Its probably more likely they end up at PG, but SG could happen. Not sure what height has to do with being a PG or SG.
Rumor time
- Thread starter Cyrok
- Start date
Its probably more likely they end up at PG, but SG could happen. Not sure what height has to do with being a PG or SG.
Fred are Charlie Sheen do have some similiarities. They both are all about WINNING!
at 5-7 you can be a ball hawking on ball defender but easy to shoot over by a wing,
where the average height is around 6-3.
Agreed. I think it's going to be tough for Sledge to play anything besides point.
In Fred's system, his speed can overcome a lot because he'll be running in space a lot pushing it up the court. If he can do that and distribute, he'll be just fine.
Just because you play SG on offense doesn't mean you have to guard the other teams SG. Pair him with a 6'2 or 6'3 PG and his height would have no detriment.
Alternatively, if they are playing a team who's shortest starter is 6'2", he's easily shot over by anyone on the court.
You can choose the matchup on defense. It's on offense where you don't get to choose the matchup. A taller point can guard the wing while a shorter 2 can guard the point if he is quick enough.
But on offense you have to deal with whomever chooses to matchup with you unless you can force a switch.
I think the key to this is, is there anyone we are going to sign in the spring who would make an impact next season or down the road? Our record with spring signees hasn't been very good recently. So if we aren't going to sign anyone this spring who would help us, KL taking up a scholarship for next year wouldn't have a negative effect on the team. The flip side, is that we won't have an available scholarship (unless someone leaves) to sign a different transfer with this spring/summer, and there will certainly be some available.
Bottom line, I think if the coaches take KL it means they believe he will be the best PG on the team in '12. Also makes me think they see Mcgee as a guy who can play the point but may be more effective at SG (Michael Nurse comes to mind as another combo guard like this with a great 3-pt shot, who could play the point, but may be better at the SG position).
I wouldnt say Tom Izzo lost interest in winning. He believed dismissing Allen and Lucious were far better than having Ws. I respect Izzo for doing the right thing.
Not if you are guarding the PG with a combo guard. Then, by definition, he has the abilities to play the 1 or 2 so if your PG is out of position to start the break you are really not losing anything by your combo guard starting the break.
I agree, and another good thing about transfers is that they are out of options... they can't just transfer to another school if they are unhappy about something.
has nothing to do with it, not being able to make switches on the run causes match up issues, I'm done aurguing the point.
Minor clarification: Transfers do not "sign." They just show up and enroll for school. They may sign a scholarship agreement but they do not sign a new LOI.
If it is about switching it doesn't matter which player you start out guarding, you are going to end up guarding someone else so the point that the PG has to guard the PG doesn't hold water. If it is something else, please enlighten me, because I still don't understand your point.
I don't consider this bad "arguing" if someone learns something.:smile:
I think Twitter is the source -- even this old man could find some very encouraging tweets.
I love it when you try to belittle people for doing exactly what you do regularly.
If someone posts something you disagree with, respectfully trying to make each other understand your point of view is what the forums are all about.
And you can say this with absolute certainty? Last I looked, Fred was doing a pretty decent recruiting job. Even at a 5 percent chance of being a decent Big 12 player, that's a better chance than Lucious will have as he sits on a bench that year.
just a guess but if the staff thought they could get someone better they would of.