Mark Tollefsen

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:47 pm

Is Tollefsen better than Korcheck? Serious question. For those who've watched him, whom might you compare his game to?

pokinmik · Post by **pokinmik** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:59 pm

I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:08 pm

pokinmik wrote:I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.

Both are reserve big men.

az91 · Post by **az91** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:11 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:
pokinmik wrote:I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.
Both are reserve big men.

Can he play defense and will he play any meaningful minutes next year here?

threenumberones · Post by **threenumberones** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:19 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:
pokinmik wrote:I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.
Both are reserve big men.

No, Tollefsen can guard the 3 and has some handles. They are nothing alike.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:45 pm

threenumberones wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:
pokinmik wrote:I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.
Both are reserve big men.
No, Tollefsen can guard the 3 and has some handles. They are nothing alike.

Got it. Haven't seen Tollefsen so not sure what to expect. But your description raises my expectations.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:22 pm

Never know til it's over, but I don't see Tollefsen getting a chance at Arizona. Lee all the way unless he surprises and picks Pitino.

The Goat · Post by **The Goat** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:33 pm

If it is Tollefson it means one of 2 things happened:

Stanley is coming back and the staff no longer is looking at Lee. (Yay!!)

Stanley is leaving and the staff lost Lee. (Booo!!)

I am sure Tollefson is a nice rotation player, but if it comes down to wanting him or Lee it is an easy choice of Lee.

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:39 pm

Why couldn't it mean Tollefsen and Lee?

UAEebs86 · Post by **UAEebs86** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:44 pm

ASUHATER! wrote:Why couldn't it mean Tollefsen and Lee?

Get premium

ChooChooCat · Post by **ChooChooCat** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:58 pm

threenumberones wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:
pokinmik wrote:I know very little about Tollefsen but he's more skilled and more athletic than Korcheck, and it's kinda weird you compared them even in general terms. Just watch some vids.
Both are reserve big men.
No, Tollefsen can guard the 3 and has some handles. They are nothing alike.

I don't think he is capable of defending a 3.

The Goat · Post by **The Goat** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:13 pm

ASUHATER! wrote:Why couldn't it mean Tollefsen and Lee?

The staff isn't taking 2 grad transfers. It is one or the other at this time.

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:15 pm

Why not? Stanley is staying for no more than one year. Scholarship wise and everything there's no difference between Lee and Johnson. Makes no sense to draw a line on grad transfers in our current situation.

UAEebs86 · Post by **UAEebs86** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:23 pm

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 10:32 pm

Well Stanley wouldn't be graduating either from Arizona? Still don't get it.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 4:02 am

ASUHATER! wrote:Well Stanley wouldn't be graduating either from Arizona? Still don't get it.

Someone would transfer out because you can't have 13 scholarship players who all expect to see minutes and transfers hurt your APR.

azcat34 · Post by **azcat34** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:22 am

Transfers hurt APR if they leave in good academic standing?

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 6:47 am

I think any kid that withdraws from school before graduating hurts the APR. If they are in good academic standing it hurts less (by half I think) but it still affects it.

azgreg · Post by **azgreg** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 6:56 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Progress_Rate

Adjustments

The NCAA does adjust APR, on a student-by-student basis, in two circumstances. One exception that can be made, is for student-athletes who leave prior to graduation, while in good academic standing, to pursue a professional career. Another is for student-athletes who transfer to another school while meeting minimum academic requirements and student-athletes who return to graduate at a later date. Compiling college athletes’ graduation rates stemmed partly from press coverage that 76 to 92 percent of professional athletes lacked college degrees and from revelations that some were functionally illiterate.[15] In the 2010–11 cycle, the NCAA granted nearly 700 APR adjustments in the latter category, out of a total of over 6,400 Division I teams. (The APR is calculated based only on scholarship players already, not walk-ons) Numerous other sources, from sports conferences to schools themselves, document much lower graduation rates for college football and men’s basketball and baseball players than for general students. Compounding matters is that only about 57 percent of all college students complete a bachelor’s degree in six years.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:07 am

Grad transfers get an athletic scholarship that funds their attendance in graduate school, but at-large instead of in an actual academic program. Over two semesters (or quarter equivalent), they take a random assortment of classes and then leave the university without completing a graduate degree. It's a classic loophole that isn't in the spirit of the student athlete image promoted by the NCAA, but because it's legal, coaches are basically forced to take advantage of the loophole at the risk of not competing fully. There's a wrong perception that athletic programs cause the loop-hole, when in fact it's the creation of the university faculty and academic administrators.

