Rawle Alkins

[gronk4heisman]

Ugh the position argument is so tired already. Play the best 5, end of story. Justise Winslow wasn't a true 4, Derrick Williams wasn't a true 5, who cares?! Play the damn talent and the rest magically tends to work out.

Agree 100%.

Also, if you must have a "true 4" why can't that be Smith? He is essentially the same size as Ryan Anderson, Aaron Gordon, and Brandon Ashley give or take an inch and a few pounds. The 4 seems like a natural fit for him after the injury and bulking up the last year or so off basketball.

[EOCT]

Put Rawle at the point.

Very interesting, Chi.

Dude has nice handles and brings the ball down-court as an intimidator and if he decides to continue to the rim, goes in a straight line more often than not. Result, brave wing defenders often try to close on him and perimeter is open all over the place. So Rawle pulls up and kicks to a Ferguson, Zo, Simmons, Allen? Or he continues to the rim and makes defenders a little sore the next day.

Feels good. And we alternate that with Kobi, Allen or PJC when called for. This kind of flexibility fits right into Choo's thesis to not do a fixed position strategy---just put the best five players in there who can play a flexible game.

[Longhorned]

Put Rawle at the point.

Very interesting, Chi.

Dude has nice handles and brings the ball down-court as an intimidator and if he decides to continue to the rim, goes in a straight line more often than not. Result, brave wing defenders often try to close on him and perimeter is open all over the place. So Rawle pulls up and kicks to a Ferguson, Zo, Simmons, Allen? Or he continues to the rim and makes defenders a little sore the next day.

Feels good. And we alternate that with Kobi, Allen or PJC when called for. This kind of flexibility fits right into Choo's thesis to not do the position strategy---just put the best five players in there.

Where did I read that Alkins isn't fast enough to play the point, and quick enough to defend the point? I don't know if true. Maybe that's premium info.

[ChooChooCat]

Ray Smith is the same exact size as Bennett Davison if not bigger. An athletic guy with decent size is a dangerous weapon to take advantage of at the 4 if you can get away with it. Best 5 need to play no matter how that is done.

[Beachcat97]

Is this the most dynamic offensive team CSM has ever had?

[NYCat]

Put Rawle at the point.

Very interesting, Chi.

Dude has nice handles and brings the ball down-court as an intimidator and if he decides to continue to the rim, goes in a straight line more often than not. Result, brave wing defenders often try to close on him and perimeter is open all over the place. So Rawle pulls up and kicks to a Ferguson, Zo, Simmons, Allen? Or he continues to the rim and makes defenders a little sore the next day.

Feels good. And we alternate that with Kobi, Allen or PJC when called for. This kind of flexibility fits right into Choo's thesis to not do the position strategy---just put the best five players in there.

Where did I read that Alkins isn't fast enough to play the point, and quick enough to defend the point? I don't know if true. Maybe that's premium info.

I mean he's often compared to a guard version of Julius Randle and most commonly Lance Stephenson, and I wouldn't want someone like Lance at the point.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Ray Smith is the same exact size as Bennett Davison if not bigger. An athletic guy with decent size is a dangerous weapon to take advantage of at the 4 if you can get away with it. Best 5 need to play no matter how that is done.

So Lauri defintely starts in that scenario, right?

Kidding. I have a much higher degree of faith in Lauri to be our best option in his natural position. It isn't really Lauri vs Ray, it's Lauri vs whoever moves into the lineup in his place. I like a KS/AT/RS/LM/DR or CC starting lineup.

This is the offseason, and none of us will get to establish validity of opinion for months, though. May I suggest a winner take all Royal Rumble in the desert patch next to Turbulence (the sad strip club by the airport) to settle things until then?

The saddest part is because this is all in the Rawle thread, if I'm right and want to toot my horn, I probably won't suspect my posts are in here in order to stroke my own ego. So then I'll lose interest and play Hungry, Hungry Hippos instead.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Put Rawle at the point.

Very interesting, Chi.

Dude has nice handles and brings the ball down-court as an intimidator and if he decides to continue to the rim, goes in a straight line more often than not. Result, brave wing defenders often try to close on him and perimeter is open all over the place. So Rawle pulls up and kicks to a Ferguson, Zo, Simmons, Allen? Or he continues to the rim and makes defenders a little sore the next day.

Feels good. And we alternate that with Kobi, Allen or PJC when called for. This kind of flexibility fits right into Choo's thesis to not do the position strategy---just put the best five players in there.

