(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. And even If you look at how they are listed Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived with a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

If you watch Baker play and think he’s a guard….. come on man. We don’t need him shooting threes. I agree he will need to flex the lineup and maybe do some things to add size. We got out rebounded by a D3 school that starts a 6’3 power forward that’s concerning. I’ve said it once I’ll say it again, playing that small before was masked by the fact that we had the greatest rebounder to ever step on campus. And if you are going to play 4 guards why the heck wouldn’t you be pressing? When they pressed last night it was mostly just man. They didn’t trap much at all. We should have been trapping the hell out of that team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(11-13-2021 10:40 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. And even If you look at how they are listed Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived with a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

If you watch Baker play and think he’s a guard….. come on man. We don’t need him shooting threes. I agree he will need to flex the lineup and maybe do some things to add size. We got out rebounded by a D3 school that starts a 6’3 power forward that’s concerning. I’ve said it once I’ll say it again, playing that small before was masked by the fact that we had the greatest rebounder to ever step on campus. And if you are going to play 4 guards why the heck wouldn’t you be pressing? When they pressed last night it was mostly just man. They didn’t trap much at all. We should have been trapping the hell out of that team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The difference between D1 players and D2/D3 is size. There are a slew of smaller guys who can flat out play but aren't big on these rosters. We usually have the quickness advantage against bigger players, but not against Guilford. And they had a bunch of balls handlers as well. They did to us what we want to do in our four guard set. It's all about matchups, and we weren't that much bigger with Baker in the middle. I don't care what anyone says, the leading scorer for Guilford was a baller.

(11-13-2021 10:55 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:40 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. And even If you look at how they are listed Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived with a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

If you watch Baker play and think he’s a guard….. come on man. We don’t need him shooting threes. I agree he will need to flex the lineup and maybe do some things to add size. We got out rebounded by a D3 school that starts a 6’3 power forward that’s concerning. I’ve said it once I’ll say it again, playing that small before was masked by the fact that we had the greatest rebounder to ever step on campus. And if you are going to play 4 guards why the heck wouldn’t you be pressing? When they pressed last night it was mostly just man. They didn’t trap much at all. We should have been trapping the hell out of that team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The difference between D1 players and D2/D3 is size. There are a slew of smaller guys who can flat out play but aren't big on these rosters. We usually have the quickness advantage against bigger players, but not against Guilford. And they had a bunch of balls handlers as well. They did to us what we want to do in our four guard set. It's all about matchups, and we weren't that much bigger with Baker in the middle. I don't care what anyone says, the leading scorer for Guilford was a baller.

Right I understand that but what we have on them is size. That can be exploited in the paint, and via traps and we largely had no plan to do either


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Getting out rebounded by a D3 team is an absolute nightmare scenario in terms of forecasting the season.

I don’t need to hear reasons of “why”. It’s just flat out concerning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. If you look at how they are listed,Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived by playing a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

This sounds very much like last year with guys playing out of position . Was this a problem vs Guilford College who has no size at any position ?

(11-15-2021 10:20 PM)jumpinmullet Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. If you look at how they are listed,Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived by playing a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

This sounds very much like last year with guys playing out of position . Was this a problem vs Guilford College who has no size at any position ?

I think the problem Siddle has is with so many new players, graduate students, etc., is a few were likely promised PT if they came here. But now that they are here, he sees what he has and it isn't working.

Baker, imo, is his biggest issue. He really expected him to come in and be a force in the paint on offense, defense and rebounding, and he's not. Kelly has shown to be far better in the paint in all aspects. But if he starts Kelly at the five, that moves Baker to the four or keeps Baker as a backup player, and i'm sure he was pretty much promised to start.

And if Baker moves to the four, that moves Sims to the three and you now have a PT battle between Fornes and Okauru. Fornes is the better three point shooter, but Okauru is the better defender, rebounder and better at getting to the basket to finish. And Sims is a problem at the four as well. Good three point shooter, good rebounder, but doesn't have the ability to drive and finish. Sims doesn't provide the mismatch that is needed by a guard at the four.