The benefits of taking on a limited amount of grad transfers over time outweighs the impact on APR. But taking too many grad transfers increases the negative impact on APR. Too many grad transfers also makes a roster top-heavy, where transfers weigh on multi-year players coming up through the program by taking their minutes. The risk is poor chemistry and transferring out. Conversely, one-and-done players have higher upside than grad transfers.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:38 am

LH is, as usual, correct:

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/res ... -transfers

Grad transfers:

ZONACAT · Post by **ZONACAT** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:53 am

Longhorned wrote:Grad transfers get an athletic scholarship that funds their attendance in graduate school, but at-large instead of in an actual academic program. Over two semesters (or quarter equivalent), they take a random assortment of classes and then leave the university without completing a graduate degree. It's a classic loophole that isn't in the spirit of the student athlete image promoted by the NCAA, but because it's legal, coaches are basically forced to take advantage of the loophole at the risk of not competing fully. There's a wrong perception that athletic programs cause the loop-hole, when in fact it's the creation of the university faculty and academic administrators.

The benefits of taking on a limited amount of grad transfers over time outweighs the impact on APR. But taking too many grad transfers increases the negative impact on APR. Too many grad transfers also makes a roster top-heavy, where transfers weigh on multi-year players coming up through the program by taking their minutes. The risk is poor chemistry and transferring out. Conversely, one-and-done players have higher upside than grad transfers.

I wouldn't be surprised if Arizona offered Tollefsen a deal where he redshirted and plays the season after. Do you want to play NOW, for a lesser Pac program/SDSU or take the Ryan Anderson route, get a year of practice and be a bigger piece to the puzzle later.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:57 am

ZONACAT wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if Arizona offered Tollefsen a deal where he redshirted

Tollefsen already redshirted as a frosh so can't do it again.

http://www.usfdons.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=973

2011-12 (FRESHMAN): Redshirted the season.

ZONACAT · Post by **ZONACAT** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:58 am

Merkin wrote:
ZONACAT wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if Arizona offered Tollefsen a deal where he redshirted
Tollefsen already redshirted as a frosh so can't do it again.

http://www.usfdons.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=973

2011-12 (FRESHMAN): Redshirted the season.

Ignore everything I wrote. LOL

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 8:56 am

This process won't get to Tollefsen because in the end, Lee to Arizona is the best fit for both sides. In the process, Lee's weekend visit to Arizona and weekday visit to Louisville also points to that end. I could be wrong because of additional factors that aren't known to anyone, but I doubt it.

The reason why Lee and Arizona are excited is because Lee is the missing piece. Smith can learn backing up Lee and Anderson. If Anderson replaces Ashley's productivity as expected, and if PJC contributes as expected, then we're no longer even talking about a transition year for Arizona. Because Lee would be an equal replacement for Stanley Johnson. Johnson is a pro, but his upside was for March 2015. That upside didn't materialize (I'm happy to elaborate). Shit happens. With Lee, you don't have the learning curve of the transition to college, and you have an outstanding, experienced college wing in March.

dcZONAfan · Post by **dcZONAfan** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:07 am

Longhorned wrote:This process won't get to Tollefsen because in the end, Lee to Arizona is the best fit for both sides. In the process, Lee's weekend visit to Arizona and weekday visit to Louisville also points to that end. I could be wrong because of additional factors that aren't known to anyone, but I doubt it.

The reason why Lee and Arizona are excited is because Lee is the missing piece. Smith can learn backing up Lee and Anderson. If Anderson replaces Ashley's productivity as expected, and if PJC contributes as expected, then we're no longer even talking about a transition year for Arizona. Because Lee would be an equal replacement for Stanley Johnson. Johnson is a pro, but his upside was for March 2015. That upside didn't materialize (I'm happy to elaborate). Shit happens. With Lee, you don't have the learning curve of the transition to college, and you have an outstanding, experienced college wing in March.

