Grizbacker1
Well-known member
Growler1 said:
What did you say shorty? pickleboystevedill wears lifts in his shoes and is still short. :lol:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
shooting guard
- Thread starter spokompton griz
- Start date
What did you say shorty? pickleboystevedill wears lifts in his shoes and is still short. :lol:
UM doesn't have a good-shooting shooting guard this year. When Stockton is in, they are playing with two point guards. That has its advantages and disadvantages. Stockton's job is not to score. It is to handle the ball, make good passes, play good defense, make hustle plays, play smart and add toughness. All 5 of the other top 6 players are scorers. We don't need 6 scorers. Yes, it would be nice to have some great 3-pt shooters, but we don't.
All those "terrible" shooters looked pretty good against Idaho State a few days before the LBS game.
Let's face it - every team is gonna have a game like that when nobody can make a basket. The only way out of that jam is to play great defense and create some easy opportunities (or free throws) for your team.
And when you're not playing great defense or making free throws, the result is pretty predictable.
Let's face it - every team is gonna have a game like that when nobody can make a basket. The only way out of that jam is to play great defense and create some easy opportunities (or free throws) for your team.
And when you're not playing great defense or making free throws, the result is pretty predictable.
I really think it is best to start your best five players. :!:So "starting" is the only way to hurt or help a team. Jamar can't do anything unless he "starts". We'll lose for sure if Stockton "starts" but if he comes in to spell a guy for a few minutes that's OK. Pretty weird logic.
Makes me wonder why they have "Best 6th Man" awards at all levels of basketball.
Makes me wonder why they have "Best 6th Man" awards at all levels of basketball.
Mousegriz said:
Partially agree. I think Tinks wants to have a decent 2nd unit out there if needed so puts some of the guys out there to "balance" the two units. I think start your best 5. Some schools use 3 guards, some 3 forwards just because they are better that way. Next few off the bench and if you aren't that good don't play. Although there are some guys that just "play better" if they start and others that were 6th man of the year and went to start in NBA and sucked. It goes both ways.
mtgrizrule
Well-known member
Like most here, I would love to see better perimeter shooting, but am not going to go as far as saying who should or should not start. Rather than that, let's consider why he starts who he starts? Just because a guy does not start, does not mean he is not 1 of the top 5 players. Much of the decision with most teams and coaches is your talent, and supporting cast at each position.
Is starting Jamar at 2 a good idea? I believe it is a great idea, but with the current cast I understand why it has not and might not happen. (1) It is great to have versatile players as your top 2 guys off the bench consistently. Why? If a guy can play mulitple positions, it favors giving your team a boost, and strategic advantage if someone gets injured or in foul trouble. Starting Jamar at 2 really puts more pressure on everyone to not get in foul trouble, get injured, and can physically put a team at a disadvantage for a few minutes each half. In this case, lets say one or both (Jamar and Steward) get in early foul trouble. Tinkle has to rely on an inconsistent Wood for major minutes at either position, and even more inexperience behind Wood. With Stockton starting, Tinkle knows he will get solid defense, smart shot selection, and someone that takes care of the ball on the court. All of which helps with team consistency and chemistry.
Let's say only Steward gets in foul trouble. What makes more sense? Having an already worn Jamar fill in, or fresh Jamar coming in? Many coaches prefer the fresher option. Many coaches also prefer the safer option of having the talented versatile guys off the bench when depth is an issue. Right now, we only quality depth issues at guard, and SF depth being our strongest depth. Starting Jamar at 2, weakens another position. Having him come off the bench strengthens both positions, and gives Tinkle much more versatility.
As for Autry, I have been a proponent of his the last month, and given up why they are not building him. I am sure there is good reason though. Maybe Chase Adams can come through in the clutch? Honestly though, his only decent shooting has been in limited minutes, not when the game is on the line. Wood has been given many opportunities, and appears to be no more than a role player.
