coach to the talent you have

[enonram]

If Shaka is a good coach he recognizes that you coach to the talent you have.

As it stands right now, we have one true PG and he will be a freshman. Shaka needs to build a team that plays to the positives, not our weakness - our weakness at point is in our depth.

Our strength is our depth, 3 point shooting ability, and Larry Sanders. That means we need to press a lot and run to offense off of makes and misses - utlize our bench and wear other teams down. Next it doesn't take a ton of talent at PG to help direct whipping the ball around the perimeter to find an open 3 - maybe an occassional inside out to Larry between LS and Gavin or Skeen. When all else breaks down, throw it up high to Larry and let him go get it.

I for one am not too worried about being weak at point if Shaka coaches to our strengths.

 

[AG_fan]

If Shaka is a good coach he recognizes that you coach to the talent you have.

As it stands right now, we have one true PG and he will be a freshman. Shaka needs to build a team that plays to the positives, not our weakness - our weakness at point is in our depth.

Our strength is our depth, 3 point shooting ability, and Larry Sanders. That means we need to press a lot and run to offense off of makes and misses - utlize our bench and wear other teams down. Next it doesn't take a ton of talent at PG to help direct whipping the ball around the perimeter to find an open 3 - maybe an occassional inside out to Larry between LS and Gavin or Skeen. When all else breaks down, throw it up high to Larry and let him go get it.

I for one am not too worried about being weak at point if Shaka coaches to our strengths.

Enon, if we're going to run off both makes and misses, we're going to need another PG -- unless, of course, Theus is some kind of superhuman specimen capable of playing 40 minutes at breakneck speed.

Also, who do you think is going to have a key role in leading all those fast breaks, getting the ball where it needs to go in the halfcourt offense and getting the ball upcourt if other teams decide to press us? The point guard.

I'm all for taking lemons and making them into lemonade, but PG is considered the most important position on the court (especially in a guard-oriented league like the CAA) for a reason. A good PG not only handles the ball, but gets everyone where they're supposed to be and makes his teammates better. If Shaka doesn't shore up that spot, all the coaching in the world won't mean a hill of beans.

 

[Ramdog]

If Shaka is a good coach he recognizes that you coach to the talent you have.

yep...IF

with all due respect ,the jury is still out on that as well

 

[enonram]

I have always thought that a true running team gets the ball in the hands of whoever the best outlet pass is and that player brings it up court. That doesn't have to be the PG. That could easily be TG, Roz, Burgess, Nixon, etc. If you wait until the ball gets in the PG's control you lose time. That's an extra pass and catch. Any decent college player can get the ball from the baseline to shooting range in 4 seconds. If we're talking outlet pass then what does it take? Two maybe three seconds.

As far as someone else pressing us, the best way to beat the press is with the pass. That's a team approach to getting the ball up court, not just the PG. If we're going to press and run, and others try to press us back, that will only play into our depth card.

I am truly not that worried about our lack of depth at PG.

Your comments on the CAA being a PG driven league are very true. It is very difficult to win the league without strong guard play. I see no reason why that good guard play could not be by committee.

 

[Rambunctious]

I have always thought that a true running team gets the ball in the hands of whoever the best outlet pass is and that player brings it up court. That doesn't have to be the PG. That could easily be TG, Roz, Burgess, Nixon, etc. If you wait until the ball gets in the PG's control you lose time. That's an extra pass and catch. Any decent college player can get the ball from the baseline to shooting range in 4 seconds. If we're talking outlet pass then what does it take? Two maybe three seconds.

As far as someone else pressing us, the best way to beat the press is with the pass. That's a team approach to getting the ball up court, not just the PG. If we're going to press and run, and others try to press us back, that will only play into our depth card.

I am truly not that worried about our lack of depth at PG.

Your comments on the CAA being a PG driven league are very true. It is very difficult to win the league without strong guard play. I see no reason why that good guard play could not be by committee.

A few questions:

- Think of all the great fast breaks we had last season? How many were led (i.e. the guy dribbling the ball up the middle of the court and making decisions) by Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

- How many of Larry's alley oops were from Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

- On the plays in which we broke pressure without a passing-centric approach who brought the ball across the court? Was it normally Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

I don't think anyone is questioning whether someone can walk the ball across half-court in 10 seconds. However if Gavin, Burgess, Rozzell, or Nixon is bringing the ball across the court how often do you think teams are going to allow them to walk it across?