I disagree LH, but only because I feel we will get both of them, and I feel we need both. Dusan, Chance, and Smith cannot play the 4, while Tollefsen can and will. Yes, he won't be a great rebounder out of that spot, but it's a small price to pay for depth at a position of need. RA is gonna be great, but he obviously can't play 40 minutes.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:51 am

dcZONAfan wrote:
Longhorned wrote:This process won't get to Tollefsen because in the end, Lee to Arizona is the best fit for both sides. In the process, Lee's weekend visit to Arizona and weekday visit to Louisville also points to that end. I could be wrong because of additional factors that aren't known to anyone, but I doubt it.

The reason why Lee and Arizona are excited is because Lee is the missing piece. Smith can learn backing up Lee and Anderson. If Anderson replaces Ashley's productivity as expected, and if PJC contributes as expected, then we're no longer even talking about a transition year for Arizona. Because Lee would be an equal replacement for Stanley Johnson. Johnson is a pro, but his upside was for March 2015. That upside didn't materialize (I'm happy to elaborate). Shit happens. With Lee, you don't have the learning curve of the transition to college, and you have an outstanding, experienced college wing in March.
I disagree LH, but only because I feel we will get both of them, and I feel we need both. Dusan, Chance, and Smith cannot play the 4, while Tollefsen can and will. Yes, he won't be a great rebounder out of that spot, but it's a small price to pay for depth at a position of need. RA is gonna be great, but he obviously can't play 40 minutes.

Why do you think Smith can't play the 4? Why do you think Ristic can't be developed into the third option at the 4 for limited minutes based on match ups?

dcZONAfan · Post by **dcZONAfan** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:04 am

Longhorned wrote:
dcZONAfan wrote:
Longhorned wrote:This process won't get to Tollefsen because in the end, Lee to Arizona is the best fit for both sides. In the process, Lee's weekend visit to Arizona and weekday visit to Louisville also points to that end. I could be wrong because of additional factors that aren't known to anyone, but I doubt it.

The reason why Lee and Arizona are excited is because Lee is the missing piece. Smith can learn backing up Lee and Anderson. If Anderson replaces Ashley's productivity as expected, and if PJC contributes as expected, then we're no longer even talking about a transition year for Arizona. Because Lee would be an equal replacement for Stanley Johnson. Johnson is a pro, but his upside was for March 2015. That upside didn't materialize (I'm happy to elaborate). Shit happens. With Lee, you don't have the learning curve of the transition to college, and you have an outstanding, experienced college wing in March.
I disagree LH, but only because I feel we will get both of them, and I feel we need both. Dusan, Chance, and Smith cannot play the 4, while Tollefsen can and will. Yes, he won't be a great rebounder out of that spot, but it's a small price to pay for depth at a position of need. RA is gonna be great, but he obviously can't play 40 minutes.
Why do you think Smith can't play the 4? Why do you think Ristic can't be developed into the third option at the 4 for limited minutes based on match ups?

Because I think rondae was the exception to the rule, and Ray isn't coming into our program with anything like the defensive reputation Rondae had.

Also, I don't think Ristic will even be able to defend the 5 next year ( although I'm hoping he improves his foot speed enough in the offseason to be serviceable) so asking him to defend the 4 seems nuts to me, especially if you can have the option of a senior who can do it.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:07 am

Don't forget, that 4 would also have to defend Ristic.

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:10 am

Im sure those guys can play the 4 in a pinch. Thing is, there is going to be pinches every night if we dont have a true 4 backing up Anderson for 6-10 minutes a night. He won't be able to defend too well knowing every night there is less than ideal backup if he gets into any foul trouble. I think Miller wants the least amount of weaknesses going into the tourny, and lack of size is something that can easily rear its ugly head in March. Dusan just does not have the foot speed/athleticism to keep up with anything more than a big lumbering 4. I guess the other option would be to play Dus at the 5 and move Tarc to guard the 4, but that isn't ideal either.