Here is to hoping the GRIZ find their perimeter game consistency. That is the absolutely only thing keeping us from an NCAA appearance. Will Cherry's health is also something that needs to improve. Without a healthy Cherry, our offense and defense is hurt.
Good luck GRIZ! Let's sweep and host in Missoula.
Is starting Jamar at 2 a good idea? I believe it is a great idea, but with the current cast I understand why it has not and might not happen. (1) It is great to have versatile players as your top 2 guys off the bench consistently. Why? If a guy can play mulitple positions, it favors giving your team a boost, and strategic advantage if someone gets injured or in foul trouble. Starting Jamar at 2 really puts more pressure on everyone to not get in foul trouble, get injured, and can physically put a team at a disadvantage for a few minutes each half. In this case, lets say one or both (Jamar and Steward) get in early foul trouble. Tinkle has to rely on an inconsistent Wood for major minutes at either position, and even more inexperience behind Wood. With Stockton starting, Tinkle knows he will get solid defense, smart shot selection, and someone that takes care of the ball on the court. All of which helps with team consistency and chemistry.
Let's say only Steward gets in foul trouble. What makes more sense? Having an already worn Jamar fill in, or fresh Jamar coming in? Many coaches prefer the fresher option. Many coaches also prefer the safer option of having the talented versatile guys off the bench when depth is an issue. Right now, we only quality depth issues at guard, and SF depth being our strongest depth. Starting Jamar at 2, weakens another position. Having him come off the bench strengthens both positions, and gives Tinkle much more versatility.
As for Autry, I have been a proponent of his the last month, and given up why they are not building him. I am sure there is good reason though. Maybe Chase Adams can come through in the clutch? Honestly though, his only decent shooting has been in limited minutes, not when the game is on the line. Wood has been given many opportunities, and appears to be no more than a role player.
Here is to hoping the GRIZ find their perimeter game consistency. That is the absolutely only thing keeping us from an NCAA appearance. Will Cherry's health is also something that needs to improve. Without a healthy Cherry, our offense and defense is hurt.
Good luck GRIZ! Let's sweep and host in Missoula.
BelierPeaux
Well-known member
He had a good night, no doubt. The PSU announcer said it at some point, Stockton is somewhere around a career 35% shooter. I wouldn't tout Stockton as any sort of great shooter. He is good in the clutch, usually, and I like his toughness. He's a great team player.
Stockton is a credible shooter. He appears to shoot better when he starts.
Stockton is shooting 42%, including 38% from three-pt range, when he starts. (I used the start designation on the website stats, but it's possible the site is not correct on one game. If it's not correct, then his starting percentage for both are several points lower.)
By contrast, Cherry is shooting 44%, including 26% from three point range, this season.
Stockton is shooting 42%, including 38% from three-pt range, when he starts. (I used the start designation on the website stats, but it's possible the site is not correct on one game. If it's not correct, then his starting percentage for both are several points lower.)
By contrast, Cherry is shooting 44%, including 26% from three point range, this season.
mtgrizrule
Well-known member
Growler1 said:
Growler, some players are better starting. Others are better coming off the bench. I think that is what PR was getting at. He said nothing about technique. Got to admit the team has played better with Stockton starting over Wood. Wood is also more comfortable coming off the bench.
mtgrizrule
Well-known member
Okay, you are right. player roles do not play a part in a player's performance. 
In this case, we each think what we think, nothing wrong with that.
Technique and fundamentally wise, you are truly right. As for what the results might be, PR is right. So you both are right, depending on how it is interpreted.
In this case, we each think what we think, nothing wrong with that. Technique and fundamentally wise, you are truly right. As for what the results might be, PR is right. So you both are right, depending on how it is interpreted.
mtgrizrule said:Okay, you are right. player roles do not play a part in a player's performance.
Technique and fundamentally wise, you are truly right. As for what the results might be, PR is right. So you both are right, depending on how it is interpreted.
You should run for office. By the way, PR is never right.