Where did I read that Alkins isn't fast enough to play the point, and quick enough to defend the point? I don't know if true. Maybe that's premium info.

Rawle is a pure scorer. I'm not sure why we'd make him a distributor. Isn't that Kadeem's role?

[gumby]

Ugh the position argument is so tired already. Play the best 5, end of story. Justise Winslow wasn't a true 4, Derrick Williams wasn't a true 5, who cares?! Play the damn talent and the rest magically tends to work out.

Yes. Were Duck fans saying, "Hey, Elgin Cook isn't a real 4!"

Brooks, Boucher, Cook and Dorsey were just a pain to guard. You don't get extra points for having five guys in their "true" positions.

Play the best five. Adjust as needed.

[HiCat]

Yeah, don't see Rawle's best use at pg. Better at 2, or 3.

[Beachcat97]

Brooks, Boucher, Cook and Dorsey were just a pain to guard. You don't get extra points for having five guys in their "true" positions.

Play the best five. Adjust as needed.

Good post, gumby. Other teams are going to have a hard time matching up with us next season, regardless of who we have on the floor.

[mofo]

Why do we have to play "true" positions to match up with other teams? Other teams should have to try to match up with us. I get that rebounding and defense of those "true" positions may be a concern, but the other teams will have their own concerns with our lineup.

[Longhorned]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

[thenewazcats]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

[ChooChooCat]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

How many teams in the country have two decent big men and by that I mean prototypical big men who play predominantly in the post? Serious question. How many 4s nationally make their living in the low post as opposed to the perimeter in college basketball? Your concerns would effect Smith against maybe 5-10 teams nationally (being generous here) and if we would end up going against such an opponent where Smith is ineffective defensively then we have other options. Honestly with the concerns this web forum has for Ray Smith playing the 4 you'd think we were in the mid-90s still.

I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.

[Main Event]

[Longhorned]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

How many teams in the country have two decent big men and by that I mean prototypical big men who play predominantly in the post? Serious question. How many 4s nationally make their living in the low post as opposed to the perimeter in college basketball? Your concerns would effect Smith against maybe 5-10 teams nationally (being generous here) and if we would end up going against such an opponent where Smith is ineffective defensively then we have other options. Honestly with the concerns this web forum has for Ray Smith playing the 4 you'd think we were in the mid-90s still.

I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.

I'd take Smith and the four, too, and my guess is he'll be one of the five best players on next year's team. I'm just saying that I'm guessing one of those big men won't be among the top five but will get starter minutes. In addition to what you say about the power forward position, the same can be said about traditional centers. There are very few centers who benefit a contender. I hope Arizona spreads the floor at 4 positions, and it's Comanche rather than Ristic as our 1-in.

[HiCat]

"The key is getting into our college-ready bodies! I’m already on it too! I’ve lost about 20 pounds, but added a lot more muscle."

Is Rawle 6'4" or 6'5"? Was listed at 200 #'s, but must have been bigger. Dropping 20 lbs is impressive.

[ChooChooCat]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

How many teams in the country have two decent big men and by that I mean prototypical big men who play predominantly in the post? Serious question. How many 4s nationally make their living in the low post as opposed to the perimeter in college basketball? Your concerns would effect Smith against maybe 5-10 teams nationally (being generous here) and if we would end up going against such an opponent where Smith is ineffective defensively then we have other options. Honestly with the concerns this web forum has for Ray Smith playing the 4 you'd think we were in the mid-90s still.

I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.

I'd take Smith and the four, too, and my guess is he'll be one of the five best players on next year's team. I'm just saying that I'm guessing one of those big men won't be among the top five but will get starter minutes. In addition to what you say about the power forward position, the same can be said about traditional centers. There are very few centers who benefit a contender. I hope Arizona spreads the floor at 4 positions, and it's Comanche rather than Ristic as our 1-in.

Agreed on all points.

[threenumberones]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

How many teams in the country have two decent big men and by that I mean prototypical big men who play predominantly in the post? Serious question. How many 4s nationally make their living in the low post as opposed to the perimeter in college basketball? Your concerns would effect Smith against maybe 5-10 teams nationally (being generous here) and if we would end up going against such an opponent where Smith is ineffective defensively then we have other options. Honestly with the concerns this web forum has for Ray Smith playing the 4 you'd think we were in the mid-90s still.

I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.