Smith on the other hand may be able to do it at 6'7-6'8, we haven't seen him yet. A lot to ask of a freshman though unless he is RHJ or AG. I heard he has defensive upside but his D is still a huge unknown at this level.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:35 am

If you disagree that Smith can back up the 4 and that Ristic can be developed to give limited minutes at the 4 depending on match ups, just remember that if Lee transfers to Arizona and Tollefsen doesn't, it's not me or anyone else on these boards that you're disagreeing with. I do think that, in the end, Lee is coming, and Tollefsen isn't. What I think about that doesn't matter.

I do suspect that there are few people here who have scouted Smith enough to say that he can't play the 4. Even if I had traveled to watch him play (I didn't), I don't have the skills to scout any prospect credibly.

By the way, Sean Miller has said that Smith may be the most elite athlete he'll have coached yet. No link.

catgrad97 · Post by **catgrad97** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:01 pm

I frankly have no idea why some people get so worked up about our recruits not being able to play the 2, 3 or 4 positions--as Miller has recruited the positions to the point of our personnel being more or less interchangeable with them.

He said as much in one of his first interviews after being hired to coach the Cats. Stanley Johnson epitomized this flexibility on offense.

I don't understand why some don't think Ray Smith can't, or won't, develop into the same type of player. Ristic has the range to play both positions; just not the wingspan or the defensive mobility, yet.

Now if you're saying some 4s like grad transfer Tollefsen can't slide out to be a wing or a shooting guard, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

But for goodness sake, Arizona's had recruits at the 2 sliding down to the 4 going back 30 years to Jud Buechler. It was one of Lute's overlooked secrets to building a winning program at Arizona.

And it won't be an issue with Arizona's recruits for next year. Matter of fact, there are some things Damion Lee can slide down and do on the low blocks that even Ivan Rabb cannot, as he showed in that game at MSG two seasons ago.

That's why, personally, I'm with LH: Cats are getting Lee before Tollefsen. Be more concerned about PJC's backup than anyone else incoming, because we're going to need quality point guard minutes there next season, and lots of them.

ChooChooCat · Post by **ChooChooCat** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:04 pm

My guess is by the time the season comes around Ray Smith will be roughly 205-210lbs if he isn't already. His scout/rivals/espn profile hasn't been updated in well over a year because he hasn't played.

Arizona made the Elite 8 with a 6'7 210lbs PF in Jesse Perry and he played 20 minutes per game, while Jamelle Horne a 6'7 215lbs SF backed him up at the 4. Please spare me the thought that Ray Smith can not man the 4 effectively in spots (key phrase there) for Arizona to have a great season. Also please spare me the thought that a 6'9 200lbs guy would be so much better equipped to defend a 4 than Smith would. Based on the personnel of this team, a guy with SF size with oodles of experience and has proven to be a hell of a player is much more of a need than a back up 4 IMO. If we have to make the choice between Lee and Tollefsen the choice isn't even close really. You take Lee.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:07 pm

gumby wrote:I had been thinking of him as an Ashley replacement or Rabb backup plan. That struck me as odd. Perhaps, it's best to think of him as a Rondae replacement.

https://medium.com/@schnides14/mark-tol ... cffc2ec14e

Like Hollis-Jefferson, Tollefsen impacts every key statistical category. Most importantly, for USF he frequently took the job of guarding the opponent’s best player. Guard or forward, it mattered not. Tollefsen has the foot speed and wingspan to render a normally good offensive player miserable.

In his final press conference of the season, following USF’s loss to Gonzaga in the West Coast Conference tournament quarterfinals, Dons coach Rex Walters affirmed a belief he has previously made known: if Tollefsen packed on 10–15 pounds ahead of ‘15–16, he could become the best player in the conference.

I wrote about Tollefsen for SLAM last season, and have frequently returned to this passage. Rex Walters frequently refers to the ease with which Tollefsen plays the game. There’s the dunks (seriously, look them up on YouTube), but more importantly, the way he can affect a game.

Knowing Miller's affinity for defense and versatility, this is beginning to make sense.

Reposting this since it's obvious from subsequent questions that it wasn't read. Korcheck? Really? Take the link for details about Tollefsen's game. Or, keep asking, because ... hell, I give up. Why don't people just Google this stuff? That's how I found it.

Here's another snippet.

