I feel like there's a good chance he gets a combine invite and impresses in some areas but making the jump from off the board to the 1st round is very unlikely
Wigginton declaring for NBA Draft, not hiring agent
- Thread starter DSM4Cy
- Start date
There was an article that came out this week about Duke not being able to guard anyone this year but about mid-way through the season they switched to a 2-3 Zone and they started winning everything. Why didn't/don't we consider that? Lard in the middle. Young and Shayok on the blocks. Babb and Wigginton on the perimeter. Sounds good to me. Look at the success teams like Duke this year, Baylor recently and Syracuse forever have had with it.
We tried some zone this year and it wasn't successful. Pretty much everything we tried this year failed though. Our pick and roll defense was horrendous
To be fair, Duke, Syracuse and Baylor are all bigger, longer and more athletic than the guys we'd be putting in those positions. With those big, long teams it works because a) makes the zone substantially longer and b) rebounding out of it isn't as difficult with that size and athleticism.
A lot of coaches are hesitant to go zone because it's more difficult to rebound out of. With a team like Iowa State that was not big and an average defensive rebounding team last year, makes sense to stick to man.
In order to run a zone successfuly as Baylor and Cuse you need to recruit specifically for that scheme often sacrificing offense. Though it lead to success in tourney setting as teams not familiar with how to attach it get flustered and miss shots. Teams especially in conference who see the zone often expose it during the season.
Given the choice Coach K would be playing Man to Man D. That is the best defense for contesting and rebounding. Dukes defense has been better since they went to zone but I fully believe having an all time recruiting class mature is the reason for them being good not the zone.
I see no reason to change defensive schemes. Getting a full roster will help that more than anything.
Selfishly I want to watch Lindell play for the clones for at least another year. His athleticism is a joy to watch. This I do know, CSP will be honest, fair, and only have Lindell's best interests at heart.
Not to pick on Young, but he would not be good in any zone defense. He's man-to-man only. His size, and ability to body up, is very good in man to man, but that would be nullified in a zone.
Man also lets you put your best defender on their best scorer. We have lacked a true one-on-one stopper since Chris Babb graduated, though Matt Thomas came close at times, but I have a feeling that Marial Shayok might be that guy.
We want a system where we can put an experienced guy like Shayok, a long/rangy guy like NWB, or an athletic freak like Wigginton on Trae Young or Jevon Carter and fill in the pieces around them, not let them dictate match-ups in zone.
You would want to put NWB, Talley, or one of the long freshmen (Griffin?) at the 4 in a zone and Lard at the 5. Young is a pretty good positional defender and good at boxing guys out in a man system. You are right he is a bad fit for a zone.
I would rather we stick with the man. Prohm proved he could coach it into guys the year before. The team with Monté, Naz, Matt, and Deonte as seniors, even if they had **** all for rim protection, actually had the highest net rating of any of our NCAA tournament teams because (1.) the offense was in the same league as all the Hoiball teams with all that shooting and (2.) the defense went from awful/we are the Texas Tech of basketball to pretty good.
Yes, better than the Royce year, better than the Big Three year, better than the BDJ experiment, and better than the year when Georges was a senior and we were briefly #3.
That offense with a serviceable defense meant a very good basketball team, and one that I think should have and could have went further in many ways.
I think he can do it again next year.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
To join in, wouldn't a whole lot more of that work happen as a pro than as a collegian?
It can. I think a lack of playing time can stunt player growth though. He could always play in the G league for a little bit but how often does a guy do that and actually turn into a good NBA player?
I’ve never understood the term ‘dribble drive’. Seems redundant- how does a non-dribble drive work?
In the NBA or if you are Svi trying to beat K-State in the last second, it can work pretty good.
Seriously tho, you make a good point. It is redundant.
If we are being honest here. Aren't the players in this situation what it's about? It would suck big time to lose him this early and I think he would benefit greatly with 1 more year of college but it's not my opinion that matters. This kids dream is to play in the NBA. Athletically he has that ability and potential now. Potential is the name of the game it seems when drafting these kids. After Blums article count me as worried.
You mean stalemate- there is dribbling that doesn’t have much driving so it’s reasonable to have a term for it. And slashing definitely has a different connotation than dribble-drive.But there isn't much driving in which we don't dribble. Checkmate.
How do you know that dribble-drive didn’t come first, and the convention of a guy “driving” only exists as a shorthand mutation of dribble-drive?