I'd take Smith and the four, too, and my guess is he'll be one of the five best players on next year's team. I'm just saying that I'm guessing one of those big men won't be among the top five but will get starter minutes. In addition to what you say about the power forward position, the same can be said about traditional centers. There are very few centers who benefit a contender. I hope Arizona spreads the floor at 4 positions, and it's Comanche rather than Ristic as our 1-in.

The question that will drive the front court lineups will be rebounding imo. Assuming we are going to continue to rebound at an elite level is dangerous considering who we lost and who we have coming in. You can't count on the freshmen, and Ray hasn't played competitive ball for a long time. I expect some growth in that area by Dusan and Chance, but it's more than likely going to be a rebounding by committee type of situation. We do have height in the backcourt so at least that is nice, but I'm not sure that Sean will have the luxury of going small ball for extended stints unless we can keep teams off our blocks. To me that's the biggest question of next year's team.

[Merkin]

I expect some growth in that area by Dusan and Chase,

Pretty sure Chase has done all the growing he can.






Romar in a small ball lineup excelled at having them all crash the boards.

[Spaceman Spiff]

It's about matchups, so the flexibility next year helps. You can't just run with a 4-guard lineup and Smith or Markannen, expecting those five to beat the other five every night. Team rebounds will matter and there will be situations where you lose the matchup in the low post, racking up fouls and wearing down. Comanche and Ristic aren't in the top five players on the team but I bet one of those two starts and plays starter minutes.

Spot on. Team rebounding is so damn important to winning against elite rosters. We witnessed that in incredible fashion in '14 and '15 when only Wisconsin stopped us from a ticket to the F4 and more.

I love the look of Ray Smith's game. He could stretch the defense as a four, but that's only one end of the floor. That lower body has to make a radical transformation to not get destroyed on defense against a team running out two decent big men. Throw in the two major injuries and having him grind in the post defensively for more than 15 minutes a game is a recipe for re-injury.

The wings will carry this team but I also can't see running out a four-guard lineup consistently working out all that well when the games get tough.

How many teams in the country have two decent big men and by that I mean prototypical big men who play predominantly in the post? Serious question. How many 4s nationally make their living in the low post as opposed to the perimeter in college basketball? Your concerns would effect Smith against maybe 5-10 teams nationally (being generous here) and if we would end up going against such an opponent where Smith is ineffective defensively then we have other options. Honestly with the concerns this web forum has for Ray Smith playing the 4 you'd think we were in the mid-90s still.

I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.

I assume my posts are a part of this, and I (and the post you were responding too) wasn't saying Ray cannot and should not play the 4 if we play a smaller lineup. My issue is with making that our base lineup. Having it as an option is great, but starting from that point is counterproductive.

Why? Your post actually hits on exactly why we should play Ray at the 3 and Lauri at the 4 (in addition to both of them being naturally at that position and being really good). You're dead right that 98% of college teams don't have a front line that goes 7'1, 6'11, 6'8. Heck, most NBA teams don't. That size is a very unique advantage we have and something to embrace, not shy away from.

[ChooChooCat]

I assume my posts are a part of this, and I (and the post you were responding too) wasn't saying Ray cannot and should not play the 4 if we play a smaller lineup. My issue is with making that our base lineup. Having it as an option is great, but starting from that point is counterproductive.

Not really, if using Ray at the 4 creates our most productive lineup then it's far from counterproductive.

Why? Your post actually hits on exactly why we should play Ray at the 3 and Lauri at the 4 (in addition to both of them being naturally at that position and being really good). You're dead right that 98% of college teams don't have a front line that goes 7'1, 6'11, 6'8. Heck, most NBA teams don't. That size is a very unique advantage we have and something to embrace, not shy away from.

Size is an advantage if utilized properly sure, but you know what else is a major advantage? Athleticism. I'll sit here and debate until I turn blue in the face that Arizona's best lineups when Brandon Ashley and Zeus were on campus together consisted of Ashley at the 5 and one of our best athletes with size at the 4 i.e. RHJ/Gordon. Lauri as talented as he is will not be one of our best athletes laterally and will get drove right by a faster 4 a la Ryan Anderson more often than not, especially with his "average wingspan for his height" per Jon Givony. Ashley at the 4 was doable because the guy had a 7'2 wingspan and those extra inches sure mattered in keeping guys in front of him that his feet couldn't do by themselves. Even with that 7'2 wingspan he was average at defending college 4s at best.

Look maybe Ray Smith will not be the same laterally as he was prior to both ACL tears. That remains TBD, but if he is even close to the same athlete he was just prior to the second tear then both defensively and offensively he seems like a superior 4 than Lauri for what Arizona wants to do.