In his final press conference of the season, following USF’s loss to Gonzaga in the West Coast Conference tournament quarterfinals, Dons coach Rex Walters affirmed a belief he has previously made known: if Tollefsen packed on 10–15 pounds ahead of ‘15–16, he could become the best player in the conference.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:24 pm

catgrad97 wrote:I frankly have no idea why some people get so worked up about our recruits not being able to play the 2, 3 or 4 positions--as Miller has recruited the positions to the point of our personnel being more or less interchangeable with them.

He said as much in one of his first interviews after being hired to coach the Cats. Stanley Johnson epitomized this flexibility on offense.

I don't understand why some don't think Ray Smith can't, or won't, develop into the same type of player. Ristic has the range to play both positions; just not the wingspan or the defensive mobility, yet.

Now if you're saying some 4s like grad transfer Tollefsen can't slide out to be a wing or a shooting guard, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

But for goodness sake, Arizona's had recruits at the 2 sliding down to the 4 going back 30 years to Jud Buechler. It was one of Lute's overlooked secrets to building a winning program at Arizona.

And it won't be an issue with Arizona's recruits for next year. Matter of fact, there are some things Damion Lee can slide down and do on the low blocks that even Ivan Rabb cannot, as he showed in that game at MSG two seasons ago.

That's why, personally, I'm with LH: Cats are getting Lee before Tollefsen. Be more concerned about PJC's backup than anyone else incoming, because we're going to need quality point guard minutes there next season, and lots of them.

Good post. Think people got used to MASSIVE. It's like people think we're only playing opponents with classic 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 players, so if we aren't sufficiently following the numbers we're doomed.

Few teams have a classic 5. Power forwards are in short supply, too. The really good ones don't hang around college long. So, many teams start five guys who aren't neatly slotted into positions.

Look around the conference. Who are these devastating 4s we won't be able to cope with while Anderson gets a blow? Will they be playing 40 minutes? If not, who subs for them? Last year, we had issues when teams played two wings, and Ashley couldn't check one of them.

Duke never had a decent 4. Neither did Utah. Neither did most teams.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:41 pm

Longhorned wrote:If you disagree that Smith can back up the 4 and that Ristic can be developed to give limited minutes at the 4 depending on match ups, just remember that if Lee transfers to Arizona and Tollefsen doesn't, it's not me or anyone else on these boards that you're disagreeing with. I do think that, in the end, Lee is coming, and Tollefsen isn't. What I think about that doesn't matter.

I do suspect that there are few people here who have scouted Smith enough to say that he can't play the 4. Even if I had traveled to watch him play (I didn't), I don't have the skills to scout any prospect credibly.

By the way, Sean Miller has said that Smith may be the most elite athlete he'll have coached yet. No link.

I would think the "who can back up the 4" debate revolves around the type of 4. Smith would be fine against a stretch 4. Against a power 4 (i.e., Michael Wright) he would get knocked around.

SJ is a key component, because if he returned (by some miracle) he's the definition of a wing that can handle physical play. He leaves, then we have to start thinking about how to flex.

I don't see the difference in taking Lee or Tollefsen. Tollefsen is not any better equipped to handle a powerful 4 than our other options. Take the best option of the 2 you can get.

threenumberones · Post by **threenumberones** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:13 pm

gumby wrote:
catgrad97 wrote:I frankly have no idea why some people get so worked up about our recruits not being able to play the 2, 3 or 4 positions--as Miller has recruited the positions to the point of our personnel being more or less interchangeable with them.

He said as much in one of his first interviews after being hired to coach the Cats. Stanley Johnson epitomized this flexibility on offense.

I don't understand why some don't think Ray Smith can't, or won't, develop into the same type of player. Ristic has the range to play both positions; just not the wingspan or the defensive mobility, yet.

Now if you're saying some 4s like grad transfer Tollefsen can't slide out to be a wing or a shooting guard, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

But for goodness sake, Arizona's had recruits at the 2 sliding down to the 4 going back 30 years to Jud Buechler. It was one of Lute's overlooked secrets to building a winning program at Arizona.

And it won't be an issue with Arizona's recruits for next year. Matter of fact, there are some things Damion Lee can slide down and do on the low blocks that even Ivan Rabb cannot, as he showed in that game at MSG two seasons ago.

