 |
|
But there's not rule that you have to overload your
Posted on: October 4, 2024 at 13:27:23 CT
alwaysright MU
Posts:
49803
Member For:
17.39 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
roster to a point where young guys can't get some pt.
The number of players we have on the team who are supposed to be P5 caliber players and are (theoretically) expecting at least some playing time is ridiculous and can not work.
Therefore, after the top 8, some decisions need to be made. Do you give the limited minutes of #'s 9&10 to young guys with promise in situations where they can learn but not kill you or do you give those minutes to grad transfers that you don't owe a damn thing to and don't really help you win now or in the future?
This is a hypothetical that I do not expect to become reality but to illustrate the point....
What if
Warrick gives us 12 ppg, 3 rpg, 2 apg
&
Boateng gives us 7 - 2 - 2
Assume D is acceptably equivalent.
Are those 5 point the difference between winning and losing most nights? Almost certainly not because it's routinely proven that those 5 points don't just disappear, the team still finds those couple buckets.
Is that difference worth slashing a freshman's minutes, stunting his development, and risking pushing him out the door for a guy that's gone anyway?
No.
We should be building a team that has a clear cut top 8 with 2-3 young guys that need some seasoning, and then 2-3 guys come in knowing and accepting that they're there to work towards the rotation as upperclassmen but might quite well be bypassed by the next round of top 50 guys....and if those bottom couple of guys transfer to SMS, no biggie.
I'd rather have a top 100 guy that worked with our team and got 5 mpg as a frosh and 15 as a sophomore than a 150 guy that played 30 mpg for 2 years at middle tennessee and has to learn a new system and new teammates.
yes, there are exceptions, but generally...
Edited by alwaysright at 13:30:09 on 10/04/24
The number of players we have on the team who are supposed to be P5 caliber players and are (theoretically) expecting at least some playing time is ridiculous and can not work.
Therefore, after the top 8, some decisions need to be made. Do you give the limited minutes of #'s 9&10 to young guys with promise in situations where they can learn but not kill you or do you give those minutes to grad transfers that you don't owe a damn thing to and don't really help you win now or in the future?
This is a hypothetical that I do not expect to become reality but to illustrate the point....
What if
Warrick gives us 12 ppg, 3 rpg, 2 apg
&
Boateng gives us 7 - 2 - 2
Assume D is acceptably equivalent.
Are those 5 point the difference between winning and losing most nights? Almost certainly not because it's routinely proven that those 5 points don't just disappear, the team still finds those couple buckets.
Is that difference worth slashing a freshman's minutes, stunting his development, and risking pushing him out the door for a guy that's gone anyway?
No.
We should be building a team that has a clear cut top 8 with 2-3 young guys that need some seasoning, and then 2-3 guys come in knowing and accepting that they're there to work towards the rotation as upperclassmen but might quite well be bypassed by the next round of top 50 guys....and if those bottom couple of guys transfer to SMS, no biggie.
I'd rather have a top 100 guy that worked with our team and got 5 mpg as a frosh and 15 as a sophomore than a 150 guy that played 30 mpg for 2 years at middle tennessee and has to learn a new system and new teammates.
yes, there are exceptions, but generally...
Edited by alwaysright at 13:30:09 on 10/04/24
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
But there's not rule that you have to overload your - alwaysright MU - 10/4 13:27:23