Also I hate you keep using the term natural positions. This is college basketball not the NBA. The only natural positions that exist are point guard and center in college. Every thing else in between is flexible at all times.

[threenumberones]

I expect some growth in that area by Dusan and Chase,

Pretty sure Chase has done all the growing he can.






Romar in a small ball lineup excelled at having them all crash the boards.

Oops, thx will fix.

Wichita State another excellent example, but their fundamentals in rebounding are off the charts. Not saying it can't happen, but to expect it is a bit of a reach at this point. For many years there was all this talk about how massive we will be and how no one could contend with our front line blah blah. Now we are just going to go small ball and bam, we can perform at an identical level? The jury is out on it for sure.

[ChooChooCat]

A 6'8 PF is going small ball. Now I've heard every thing.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I assume my posts are a part of this, and I (and the post you were responding too) wasn't saying Ray cannot and should not play the 4 if we play a smaller lineup. My issue is with making that our base lineup. Having it as an option is great, but starting from that point is counterproductive.

Not really, if using Ray at the 4 creates our most productive lineup then it's far from counterproductive.

Why? Your post actually hits on exactly why we should play Ray at the 3 and Lauri at the 4 (in addition to both of them being naturally at that position and being really good). You're dead right that 98% of college teams don't have a front line that goes 7'1, 6'11, 6'8. Heck, most NBA teams don't. That size is a very unique advantage we have and something to embrace, not shy away from.

Size is an advantage if utilized properly sure, but you know what else is a major advantage? Athleticism. I'll sit here and debate until I turn blue in the face that Arizona's best lineups when Brandon Ashley and Zeus were on campus together consisted of Ashley at the 5 and one of our best athletes with size at the 4 i.e. RHJ/Gordon. Lauri as talented as he is will not be one of our best athletes laterally and will get drove right by a faster 4 a la Ryan Anderson more often than not, especially with his "average wingspan for his height" per Jon Givony. Ashley at the 4 was doable because the guy had a 7'2 wingspan and those extra inches sure mattered in keeping guys in front of him that his feet couldn't do by themselves. Even with that 7'2 wingspan he was average at defending college 4s at best.

Look maybe Ray Smith will not be the same laterally as he was prior to both ACL tears. That remains TBD, but if he is even close to the same athlete he was just prior to the second tear then both defensively and offensively he seems like a superior 4 than Lauri for what Arizona wants to do.

Also I hate you keep using the term natural positions. This is college basketball not the NBA. The only natural positions that exist are point guard and center in college. Every thing else in between is flexible at all times.

On the first point, we just disagree on that. I think you are underrating Lauri and that he'll be ready to be a starter. You disagree and think Ray is better. If it's just that basic disagreement, we really can't do much except wait for the season to see.

On the second point, I disagree Ray is better for what Arizona wants to do. The pack line is not based in using smaller, quicker people to create ball pressure. It's the opposite, using off ball D to control penetration and force jumpers.

I also disagree that there are enough 4's who are penetrators enough to center our lineup to deal with them. How many teams really want their 4 breaking down the D. On our last year's schedule, Oregon and that's it.

Finally, Ray was a wing in HS and will be a wing at the next level. Yeah, people can play out of position, but Ray has been a 3 and will continue to be a 3 after Arizona. In my view, you play Hassan at the 4 when you have to, not because that's the ideal place for him. Lauri will be ready for the 4.

[Longhorned]

And Arizona won't need great individual rebounders to be a good rebounding team.

[ChooChooCat]

I assume my posts are a part of this, and I (and the post you were responding too) wasn't saying Ray cannot and should not play the 4 if we play a smaller lineup. My issue is with making that our base lineup. Having it as an option is great, but starting from that point is counterproductive.

Not really, if using Ray at the 4 creates our most productive lineup then it's far from counterproductive.

Why? Your post actually hits on exactly why we should play Ray at the 3 and Lauri at the 4 (in addition to both of them being naturally at that position and being really good). You're dead right that 98% of college teams don't have a front line that goes 7'1, 6'11, 6'8. Heck, most NBA teams don't. That size is a very unique advantage we have and something to embrace, not shy away from.