That's why, personally, I'm with LH: Cats are getting Lee before Tollefsen. Be more concerned about PJC's backup than anyone else incoming, because we're going to need quality point guard minutes there next season, and lots of them.
Good post. Think people got used to MASSIVE. It's like people think we're only playing opponents with classic 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 players, so if we aren't sufficiently following the numbers we're doomed.

Few teams have a classic 5. Power forwards are in short supply, too. The really good ones don't hang around college long. So, many teams start five guys who aren't neatly slotted into positions.

Look around the conference. Who are these devastating 4s we won't be able to cope with while Anderson gets a blow? Will they be playing 40 minutes? If not, who subs for them? Last year, we had issues when teams played two wings, and Ashley couldn't check one of them.

Duke never had a decent 4. Neither did Utah. Neither did most teams.

Yea this. And on top of that the traditional numbering of the positions (1=point, 2=sg, etc) is way overstated in college. That's a thing for the pros. In college it is a reflection of the roles and responsibilities for each player in the system you run, both offensive and defensive. For any given set we a combo of 1pg, 2-3 wings, 1-2 posts - and in many cases these roles change from set to set, pending on the D we are up against. How we matchup on D is different, but that's more of a size/speed type question rather than 'what position does this guy play'.

So the pg, sure - that's a clear need with specific skills. The other four players on the court are a slider scale of attributes/skills that is adjusted on the fly for matchups/scheme. You can further scrutinize the need for matchups/scheme, but pigeonholing the players into the traditional 2-5 positions doesn't make any sense.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:18 pm

Here are the Top 4s from last year, based on the Karl Malone Award voting.

Montrez Harrell
Kyle Wiltjer
David Laury (Iona)
Georges Niang
Perry Ellis.

Harrell is the lone power forward. (Know nothing about Laury). Rest could be checked with length and quickness, rather than strength. No need to obsess about backup 4s.

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:05 pm

I'm not super super worried about it, to clarify.

Yea, we have gotten used to Massive, Massive, Massive, but that has always been a strength for us these past few years. Cant blame fans who want to retain that huge advantage. Me personally, in our conference with the way officials call games (especially for us), aside from what people say about there not going to be any great 4's, I would rather be deep in the post than on the perimeter, and we already have lots of depth on the perimeter anyhow. And big picture, id hate to run across a team in the tournament and Tarc gets in some early foul trouble and we are leaving ourselves open to gettin eaten up at both blocks if Dusan is athletically inferior to the 5 and Anderson needs rest and the guy in for him is giving up 2-3 inches and a little bulk and interior skill.

I havent seen Tollefsen, I vaguely remember Lee (just that I thought he played well), so I am not going to say who I rather have without seeing both of them in action. I know Miller knows exactly what he wants and he will make the right decision. These are just possible concerns I have as a fan, and each of us was taught the game differently and/or view the game in different ways and styles. I think regardless, Miller finds a way to make it work 95 percent of the time, its just the 5 percent that scares you as a fan.

And Gumby, I get what you are saying, but to throw out an example: Imagine we got Tarc, Dus, Anderson, Comanche and whatever wing(s) we have coming to play the 4 when Andersons resting or in foul trouble, and we run into a Xavier with Stainbrook and Mr Slap a Girl. Those guys hurt us enough in that game and luckily Stainbrook ran out of gas and we had just enough length to wear him out. With those Arizona guys mentioned above, that team sends us home in the sweet 16, guaranteed. And it wasnt like that was some special team. Cant be sure that a Tollefsen changes that, but it certainly would help, and it isnt like he is a guy who only brings length.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:35 pm

You mean. Mr. Allegedly Slap A Girl. (Say, where are the updates? We were SO selflessly concerned about that situation).

We aren't going to be the same team in a lot of ways. While not massive or having great depth in the paint, we will be different elsewhere. So in the case of foul trouble, the Stainbrooks and Reynolds of the world (and they are dwindling) have to guard people who are quicker and can bring them out to the perimeter. This was a problem for Arizona when we had the Tucson Skyline.