So Siddle is going to be forced to make changes if he wants to win, and he doesn't want to make those changes. Tonight we will see if he makes the changes he needs to or not. Pitt hasn't played well, but they are a P5 team and will likely have size in the paint. Kelly is the big man we have that compete with that size, but will Baker get the minutes at the five or will Siddle play Kelly and Baket to deal with that size which, IMO, should be our starting players at the four and five.

(11-16-2021 06:11 AM)82hawk Wrote:  I think the problem Siddle has is with so many new players, graduate students, etc., is a few were likely promised PT if they came here.

If people literally play as hard as they can when on the floor, a whole bunch of guys can get all they playing time they can handle - they will need to hit the bench to get their wind. We haven't seen much of that in the first two games.

(11-16-2021 06:11 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-15-2021 10:20 PM)jumpinmullet Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:50 AM)82hawk Wrote:  The biggest problem I see is we are playing a few guys out of their best position.

Sims is not a four, he's a three. When you play a four guard offense, the mismatch of a big guard being able to drive and score against a bigger, slower four is the advantage. The problem is that Sims can't drive and score against a big man and he has a hard time shooting over a big man outside. His primary offense is from three, and he can also hit jumpers inside the three. But he is not a drive and finish guy at all.

Baker is a four, not a five. His inside game is almost non existent. He likes to start his offense on the perimeter, not in the post. He also is not big enough at 205lbs. to establish position in the post to rebound and score.

Those are our two glaring problems. The solution is to start Kelly at the five, Baker at the four and Sims at the three. We can sub in White for Baker and Saamb or McGriff for Kelly. And we have plenty of guards to sub in for Sims at the three.

Sims can shoot over the typical three and can hit the boards with a size advantage Kelly is obviously our best post player on offense and defense. And Baker at the four can attack from outside and help on the baords with Kelly and Sims.

So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. If you look at how they are listed,Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived by playing a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

This sounds very much like last year with guys playing out of position . Was this a problem vs Guilford College who has no size at any position ?

I think the problem Siddle has is with so many new players, graduate students, etc., is a few were likely promised PT if they came here. But now that they are here, he sees what he has and it isn't working.

Baker, imo, is his biggest issue. He really expected him to come in and be a force in the paint on offense, defense and rebounding, and he's not. Kelly has shown to be far better in the paint in all aspects. But if he starts Kelly at the five, that moves Baker to the four or keeps Baker as a backup player, and i'm sure he was pretty much promised to start.

And if Baker moves to the four, that moves Sims to the three and you now have a PT battle between Fornes and Okauru. Fornes is the better three point shooter, but Okauru is the better defender, rebounder and better at getting to the basket to finish. And Sims is a problem at the four as well. Good three point shooter, good rebounder, but doesn't have the ability to drive and finish. Sims doesn't provide the mismatch that is needed by a guard at the four.

So Siddle is going to be forced to make changes if he wants to win, and he doesn't want to make those changes. Tonight we will see if he makes the changes he needs to or not. Pitt hasn't played well, but they are a P5 team and will likely have size in the paint. Kelly is the big man we have that compete with that size, but will Baker get the minutes at the five or will Siddle play Kelly and Baket to deal with that size which, IMO, should be our starting players at the four and five.

If he is promising kids that they are starting and playing the problem is not with the players as far as the lineup goes . Promising playing time went out with the covered wagon so if that is the case here he might wanna go back on his word and play the guys he win with .

(11-16-2021 08:11 AM)jumpinmullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 06:11 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-15-2021 10:20 PM)jumpinmullet Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 10:17 AM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-13-2021 08:53 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  So the solution is to start Baker, and Kelly and this coming form a guy that said that we always play 4 guards? You walking that back now? I don't disagree with you just pointing out the change in tone.

Not walking back anything. Siddle is a four guard guy just like Keatts was and our roster is going to be built for that. If you look at how they are listed,Baker is a guard, not a forward or center, there is a reason for that. The problem we have right now is that Sims can't create the mismatch we need at the four as a guard, and Baker isn't a post player. Move them over one spot and insert Kelly and we have something. The only problem is that puts either Fornes or Okauru as a sub instead of a starter and Siddle needs Fornes for three point shooting and Okauru is an overall good player.