Size is an advantage if utilized properly sure, but you know what else is a major advantage? Athleticism. I'll sit here and debate until I turn blue in the face that Arizona's best lineups when Brandon Ashley and Zeus were on campus together consisted of Ashley at the 5 and one of our best athletes with size at the 4 i.e. RHJ/Gordon. Lauri as talented as he is will not be one of our best athletes laterally and will get drove right by a faster 4 a la Ryan Anderson more often than not, especially with his "average wingspan for his height" per Jon Givony. Ashley at the 4 was doable because the guy had a 7'2 wingspan and those extra inches sure mattered in keeping guys in front of him that his feet couldn't do by themselves. Even with that 7'2 wingspan he was average at defending college 4s at best.

Look maybe Ray Smith will not be the same laterally as he was prior to both ACL tears. That remains TBD, but if he is even close to the same athlete he was just prior to the second tear then both defensively and offensively he seems like a superior 4 than Lauri for what Arizona wants to do.

Also I hate you keep using the term natural positions. This is college basketball not the NBA. The only natural positions that exist are point guard and center in college. Every thing else in between is flexible at all times.

On the first point, we just disagree on that. I think you are underrating Lauri and that he'll be ready to be a starter. You disagree and think Ray is better. If it's just that basic disagreement, we really can't do much except wait for the season to see.

On the second point, I disagree Ray is better for what Arizona wants to do. The pack line is not based in using smaller, quicker people to create ball pressure. It's the opposite, using off ball D to control penetration and force jumpers.

I also disagree that there are enough 4's who are penetrators enough to center our lineup to deal with them. How many teams really want their 4 breaking down the D. On our last year's schedule, Oregon and that's it.

Finally, Ray was a wing in HS and will be a wing at the next level. Yeah, people can play out of position, but Ray has been a 3 and will continue to be a 3 after Arizona. In my view, you play Hassan at the 4 when you have to, not because that's the ideal place for him. Lauri will be ready for the 4.

I'm not underrating Lauri and think he could definitely be a starter, but I just don't think he's a college 4. I'm not opposed to him being the starting 5 one bit.

I love calling a 6'8 guy small. It seriously is just a running joke at this point. Say what you want, but Sean Miller's pack line defense has been at its best when it has superior athletes. I know it's a defense designed for non-athletes, but boy we sure saw how that looked last year didn't we?

There's more athletic 4s who can drive past a slower plodding 4 than there are true post playing 4s in college today that's for sure.

Finally it doesn't matter what position Ray played in HS or what position he plays in college in regards to what he'll play in the NBA. We both know he's a 3 in the NBA, but playing the 4 won't prevent him from being a NBA 3 and won't make him a lesser effective 4 in college than a 6'11 guy who's not a plus athlete. PLAY YOUR BEST PLAYERS. This isn't playing a 6'4 athlete at the 4 because you have no choice. This is playing your 6'8 wing at the 4, because he is your best choice.

[Main Event]

Lauri probably starts day 1 at the 4

[Spaceman Spiff]

Choo, if referring to a lineup with Ray at the 4 as small bothers you, referring to Lauri as slow and plodding bothers me equally. Everything from the DX profile on down notes him as a particularly nimble perimeter defender.

If you prefer small(er), that's really what we are talking about. I am not floating a true small lineup, where we rely on PJC for rim protection. Although that would definitely cross up the opponents.

Here's me in a nutshell (insert the Austin Powers): we have a top 20 recruit who has always played the 3 in Ray who should be ready to start. We have a top 20 recruit who has always played the 4 in Lauri who should be ready to start. Play our best lineup, which includes those guys at 3/4. Beyond that is stretching for something that isn't necessary. Having flexibility is good, and we do have that, but we should have our base lineup centered on letting guys do what they do best and then adjust when/if needed.

[gronk4heisman]

Ray has added 30+ pounds since he last played the three two years ago, and I question his ability to be ready to start day 1 at any position after two years off (though I do like his chances at the 4 more than the 3). Ray has the body of a college four at this point, additionally we have a larger need at the 4 then the 3, where he played in HS is more or less irrelevant. At the same time Lauri sounds great and everything, but when has a European ever come in and been a good defender? And we all know how Sean makes his playing time decisions mainly on defensive ability. I am not a fan of putting people in a box and saying you have to play here because X,Y and Z. Look at Villanova, they did not have a typical 1-5 lineup and now they are champions. Same with the Pac 12 champion's Oregon. Same with the NBA Champion Warriors. You play the best 5 regardless of the box that some people want to put them in.