In any event, we aren't after any player who can effectively check those two. So the decision will be irrelevant to that scenario.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:38 pm

rgdeuce wrote: And Gumby, I get what you are saying, but to throw out an example: Imagine we got Tarc, Dus, Anderson, Comanche and whatever wing(s) we have coming to play the 4 when Andersons resting or in foul trouble, and we run into a Xavier with Stainbrook and Mr Slap a Girl. Those guys hurt us enough in that game and luckily Stainbrook ran out of gas and we had just enough length to wear him out. With those Arizona guys mentioned above, that team sends us home in the sweet 16, guaranteed. And it wasnt like that was some special team. Cant be sure that a Tollefsen changes that, but it certainly would help, and it isnt like he is a guy who only brings length.

I understand what you're saying, and that's valid, but Xavier wasn't a great match-up for Arizona with last year's team. Xavier struggled against smaller, more athletic teams with shooters at every position. I watched and re-watched Villanova destroy Xavier doing things that Arizona couldn't. Conversely, and I may be wrong (who knows?), but I think Arizona would have handled NC State. Maybe if next year's Arizona meets the equivalent of last year's Xavier, and if Anderson gets into foul trouble, then Arizona will go down. Or maybe Arizona plays smaller and a 2nd-year-March-PJC leads Arizona to run Stainbrook off the court early than last year's team could.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:47 pm

XU lost 14 games. Don't lose sleep trying to cover every possible scenario.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:26 am

BigSkyCatinMT · Post by **BigSkyCatinMT** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:37 am

Merkin wrote:

Lee might be a better player, but Zeus, Ristic, Anderson, Chance is a very thin frontcourt.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:41 am

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Lee might be a better player, but Zeus, Ristic, Anderson, Chance is a very thin frontcourt.

It really isn't, I don't think. Zeus and Ristic is as good a C rotation as it gets. Anderson should be able to handle 28-30 mpg. If Comanche can give us 10, we're fine right there. If not, we could flex to Zeus/Ristic against bigger teams or play with an extra wing against smaller teams. On the off chance Stanley returns, we're loaded, b/c he is big enough to check any 4 for a limited time period.

SCCats · Post by **SCCats** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:57 am

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Lee might be a better player, but Zeus, Ristic, Anderson, Chance is a very thin frontcourt.

I disagree with the analysis of "very thin frontcourt."

ChooChooCat · Post by **ChooChooCat** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:13 am

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Lee might be a better player, but Zeus, Ristic, Anderson, Chance is a very thin frontcourt.

Man Arizona fans are obviously spoiled.

The height and weights of the frontcourt rotation for the National Champions in one of the deepest years of college basketball in quite awhile.

6'6 225lbs
6'9 215lbs
6'11 270lbs
7'0 255lbs (played less than 10 minutes per game)

Our frontcourt rotation with no Tollefsen

6'9 230lbs
6'7 whatever Ray Smith will weigh by the time the season begins (my guess is 210lbs)
7'0 245lbs
7'0 245lbs

We have a pretty good rotation and that doesn't even include Chance Comanche of course who should theoretically redshirt. Now if an injury happens sure we'd be hurting, but the same goes for 99% of the teams in the nation. I don't know many teams that wouldn't trade frontcourt rotations with us. Also if Arizona lands Lee then theoretically in small lineups you can get away with playing him at the 4 depending on the matchup of course. All we'd need out of our back up 4 man is to have long arms and put said arms up in the air and defend. The list of 4's who bang down low in college basketball is ridiculously short, so I'm not exactly concerned about Ray Smith being built like a brick shit house to be able to defend the 4 in spot minutes.

Without Damion Lee, Arizona is thin in proven scorers and defenders on the wing, especially those with size capable enough of playing the 3. That scares me more.

az91 · Post by **az91** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 4:20 pm

BigSkyCatinMT wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Lee might be a better player, but Zeus, Ristic, Anderson, Chance is a very thin frontcourt.

Given that Chance is a project and probable redshirt candidate, I agree. We need Tollefsen for some depth. I think the jury is still very much out on Ristic being able to play defense well enough to stay on the court for an extended period of time.

BigSkyCatinMT · Post by **BigSkyCatinMT** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:50 pm

First knee injury or broken foot screws it all up. Done that already.

Login • Register