Keatts really had his perfect lineup when he had a PG like Ingram who could run the offense and flat out shoot the three ball, along with Flemmings at the four who could finish at the basket and shoot the three. We don't have either of those right now so we need a Plan B. Don't forget, even though Keatts preferred a four guard set, he had to adjust until Flemmings arrived by playing a center and power forward. Siddle may have to do that to win this year.

This sounds very much like last year with guys playing out of position . Was this a problem vs Guilford College who has no size at any position ?

I think the problem Siddle has is with so many new players, graduate students, etc., is a few were likely promised PT if they came here. But now that they are here, he sees what he has and it isn't working.

Baker, imo, is his biggest issue. He really expected him to come in and be a force in the paint on offense, defense and rebounding, and he's not. Kelly has shown to be far better in the paint in all aspects. But if he starts Kelly at the five, that moves Baker to the four or keeps Baker as a backup player, and i'm sure he was pretty much promised to start.

And if Baker moves to the four, that moves Sims to the three and you now have a PT battle between Fornes and Okauru. Fornes is the better three point shooter, but Okauru is the better defender, rebounder and better at getting to the basket to finish. And Sims is a problem at the four as well. Good three point shooter, good rebounder, but doesn't have the ability to drive and finish. Sims doesn't provide the mismatch that is needed by a guard at the four.

So Siddle is going to be forced to make changes if he wants to win, and he doesn't want to make those changes. Tonight we will see if he makes the changes he needs to or not. Pitt hasn't played well, but they are a P5 team and will likely have size in the paint. Kelly is the big man we have that compete with that size, but will Baker get the minutes at the five or will Siddle play Kelly and Baket to deal with that size which, IMO, should be our starting players at the four and five.

If he is promising kids that they are starting and playing the problem is not with the players as far as the lineup goes . Promising playing time went out with the covered wagon so if that is the case here he might wanna go back on his word and play the guys he win with .

At a certain point his job is more important than their PT, so I agree. But when you're recruiting players to tranfer for their graduate season, PT is at the top of their list. Maybe not a certain promise, but i'd be surprised if it wasn't strongly suggested.

In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I'd have a hard time thinking anyone was promised playing time and I'm hopeful that tonight, we'll see more Amari Kelly minutes. We're going to need him to be his usual self with energy, rebounding and rim protection, in addition to James Baker's best game of the season. I think Kelly has absolutely earned the chance to start.

Oglesby has uncharacteristically missed some good looks early on, but that will level out as he gets his toe injury fully behind him.

Our shooting woes have been mostly self-inflicted by a stagnant offense and too much dribbling, but we've missed our share of easy ones, too.

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

(11-16-2021 02:11 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

Everything I have heard about Boggs was that he loved Wilmington and UNCW but didn't want to play inside or off the bench and not a fan of the system as a whole . In todays world of college sports it does not take much for players to move on to the next stop .

(11-16-2021 02:50 PM)jumpinmullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 02:11 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

Everything I have heard about Boggs was that he loved Wilmington and UNCW but didn't want to play inside or off the bench and not a fan of the system as a whole . In todays world of college sports it does not take much for players to move on to the next stop .

Mullet, I didn't change any of the content, just fixed the text bracket for you so the quote would show up correctly. Cheers.

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

I was commenting on the promise of playing time. Like Scribe, I don't see that as any sort of reality in this system, promise of playing time. Additionally, I think if you're ever doing that as a coach, you're setting yourself up for disaster when such as in this specific case Siddle finds himself in... changes need to be made for the better of the team.

As far as size goes, I'm commenting on the reality too. I like your ideas for lineups, but the fact remains that our rebounding has not been good. That's also a reality. It was also a concern brought up months ago, and dismissed by some on this board in favor of "system" players. I'm okay with having players for a system... as long as that system is effective. If it's not, that's where the concern turns into required change.

(11-16-2021 02:11 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

It's not really speculation in his case, it's a pretty clear picture. Coach didn't recruit any bigs. Because of that shortfall, a taller, good shooter was asked to play out of position all year long. He did so much to his chagrin. Season's over he says peace out. There is a cause- effect with this situation. Speculation on the other guys that left, sure but Boggs is about as clear as it gets.