 

[AG_fan]

I have always thought that a true running team gets the ball in the hands of whoever the best outlet pass is and that player brings it up court. That doesn't have to be the PG. That could easily be TG, Roz, Burgess, Nixon, etc. If you wait until the ball gets in the PG's control you lose time. That's an extra pass and catch. Any decent college player can get the ball from the baseline to shooting range in 4 seconds. If we're talking outlet pass then what does it take? Two maybe three seconds.

As far as someone else pressing us, the best way to beat the press is with the pass. That's a team approach to getting the ball up court, not just the PG. If we're going to press and run, and others try to press us back, that will only play into our depth card.

I am truly not that worried about our lack of depth at PG.

Your comments on the CAA being a PG driven league are very true. It is very difficult to win the league without strong guard play. I see no reason why that good guard play could not be by committee.

For every basketball team I've ever been associated with, and it's been a few, the first pass from the rebounder is almost always to the PG, with teammates filling the lanes and ready to receive a pass on either side of the court.

Unless your 2 guard opts not to block his man out, takes off immediately after a shot and is open downcourt for a layup, the PG is your best option for an outlet pass because your forwards and center had better be crashing the defensive boards. It goes without saying that if you can't get the rebound, it doesn't matter how fast your guys are because you can't run a fast break without the ball.

That's different than a broken-play scenario that results from a turnover forced in the backcourt. Those plays usually are converted with either no passes or the quickest possible pass to an open man for a layup. But those aren't technically fast breaks.

That's not really my point, though. Regardless of whether we run all the time or rely on a halfcourt offense, the ball will be in the PGs hands a lot. It's asking an awful lot of a true freshman to play 35 minutes per game at any kind of pace, and that's why it's so obvious we have to find someone, anyone who can at least be a serviceable backup while Theus gets a rest.

 

[Blackmagic804]

I have always thought that a true running team gets the ball in the hands of whoever the best outlet pass is and that player brings it up court. That doesn't have to be the PG. That could easily be TG, Roz, Burgess, Nixon, etc. If you wait until the ball gets in the PG's control you lose time. That's an extra pass and catch. Any decent college player can get the ball from the baseline to shooting range in 4 seconds. If we're talking outlet pass then what does it take? Two maybe three seconds.

As far as someone else pressing us, the best way to beat the press is with the pass. That's a team approach to getting the ball up court, not just the PG. If we're going to press and run, and others try to press us back, that will only play into our depth card.

I am truly not that worried about our lack of depth at PG.

Your comments on the CAA being a PG driven league are very true. It is very difficult to win the league without strong guard play. I see no reason why that good guard play could not be by committee.

A few questions:

- Think of all the great fast breaks we had last season? How many were led (i.e. the guy dribbling the ball up the middle of the court and making decisions) by Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

- How many of Larry's alley oops were from Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

- On the plays in which we broke pressure without a passing-centric approach who brought the ball across the court? Was it normally Rozzell, Burgess or Nixon?

I don't think anyone is questioning whether someone can walk the ball across half-court in 10 seconds. However if Gavin, Burgess, Rozzell, or Nixon is bringing the ball across the court how often do you think teams are going to allow them to walk it across?

Not sure if these are fair questions since we had one of the best PG in the country and I'm sure it was the teams focus to get the ball in his hands.....at all times. Now that Maynor is gone let's see who steps up, hopefully they all do.

 

[theVCUchamp]

With Maynor and Rodriguez gone, our weakest spot is at the point. We have the big guys who that the proven ability to dominate in the middle, but it's a moot point if we don't have folks on the outside that can compliment the guys on the inside. A good team is not all about size and power. Can't have a team full of big guys that can squash anything that flies in the air. Like in football, your defensive line can't just be a bunch of swole-up linebackers going for the rush all day...you gotta have those guys that go yard for yard with a receiver and break up plays down the field. In basketball, you need those guys who have speed and a good perimeter game. And while I agree with the philosophy that you coach to the talent you have, if the talent is lopsided in the favor of one demographic over the other, then you don't have a squad that can work at optimal efficiency.

 

[ram4life]

I love your optimism, enonram, but me thinkist that you have underestimated the need for a second point guard.

 

[RAMitDown]

you obviously have to coach to your talent. You cant coach talent you dont have, or can you?

The point is a weakness and this will be a rebuilding year. We have to have faith and hope that when our newest coach rises up, that he doesnt leave for some PAC-10 school.

 

[row6ram]

The point is a weakness and this will be a rebuilding year.

We don't rebuild. We reload!