[NYCat]

UConn, Louisville, villanova have recently proved that you don't need the big guys to win. They need to be serviceable, let the guards do the work. Even Duke had Okafor and Winslow, Tyus Jones, Quinn Cook, Matt Jones, Suliamon, Jefferson (6'9), Allen in their main rotation. That was about 2 true big guys and one limited (Jefferson). 2012 Kentucky only had three big guys, Davis, Terrance Jones (6'9), Darius Miller (6'8 - limited) and the rest wings and guard like MKG, Teague, Lamb etc.

I don't know the last team that has won with two guys above 6'11, that HUGE Kentucky team lost to UConn. If you do play twin towers you get beat because you're bigger and slower by guards who win in tournament play. Lauri would be great for the regular season, but I don't see how we make it far come tournament play. Teams who win usually tend to have Forwards who are 6'8-6'9, who are smaller and more athletic.

[ChooChooCat]

Look if Lauri's better it should be Lauri. If Ray's better it should be Ray. If Rawle or Ferguson aren't good enough then it should probably be both Lauri and Ray. We're all speaking in hypotheticals at this point, but play the best damn 5, whoever they are. Let's agree to that.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Ray has added 30+ pounds since he last played the three two years ago, and I question his ability to be ready to start day 1 at any position after two years off (though I do like his chances at the 4 more than the 3). Ray has the body of a college four at this point, additionally we have a larger need at the 4 then the 3, where he played in HS is more or less irrelevant. At the same time Lauri sounds great and everything, but when has a European ever come in and been a good defender? And we all know how Sean makes his playing time decisions mainly on defensive ability. I am not a fan of putting people in a box and saying you have to play here because X,Y and Z. Look at Villanova, they did not have a typical 1-5 lineup and now they are champions. Same with the Pac 12 champion's Oregon. Same with the NBA Champion Warriors. You play the best 5 regardless of the box that some people want to put them in.

Euros being bad at D is a stereotype that doesn't have a basis in reality. Even if you don't count Joakim Noah, within the past 5 years, just among European big guys Marc Gasol made an NBA all defensive team. Andrew Bogut isn't European, but same. Kirilenko if you stretch a little further. There are plenty of good defenders who never made all defense either. Pekovic, Pau Gasol, Rudy Gobert, Giannis (can't spell last name) are all very highly regarded defensive big guys.

[KaibabKat]

Reminds me of the old story about Portland picking Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan in the 1984 NBA draft.

Bobby Knight, who had coached Jordan at the '84 Olympic trials, urged his old friend Blazers General Manager Stu Inman to draft Jordan. Inman said, "But we need a center." Knight yelled back, "So play him at center!" Inman did not listen to him and we all know the rest.

[84Cat]

UConn, Louisville, villanova have recently proved that you don't need the big guys to win. They need to be serviceable, let the guards do the work. Even Duke had Okafor and Winslow, Tyus Jones, Quinn Cook, Matt Jones, Suliamon, Jefferson (6'9), Allen in their main rotation. That was about 2 true big guys and one limited (Jefferson). 2012 Kentucky only had three big guys, Davis, Terrance Jones (6'9), Darius Miller (6'8 - limited) and the rest wings and guard like MKG, Teague, Lamb etc.

I don't know the last team that has won with two guys above 6'11, that HUGE Kentucky team lost to UConn. If you do play twin towers you get beat because you're bigger and slower by guards who win in tournament play. Lauri would be great for the regular season, but I don't see how we make it far come tournament play. Teams who win usually tend to have Forwards who are 6'8-6'9, who are smaller and more athletic.

97 team was the same. JT, Bibby, Simon, Dickerson. The bigs were Bramlett, Davison & Harris. Same formula is needed in today's game.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Look if Lauri's better it should be Lauri. If Ray's better it should be Ray. If Rawle or Ferguson aren't good enough then it should probably be both Lauri and Ray. We're all speaking in hypotheticals at this point, but play the best damn 5, whoever they are. Let's agree to that.

My only caveat (and I swear I'm not just arguing to argue) is I don't see it as Lauri vs Ray. I think both are likely to start. I think it is probably more likely Lauri and Ray vs Ferguson and Alkins, because that's who it really boils down to being in or out of the lineup.

[ChooChooCat]

Look if Lauri's better it should be Lauri. If Ray's better it should be Ray. If Rawle or Ferguson aren't good enough then it should probably be both Lauri and Ray. We're all speaking in hypotheticals at this point, but play the best damn 5, whoever they are. Let's agree to that.

My only caveat (and I swear I'm not just arguing to argue) is I don't see it as Lauri vs Ray. I think both are likely to start. I think it is probably more likely Lauri and Ray vs Ferguson and Alkins, because that's who it really boils down to being in or out of the lineup.