(11-16-2021 03:02 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 02:11 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 10:51 AM)B_Hawk06 Wrote:  In the Keatts/Siddle style system, it seems really ill-advised to promise any sort of significant PT. That type of system is designed to be constantly moving on offense, and hounding and badgering teams into submission on defense, which in turn means a lot of substituting to keep legs fresh. It's more of a hockey line change style.

Here's the thing. If we're two games into him "having his players for his system" and barely beating a D-3 team because the team isn't playing with energy... I'm highly concerned.

I'm not ready to ring any significant alarm yet, but that is definitely concerning. Siddle needs to get this BS right.

Also, I'm really tired of reading all the angst about our size, considering those of us who were concerned about it during the recruiting phase of Siddle getting "his players" for "his system" were told to shutup and color. The lack of size is clearly already hurting us, because this team isn't rebounding the ball the way we need them to.

I think we get beat by 15-20 points tonight, honestly. It sucks, but that's what I see happening.

What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

It's not really speculation in his case, it's a pretty clear picture. Coach didn't recruit any bigs. Because of that shortfall, a taller, good shooter was asked to play out of position all year long. He did so much to his chagrin. Season's over he says peace out. There is a cause- effect with this situation. Speculation on the other guys that left, sure but Boggs is about as clear as it gets.

It's not clear at all and the proof it isn't clear is that we could go back and forth for days and nobody would know anything for sure. He's gone and I wish he was here. Anything beyond that is speculation, period. You don't know anything more than I or anyone else knows whether you like it or not.

(11-16-2021 03:23 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 03:02 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 02:11 PM)82hawk Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:23 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(11-16-2021 01:14 PM)82hawk Wrote:  What in the world are you talking about? Siddle is going to play what he's going to play whether me, you or anyone else likes it. When i'm commenting on size or anything else in a Siddle system, it isn't a reflection of what I do or don't support, it's based on reality. And the reality is that in a Keatts/Siddle system, we are not going to have a stable of 6'9" centers and forwards...whether I like it or not. A four guard set is exactly that, four guards and ONE big man. The guard in the four spot is usually bigger than the other guards, but isn't a forward who plays in the paint. And it's vital that the guard in that spot can put up a lot of points compared to the forward they are matched up against. Otherwise the four guard system doesn't work.

The big man who SHOULD be playing the five is Kelly, and right now it's not even close. And he has plenty of size and capability for this system. The problem comes in at the four. Sims or Baker? If you go Kelly, Baker Sims at the 5,4,3 spots we're going 6'9", 6'7", 6'6" which is plenty of size no matter who the other two guards are and that's the lineup I proposed from the beginning. We may very well see that tonight. And that would probably mean Okauru comes off the bench in favor of Fornes who is a much greater three ball threat. And that will pretty much leave Fornes and Sims shooting threes.

The real problem I see on this team is a lack of three point shooters as opposed to a size issue. If White, Baker or Oglesby could become a threat it makes roster changes a lot easier.

Well, maybe we shouldn't have run off a pretty damn good shooter in Boggs? He made his bed with the guys that left, guys he ran off, lets hope it comes around. Oglesby has to come around i'd think but he's been pretty bad thus far.

I have said all along that Boggs was one of my favorite players and he's the one guy that we needed to keep from last year. Maybe he was run off, maybe he wasn't. It's pure speculation. Maybe he and his family wanted to get him out of the Covid Police state of North Carolina to Florida. But he would be ideal to have right now. Agreed.

It's not really speculation in his case, it's a pretty clear picture. Coach didn't recruit any bigs. Because of that shortfall, a taller, good shooter was asked to play out of position all year long. He did so much to his chagrin. Season's over he says peace out. There is a cause- effect with this situation. Speculation on the other guys that left, sure but Boggs is about as clear as it gets.

It's not clear at all and the proof it isn't clear is that we could go back and forth for days and nobody would know anything for sure. He's gone and I wish he was here. Anything beyond that is speculation, period. You don't know anything more than I or anyone else knows whether you like it or not.

I agree. We all wish he was here. By all accounts, a great young man and a helluva player. 82 is right though, we can all speculate based on what we think he left for, however none of us really know the bolts and nuts facts that led to the decision.