"If we win the rebound battle...."

Almost every time you lose. And that goes for most teams that don't lose by more than 12+.

The fact is you're always going to have a few games in league play where you struggle with TO's, or on the boards, etc. You can still find ways to win those games if you have a more well rounded roster.

KU turned the ball over 25 times against us the other night. That was the only reason that wasn't a 20 pt loss.

 

[cyatheart]

Maybe they should start running an offense like they did early in the season and this wouldn't be a problem.

They trying, teams have scouted and adjusted. It's not just that easy.

 

[Cyclonesrule91]

The last three games we have been OWNED by the opposing teams big man. I love Hoiberg's teams, but the one thing I don't like is the lack of true center. Yes turnovers and cold three point shooting have smoked us, but the big man on OU, KU and TU took us to the woodshed.

 

[cyatheart]

I don't mind playing small ball, but we don't really have any shooters. Our shooting guards position with Long and Thomas are really struggling. Man we sure could use Vaughn to shore up that position.

Thomas is really to the point where he is hurting us. I think he will be really good, and you have to keep getting him minutes. But he can't hit a bull in the ***

 

[cyatheart]

The last three games we have been OWNED by the opposing teams big man. I love Hoiberg's teams, but the one thing I don't like is the lack of true center. Yes turnovers and cold three point shooting have smoked us, but the big man on OU, KU and TU took us to the woodshed.

Get used to it, going to keep happening against anyone with even an average big man

 

[swarthmoreCY]

You can play the "if we take care of the balll....."

or

"If we hit our 3's...."

or

"If we just hit our FT's...."

or

"If we win the rebound battle...."

Almost every time you lose. And that goes for most teams that don't lose by more than 12+.

The fact is you're always going to have a few games in league play where you struggle with TO's, or on the boards, etc. You can still find ways to win those games if you have a more well rounded roster.

KU turned the ball over 25 times against us the other night. That was the only reason that wasn't a 20 pt loss.

Exactly why saying a big man changes things is wrong. We don't need a big guy as much as we need to play better. 3 inches on Georges is not going to make us undefeated right now. In our three losses, a big guy would have yet corrected our three biggest reasons for the losses. Hell, OU plays four guards.

 

[Cytation]

He's a huge liability. SDW needs to be given a shot.

 

[Chipper]

Texas didn't use their bigs in first half and still had shot at lead into half.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Texas didn't use their bigs in first half and still had shot at lead into half.

Ejim on the bench. We do not need a center, but we do need Ejim.

 

[Final42b]

The last three games we have been OWNED by the opposing teams big man. I love Hoiberg's teams, but the one thing I don't like is the lack of true center. Yes turnovers and cold three point shooting have smoked us, but the big man on OU, KU and TU took us to the woodshed.

Exactly. I want a big man more for defensive situations and rebounding more than anything. I don't care if they can score. Just one defensive enforcer would go a long way IMO. Booker wasn't great last year, but he had has value.

 

[mattyice]

Exactly. I want a big man more for defensive situations and rebounding more than anything. I don't care if they can score. Just one defensive enforcer would go a long way IMO. Booker wasn't great last year, but he had has value.

Exactly. Can't just look at rebounding stats. Teams are driving for easy buckets because there is no threat at all. They are crashing the boards because they can. And offensively it limits our ability....which can somewhat be masked by ejim and niang hitting 3s. But not enough.

And we are getting zero from long, Thomas and SDW. Morris is nice but he's tiny and can't really effectively be our shooting guard.

 

[imnclone]

We just need to start getting some more length. McKay is a nice start.

McKay is a great start. He is a two-time first team NJCAA All-American. I am starting to think he can be a game changer based on comments from coaches. Big time athletes can make everyone around them better.


from CW article:

“The first practice that he was able to play in, we had more blocks in practice than we have had in the three years we have been here combined,â€￾ assistant coach Matt Abdelmassih said. “He is just so skilled for his size. There really isn’t anything bad that I can say about him. It’s pretty scary how good he is and he is out of shape as well. We are really lucky to have him.â€￾


I like this year's team a lot, they play hard and for the most part are playing near their ceiling as a team. Recruits like Mckay will raise that ceiling.

 

[CyCy]

Using the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, it was a mistake to bump Amardi instead of Bluford. He's averaging 7.6 ppg and 4.6 rpg in around 17 minutes for Oregon.

 

[Cyforce]

I would be shocked if Fred doesn't fill his last two opening with a shooter and a big. Like to see the big be an instantly eligible Senior if they don't change the rule.

 

[IABigPeach]

Not to fear, we've got some guys who've been paying their dues. Time is right for some others to step up this season, we're far from over in 2014.

I would be shocked if Fred doesn't fill his last two opening with a shooter and a big. Like to see the big be an instantly eligible Senior if they don't change the rule.

 

[huntt26]

Add a talented hard-nosed big man and bring back Tyrus McGee and this team wouldn't ever lose.

 

[Amesboy]

This is a good point and discussed before when we were winning but allot people thought we didn't need a big inside guy. This was a concern before the Baylor game going against their bigs but we controlled the boards and made our shots. I think the farther we get into post season play the lack of height inside will be a disadvantage. We've shown we can win with 6'6 guys but if we aren't clicking on all cylinders, mostly on the glass, we will be in trouble.

 

[allfourcy]

Exactly why saying a big man changes things is wrong. We don't need a big guy as much as we need to play better. 3 inches on Georges is not going to make us undefeated right now. In our three losses, a big guy would have yet corrected our three biggest reasons for the losses. Hell, OU plays four guards.

And yet, Spangler killed us.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

And yet, Spangler killed us.

which tells you it is not a size issue. Spangler is an inch bigger than Georges, Clark is the same height of Ejim

 

[cysox2]

I was really excited to see ejim come out and get 5 boards in the first 4 minutes of the game. I'm not sure why he only got 5 more over the next 36 minutes. I don't think it's a lack of effort, but if we are going to win he has to find a way to pull down rebounds like he was the first 5 minutes of that game.

I like hogues aggresiveness but he seems to pick up fouls fighting for position against bigger guys. When he gets his hands on a rebound it's reassuring to know it's not getting taken away from him.