Well that's like your opinion man...

One where 6'8 wings can't play the 4 position in college and only 6'11 guys can just because. I'm kidding....but still

[Spaceman Spiff]

Look if Lauri's better it should be Lauri. If Ray's better it should be Ray. If Rawle or Ferguson aren't good enough then it should probably be both Lauri and Ray. We're all speaking in hypotheticals at this point, but play the best damn 5, whoever they are. Let's agree to that.

My only caveat (and I swear I'm not just arguing to argue) is I don't see it as Lauri vs Ray. I think both are likely to start. I think it is probably more likely Lauri and Ray vs Ferguson and Alkins, because that's who it really boils down to being in or out of the lineup.

Well that's like your opinion man...

One where 6'8 wings can't play the 4 position in college and only 6'11 guys can just because. I'm kidding....but still

Dude, that's why I thought you were misunderstanding me. I've never said Ray can't play the 4. I'm advocating for him to do that for 10-12 mpg. I just don't want him as a 4, but a 3 who slides up to create an alternate lineup.

It is definitely my opinion. The opinion that really matters is Sean Miller's though. Look, maybe he'll finally run a 2-3 like Riseandfire wants and we both lose...? In the offseason, ain't much to do but argue opinions, I guess.

I'm increasingly enamored of the idea of starting PJC at center for at least one game. Preferably as a middle finger to ASU.

[catgrad97]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

If he couldn't beat out a healthy Zeus this season, where is this assumption coming from that he's going to be a better option at center than a healthy Markkanen?

You really don't even need a true center in the college game if you have an athletic 5 who can rebound and not be a foul machine. Both areas of the game in which Zeus, for all his four-star ability, was a four-year project.

Sure, maybe even Miller won't find this out until December after going with Dusan in the non-con, but unless this glorious Class of '16 proves to be the slowest-starting bunch in Arizona history, my money's on LM and Ray to be our best players in the paint next season.

[Longhorned]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

If he couldn't beat out a healthy Zeus this season, where is this assumption coming from that he's going to be a better option at center than a healthy Markkanen?

You really don't even need a true center in the college game if you have an athletic 5 who can rebound and not be a foul machine. Both areas of the game in which Zeus, for all his four-star ability, was a four-year project.

Sure, maybe even Miller won't find this out until December after going with Dusan in the non-con, but unless this glorious Class of '16 proves to be the slowest-starting bunch in Arizona history, my money's on LM and Ray to be our best players in the paint next season.

What do you think of Comanche as a sophomore? Too little evidence to project?

[catgrad97]

In all honesty, I feel better about Comanche as a sophomore than I do about Ristic as a junior.

Every time someone tries to sell me on Ristic as a starter, I just see this re-run in my head of his pick-and-roll defense. Maybe because he got totally butt-raced (the polite amalgam of boatraced + buttf*cked) on it every game this season.

Was there a game this year he was NOT benched for it? At least Comanche knows that if he can defend that, he has a real shot to start this season regardless of his offensive efficiency on the low blocks.

Speaking to that, Chance, Ray, and Lauri can all face up going to the hoop. Ristic is squarely a back-to-the-basket post who can hit a three every once in awhile. Not exactly what I'd call "stretching the defense."

He has an Ivan Radenovic senior ceiling. I think this program has the talent to aim higher.

[Merkin]

Ristic needs to get ripped like Zeus, although I don't think it's in his genetic disposition. Get down to 5% body fat.

[gumby]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

I don't. This thread doesn't support this. Some don't even see having a 5. See the posts decrying positions by numbers.

[Jefe]

We're all speaking in hypotheticals at this point

Its mid-April, what else are we supposed to do?

[Spaceman Spiff]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

If he couldn't beat out a healthy Zeus this season, where is this assumption coming from that he's going to be a better option at center than a healthy Markkanen?

You really don't even need a true center in the college game if you have an athletic 5 who can rebound and not be a foul machine. Both areas of the game in which Zeus, for all his four-star ability, was a four-year project.

Sure, maybe even Miller won't find this out until December after going with Dusan in the non-con, but unless this glorious Class of '16 proves to be the slowest-starting bunch in Arizona history, my money's on LM and Ray to be our best players in the paint next season.

I would put even odds on Chance vs Dusan, but right now, Dusan has a skill that is unique at Arizona. He is our only low post scorer. Chance is not (yet) a back to the basket scorer, and Lauri's biggest issue is his physical ability to hold position in the post. Dusan is the only guy we can reasonably expect to produce points in the post.

