(12-05-2012 10:58 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:13 PM)Chi-Town Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:05 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  How many other teams have so many different guys playing the PG position?

Just because you have 3-4 guys of similar attributes who all can bring the ball up the court and start the offense, does that mean you should have them all take on the role? It would seem to me that the team would be better served through a more consistent scheme. Or maybe I'm missing something?

Really? What will happen next year when Kuran and Pookie arrive......

The last time we had three point guards, we nearly won a NC. We may beat Kobe and Z-Bo with five, huh TC? The world is ours!!!

Rose, Kemp, Allen

Joe, Crawford, Antonio, and now Geron

....there is really no comparison between the roles of the two groups. Rose was THE point guard and all others fell in line and understood their roles. Furthermore, I don't think Kemp and Allen played off ball very much (as the current quartet of ball handlers does).

(12-05-2012 11:01 PM)memphis mania Wrote:  I actually think the PG role needs to be narrowed down to at least 2 folks.

I may be wrong but that seems to be the norm. I can't recall any other team having a similar scheme of so many different players at the PG spot both throughout single games as well as across the whole season.

(12-06-2012 12:10 AM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 11:01 PM)memphis mania Wrote:  I actually think the PG role needs to be narrowed down to at least 2 folks.

I may be wrong but that seems to be the norm. I can't recall any other team having a similar scheme of so many different players at the PG spot both throughout single games as well as across the whole season.

I can't think of a better problem to have. Many teams have no PG at all. We have 4.

Basically, there isn't a problem here. Competition for the spot will make everyone better. One main guy will likely emerge and the other 3 will give us multiple options.

I think it's a blast, esp. right now.

(12-05-2012 10:12 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:07 PM)Mtyler Wrote:  They just beat a sweet 16 team by 26 points. Shhyyyuuuutttt up.

Bi-polar fans will be screaming the world if over if they loose next game.

You don't BECOME a Sweet 16 team by "shutting up", nor by being bi-polar.

You also don't become a Sweet 16 team by asking dumb questions on a message board.

The offense we run the point guard is really not required to do much to start the offense.

9 times out of 10 he is just passing or handing the ball off to the wing and running through

(12-06-2012 12:10 AM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 11:01 PM)memphis mania Wrote:  I actually think the PG role needs to be narrowed down to at least 2 folks.

I may be wrong but that seems to be the norm. I can't recall any other team having a similar scheme of so many different players at the PG spot both throughout single games as well as across the whole season.

So, the process is more important than the result?

We just beat a good team at home by nearly 30 points. The line on the game was 5. Ohio is a really good, experienced team. Memphis just manhandled them like they were a SWAC team. For f**k's sake, let the fans enjoy a win without FINDING SOMETHING TO ***** ABOUT!!!

When (not if, when) Pastner beats a top 25 team and wins some tournament games this is my prediction on this board.

"Josh hasn't made a Final Four. He sucks."
"Josh hasn't won an national championship . He sucks."
"Josh has never beaten Duke 456992-0. He sucks."
"Josh has never taken the Tigers to a win vs the 2012 US Men's Olympic basketball team. He sucks."

This might get me banned and seriously I don't even care at this point. You know who sucks? A bunch of mouth breathing, inbred, whining, crybaby, f**ktard trolls who would rather see the Tigers lose than win so they can enjoy their favorite pastime of bitching about Josh Pastner. Don't tell me that there isn't a group like that currently inhabiting this board because that is a 100% lie! They ARE on here (probably 2-3 idiots with 6-12 aliases) and reasonable, legit Tiger fans are over their BS!

(12-06-2012 06:08 AM)SigEpMike Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:12 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:07 PM)Mtyler Wrote:  They just beat a sweet 16 team by 26 points. Shhyyyuuuutttt up.

Bi-polar fans will be screaming the world if over if they loose next game.

You don't BECOME a Sweet 16 team by "shutting up", nor by being bi-polar.

You also don't become a Sweet 16 team by asking dumb questions on a message board.

This.

(12-05-2012 10:05 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  How many other teams have so many different guys playing the PG position?

Just because you have 3-4 guys of similar attributes who all can bring the ball up the court and start the offense, does that mean you should have them all take on the role? It would seem to me that the team would be better served through a more consistent scheme. Or maybe I'm missing something?

Yes, this is correct. You are missing something. Just be glad you didn't ask WHAT you are missing, and be satisfied with the responses you have received up to now.

(12-05-2012 10:05 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  How many other teams have so many different guys playing the PG position?

Just because you have 3-4 guys of similar attributes who all can bring the ball up the court and start the offense, does that mean you should have them all take on the role? It would seem to me that the team would be better served through a more consistent scheme. Or maybe I'm missing something?

I think your questions are fair, but in all honesty, don't you know the answer?