 

[fmrick]

I have always thought that a true running team gets the ball in the hands of whoever the best outlet pass is and that player brings it up court. That doesn't have to be the PG. That could easily be TG, Roz, Burgess, Nixon, etc. If you wait until the ball gets in the PG's control you lose time. That's an extra pass and catch. Any decent college player can get the ball from the baseline to shooting range in 4 seconds. If we're talking outlet pass then what does it take? Two maybe three seconds.

As far as someone else pressing us, the best way to beat the press is with the pass. That's a team approach to getting the ball up court, not just the PG. If we're going to press and run, and others try to press us back, that will only play into our depth card.

I am truly not that worried about our lack of depth at PG.

Your comments on the CAA being a PG driven league are very true. It is very difficult to win the league without strong guard play. I see no reason why that good guard play could not be by committee.

For every basketball team I've ever been associated with, and it's been a few, the first pass from the rebounder is almost always to the PG, with teammates filling the lanes and ready to receive a pass on either side of the court.

Unless your 2 guard opts not to block his man out, takes off immediately after a shot and is open downcourt for a layup, the PG is your best option for an outlet pass because your forwards and center had better be crashing the defensive boards. It goes without saying that if you can't get the rebound, it doesn't matter how fast your guys are because you can't run a fast break without the ball.

That's different than a broken-play scenario that results from a turnover forced in the backcourt. Those plays usually are converted with either no passes or the quickest possible pass to an open man for a layup. But those aren't technically fast breaks.

That's not really my point, though. Regardless of whether we run all the time or rely on a halfcourt offense, the ball will be in the PGs hands a lot. It's asking an awful lot of a true freshman to play 35 minutes per game at any kind of pace, and that's why it's so obvious we have to find someone, anyone who can at least be a serviceable backup while Theus gets a rest.

The problem with your entire comment is that you keep talking about rebounds. I think if we get back to pressing and running, like we did two years ago, the true goal will be to never let the other team take a shot. We had games where other teams would go many possessions without getting the ball to half-court, much less being able to take a shot. That is exactly what we need to do next year.

Play to our strength and you will press, press, press. This is something we have not been able to do the past couple years. PLUS- we played to our strength- Eric Maynor. We did not press as much because we could not, and we did not have to. We could not because we did not have enough players, we did not have to because had a great PG in Eric, who gave us a great half-court option.

I don't know what basketball you have been involved in, but if you think that in fast-break situations, when you get the steal, that the first pass (or second or third, for that matter) must be to the PG, then you need to pay more attention to the game and less to towels. One guy gets the steal, throws to whoever is out front, then he either takes it to the basket or passes to someone with a better (i.e. easier, higher percentage) shot. Sometimes the PG will be involved, sometimes not.

Quiz question to old-time VCU fans out there (note I said VCU fans, not AG fans)- How many years in the 20 years before Eric Maynor did we have a true PG? A true PG, not just some good guard that we adapted to the position. And note I said good.

 

[AG_fan]

I don't know what basketball you have been involved in, but if you think that in fast-break situations, when you get the steal, that the first pass (or second or third, for that matter) must be to the PG, then you need to pay more attention to the game and less to towels. One guy gets the steal, throws to whoever is out front, then he either takes it to the basket or passes to someone with a better (i.e. easier, higher percentage) shot. Sometimes the PG will be involved, sometimes not.

Pardon me, Mr. Snarky and Condescending, but reading comprehension clearly isn't a great skill of yours. If you'll go back and re-read my previous post, I draw a clear distinction between running a traditional fast break and a transition game based off stealing the ball in the backcourt.

Or is this not clear enough for you?

That's different than a broken-play scenario that results from a turnover forced in the backcourt. Those plays usually are converted with either no passes or the quickest possible pass to an open man for a layup. But those aren't technically fast breaks.

Look, I know you think you know everything there is to know about VCU basketball. Everybody on here treats you like you're some kind of authority figure. Fine. But you clearly don't understand the difference between running a fast break off an opponent's shot (which, by the way, was the topic of the original discussion) and scoring quick baskets off full-court pressure.

Of course, there's probably a rational explanation for your overly-defensive response: You're the most blatant VCU homer on this, or any other, board. Since we currently lack a proven Division I PG, you want to believe we won't really need one to play Shaka's up-tempo game. This is simply not true.

 

[Natty]

So much for the love-fest the Zoners predicted!

We've got a real message board!

 

[ramathon74]

That's it, I'm going back to the CAAZone!