I don't think it guarantees him a starting role, but it matters. Having him alongside Lauri creates a high/low post dynamic, but he's really the only person we can get that with.

I agree his D is not the best. In addition to his own development, I think it benefits Dusan to be surrounded with better defenders, which he will be next year. I trust Trier and anyone in our 2/3 spot more than I would freshman Trier and Gabe. I like RA, but he was never going to cover Dusan on the back end like Lauri and Chance can.

[Main Event]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

Nope, #StartChance

[Harvey Specter]

We all assume Ristic starts at the 5 from Day One.

If he couldn't beat out a healthy Zeus this season, where is this assumption coming from that he's going to be a better option at center than a healthy Markkanen?

You really don't even need a true center in the college game if you have an athletic 5 who can rebound and not be a foul machine. Both areas of the game in which Zeus, for all his four-star ability, was a four-year project.

Sure, maybe even Miller won't find this out until December after going with Dusan in the non-con, but unless this glorious Class of '16 proves to be the slowest-starting bunch in Arizona history, my money's on LM and Ray to be our best players in the paint next season.

I don't think many assume that at all... I certainly don't.

Your comments above clearly suggest that you thing that a healthy Markaanen as a frosh >>> a healthy Zeus as a senior.

I stopped reading your post at that point,,,,,

[catgrad97]

In the NCAA champion tradition, younger athleticism often trumps the more experienced giant in the post.

Brian Williams, Sean Rooks and Ed Stokes couldn't get to a Final Four, but Ray Owes, Joseph Blair and Kevin Flanagan could the year after they left. Ben Davis couldn't get past the Sweet 16, but his successors A.J. Bramlett, Donnell Harris and Eugene Edgerson won it all.

Does that suggest to anyone I'm saying the first three were not as good big men as the second group in those comparisons?

Every single lineup projection in this thread for next year had Ristic starting at the 5 before I pointed it out.

But hey, before you draw your own conclusions, Harvey, let's ignore everything else I'm talking about, be really simple and just believe I'm making a statement when I'm asking a question.

If that were remotely true, I'd not only come right out and say it, I'd tell you to look at Markkanen's current draft projections vs. Zeus', then feel free to tell me how wrong I am.

I have spent most of this off-season in constant amazement at the number of otherwise rational posters looking at last season's players through heavily red-and-blue-tinted lenses. We have a great class coming in and all anyone seemingly wants to do when you talk about 2015-16 players is whitewash their legacies.

Ristic COULD score...until he was being gameplanned for. Zeus was a poor rebounder and shooter for his size, and Comanche, Smith and Markkanen each are stronger with the basketball.

In no universe does Kadeem Allen or Parker-Jackson Cartwright start full-time next season unless our three guard recruits all die of plague. A senior Allen might start the first game of the season for stability, but even Harvey Mason started the first two weeks of his senior season before Lute realized the obvious about Matt Muehlebach.

You know, between this and the Trier thread, everyone on this board who thinks they know what I'm saying better than I do can honestly keep it to themselves.

Clearly, though, they have nothing else better to do. Talk about cherry-picking.

Sorry if I've committed Fan Heresy here, but we need to move on from what was a highly limited roster this past season to something bigger and better with our incoming guys. They may not be polished, but they're going to give us a helluva lot more possessions--and chances to win even more games--next season than this season's did.

[Puerco]

Scratching my head at some of the posts in this thread.

I'm pretty sure I read the phrase 'I don't think Lauri would be able to guard the Derrick Williams type 4s of the world, which are rampant in college,' Is it just me, or did someone just criticize a recruit for not being able to defend a conference player of the year and eventual 2nd overall NBA pick while in the very same sentence imply that that level of player is commonplace in college basketball...? Damn, why'd we recruit Markannen then? Shoulda just grabbed another one of those Derrick Williamses. They're all over the place.

Pretty sure I also read this: 'I'll take the 6'8 210lbs (Smith will likely be heavier next year) athletic 4 man over a Ryan Anderson type in college basketball 10000000 times out of 10000000, especially defensively.' Right. So, we're going to take a highschool SF who's never played a college game over a proven all PAC-12 player who was easily our team's most effective player a year ago? Ten million times out of ten million? Christ, the all PAC-12 team last year must've been a bunch of chumps. Hell, our roster must've been garbage as well.

Scratching my head...