Seems to me we got three guys capable of playing the PG backup role, but none of them can be consistent enough to be the full time starter or to get the majority of starter minutes at the position during a game. This was the same problem from last year, but now we got 4 guys in the mix.

It would be better if the pg position was more defined on this team, but it didn't hurt them last night. That doesn't mean it's not an issue. It is an issue that needs to be solved. It would help stabilize the team if the issue was solved. It's almost like a football team using 4 quarterbacks. Btw, i think crawford is capable of running the point, but i prefer him to play off the ball where he can focus on shooting and defense.

(12-06-2012 07:52 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-06-2012 12:10 AM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 11:01 PM)memphis mania Wrote:  I actually think the PG role needs to be narrowed down to at least 2 folks.

I may be wrong but that seems to be the norm. I can't recall any other team having a similar scheme of so many different players at the PG spot both throughout single games as well as across the whole season.

So, the process is more important than the result?

Not at all.

The result has been lack-luster at best with the exception of new-commer Geron. It would seem to me that position/rotation consistancy would go a long way in helping this team win a game in March. This has been a concern of mines for tha past couple seasons.... maybe Geron is the answer.

(12-06-2012 09:07 AM)tmoneyinmphs Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:05 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  How many other teams have so many different guys playing the PG position?

Just because you have 3-4 guys of similar attributes who all can bring the ball up the court and start the offense, does that mean you should have them all take on the role? It would seem to me that the team would be better served through a more consistent scheme. Or maybe I'm missing something?

I think your questions are fair, but in all honesty, don't you know the answer?

Seems to me we got three guys capable of playing the PG backup role, but none of them can be consistent enough to be the full time starter or to get the majority of starter minutes at the position during a game. This was the same problem from last year, but now we got 4 guys in the mix.

It would be better if the pg position was more defined on this team, but it didn't hurt them last night. That doesn't mean it's not an issue. It is an issue that needs to be solved. It would help stabilize the team if the issue was solved. It's almost like a football team using 4 quarterbacks. Btw, i think crawford is capable of running the point, but i prefer him to play off the ball where he can focus on shooting and defense.

Yes that's exactly how I've seen it as well.... but I was curious if any of the basketball gurus here had any other knowledgeable opinions. "Just STFU" obviously is not one.

I was also seriously curious if other teams have similar trends at the PG spot.

The 4 QBs analogy is great.... I'm sure no one would doubt that such would make things difficult for individual players and the team in general to get in their "niche" and find a cohesive rhythm.

I have a feeling that Pastner has known/felt that Geron is the answer... because I recall Geron saying in his first interviews here that he was going to be playing PG.

(12-05-2012 10:05 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  How many other teams have so many different guys playing the PG position?

Just because you have 3-4 guys of similar attributes who all can bring the ball up the court and start the offense, does that mean you should have them all take on the role? It would seem to me that the team would be better served through a more consistent scheme. Or maybe I'm missing something?

Fans were whining when Chris played PG and Joe the 2. This switch led to 2 highly needed victories with Chris & Joe playing very well. Now we have 4 guys that play PG from time to time, just beat a good team by 26 and you have concerns? Why?

”If it ain’t broke don’t fix it”. This was Josh’s strategy for this game and it worked very well. We are not running the Princeton offense (ect), thus the PG guard isn’t that critical. We primarily run the Dribble-Drive Motion offense with curls and the idea is to break down the defense and hit the open man.

With our offense the PG’s main responsibility is to recognize the defense and call a set for THAT defense. After that any of the players can become the playmaker. I mean, it ain’t rocket science and I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see 4 guards playing at the same time at some point during the season.

BTW, Mizzo has played with 4 guards and played well.

(12-05-2012 10:13 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:11 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  Thank God somebody found something to ***** about.

This schtick is quite cliched. See previous post. Other than you no one is "bitching" here, but many will be if the team doesn't continue to improve.

this is a pretty pathetic jab 400...
weak weak weak

(12-06-2012 10:59 AM)Willie Becton Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:13 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:11 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  Thank God somebody found something to ***** about.

This schtick is quite cliched. See previous post. Other than you no one is "bitching" here, but many will be if the team doesn't continue to improve.

this is a pretty pathetic jab 400...
weak weak weak

Thank God somebody found something to ***** about with his response.

(12-05-2012 10:11 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  Thank God somebody found something to ***** about.

lol, and imagine who...

(12-05-2012 10:19 PM)Memp400Kng Wrote:  

(12-05-2012 10:14 PM)tom82 Wrote:  Yeah, that didn't work too well tonight. We only won by 26. I guess if we only had one guy playing point, we could have won by 40+.

Bi-polar fans have such short memories and can't be reasoned with (regardless of which extreme they are at). I guess I'll bring this up again when when the emotional high defuses.

As for the 26 point win, it was mainly due to Geron and Shaq having the great game that they did. Recall how things have gone without those two being a factor.

FIFY but I agree and theirs may well be the shoulders we ride upon this year.