Prescriptive, not predictive:
Really great stuff!
2 Likes
A lot of minutes preferences and ideal roster usage may of course come down to what kind(s) of offense the staff ends up trying to run. Some of this is chicken-and-egg… picking a lineup based upon offense selection vs picking an offense based upon best available players.
You’re higher on Power than I am, and I know I’ve been an outlier this summer insisting Power is best served in a 6th man role, in a Jacob Groves ideal usage situation, after seeing so little meaningful action as a freshman.
In his place, I’m higher on Murray and have him as my final starter right now (I think everyone else agrees McKneely, Saunders, and Blake are locks and Warley is close to being a lock as well). I get that the goal is to have one non-shooting PG, shooters at the 2, 3, and 4 spots, and then an enforcer at the 5. And I’m on board with that. I just like Murray’s experience more than Power’s upside right now. Totally understand your rationale though that you think by January Power’s upside will be more tapped and he’ll have earned the bigger role. We shall see.
Of course this just means that both of them will lose out on that starting spot to Rhode.
8 Likes
My main concern about Murray/iMac together is the defense.
It’s not that Murray is a big liability, and I’d say the same for iMac. But neither are plus defenders and as a pair struggle with stronger, longer, more athletic wings or lightning quick small guards. Another reason why Eli’s injury sucks.
3 Likes
Yeah - this is a lot of speculation but that’s also part of the fun because I like thinking about what might be ideal and then revisiting after the fact to compare to what actually happened and also whether or not what I wanted to see preseason is what I still wanted to see postseason.
Mostly a fun thought exercise to view the team through and also a moment in time so, for example, I can see that I didn’t want Taine to play at all last offseason and now want him in almost half the game!
But yeah, I’m incredibly high on Saunders playing SF in basically any situation except for a Sides-heavy offensive approach… which probably speaks to my Power minutes. I just think that if you do that, you get Cofie minutes and if you do that and you’re playing Warley at PG, we’re going to be such a physically imposing team which is where CTB teams shine.
Saunders is a good shooter and a good defender on and off the ball across multiple positions - but I don’t think I’ve emphasized enough how good of a rebounder he is when crashing down from the perimeter offensively and defensively. He reads the ball very well and puts in the effort/has the athleticism to go and get it. He’s a much better asset on the glass doing that with movement than when he has to box out a big that out lengths and weighs him, which is often what he’s doing when he’s playing the deeper forward positions.
3 Likes
Yeah but you pair them with Warley or Dai Dai at the point, Saunders at the 4, and Blake at the 5, and there’s enough defense to work with. Keep in mind iMac is approaching 2,000 minutes played in the Pack Line which means he’s peaking in his system mastery, and Taine’s emergence last year corresponded with him crossing the 500 minutes played threshold (my rule of thumb for baseline Pack Line competence) and with 20 mpg will hit the 1,000 minute mark (my threshold for confident dependability) come January. Blake played 511 minutes last year, so this year should be the year he too transitions from baseline competence to fully dependable; point being I’m happy to have him anchoring the 5 on defense, think he could surprise defensively the way redshirt sophomore Salt did in 2016-17.
So I think you can get away with iMac/Murray capping out as merely average defenders at the 2/3 when starting because they’re playing with guys with more defensive potential/readiness at the 1, 4, and 5.
A lot of the defensive concerns for me come when Saunders and/or Blake sit. The backup bigs (Cofie/Power/A-Rob) just aren’t going to look great on defense for a while, even if they’ve got upside that they’ll hopefully start to tap into by league play. So that’s when I think you have to pull one of the offense-first wings in favor of probably going Dai Dai / Warley together unless/until one of the other backups (Rhode? Sharma? Bliss?) start to emerge as a sparkplug defender as well. Sharma surprising as a 3-and-D bench option at the 3-spot would be a massive lift in this regard.
Add: This dovetails into a big worry I’ve got in Tony’s recent historical precedent with Cofie and A-Rob, and that’s that both have tons of upside but may initially be liabilities on both ends of the floor until lightbulbs come on and the staff figures out how best to use them. At least with Power you know how you can use him as a plus offensive player (same playbook you used for Groves), but how fast can Cofie and Robinson figure out how to contribute positively on at least one end of the floor? Then when Tony inevitably gets into a “win now” mindset, we start to see Power-Saunders together at the 4-5 when Blake sits because at least then there’s some bump to the offensive spacing, even if we get killed by oversized centers and on the defensive glass as a result.
1 Like
I’m just not sure what Murray really gives you over Power - which is basically where we disagree in lineup usage.
A little more ball handling and familiarity with the defense… is that worth way more size and potential? Don’t get me wrong, I imagine playing both and that’s sort of my fist-off-the bench shift - but I’d rather have the towers and keep the shooting.
I’m also a little more optimistic about what Robinson and Cofie can provide. Generally speaking, we’re so much better when we have positional size and athleticism and I’d really like to get back to that/think we have the ability to this season without playing all of the clunky non-shooting lineups.
1 Like
Of course if each plays 17-22 mpg, doesn’t matter as much which starts, maybe just comes down to who’s having the better fall camp. One thing I’d love to see at least one of them take a big jump forward with is rebounding, neither has really impressed on the glass yet and that’s something you want out of a forward spot.
By all means my point was to agree with you here, I think we’re better with them taking the lumps to the point that at least one can be a baseline-competent backup to Blake by ACC play. We’re much better platooning true bigs at the 5 than we are tying to play small. It’s just my worry that the same Tony Bennett who played BVP and Jacob Groves the last two years at the 5-spot is going to go for a “3rd time’s the charm” approach when both Cofie and A-Rob inevitably struggle in their respective freshman seasons.
6 Likes
Agreed on the first point although I think Power just innately offers you more on the glass than Murray and more good things happen for him in that regard even when he’s made a mistake or not boxed out because of his length. I’m thinking specifically of a couple of clips of him at Duke where he turns and watches a rebound and completely loses track of his man (who gets by him) but he’s long enough he just kind of tips the ball to himself (or a teammate) and keeps it alive.
Second point - roger - what I was trying to differentiate is that I’m not sure the lumps will be as big early as we’re thinking if the accounts of the athleticism and strength of both are real.
And here’s my hope re: Power and Saunders not playing 4/5 as often as we think. HGN’s mention of Power being soft or needing to add toughness (I forget how he said it exactly, I don’t want to misquote). I hadn’t heard that - but if that’s out there, that’s not a sign he’s viewed as a viable Center option. It’s similar to how we used to hear Kadin described. Also, when talking about BVP, he’d regularly mention his toughness.
All conjecture, but those are the reasons (along with Cofie’s presence) my running hypothesis is that we won’t actually go Saunders/Power as much as I previously feared.
Good banter, Cuts. Of course the last two years, there were extenuating circumstances at the center position, Papi being hurt and Kadin in the doghouse in 2022-23 and Minor struggling and Blake just having freshman hurdles last season. Here’s hoping that this year Blake can give us 25 mpg as a competent incumbent in the staff’s good graces, something we’ve effectively lacked the last few seasons.
3 Likes
Great stuff cuts. I hope CTB assigns minutes in a similar manner, but as you acknowledge, he probably won’t. Based on nothing more than firmly believing Tony is a creature of habit, my guesstimate starting lineup is:
Warley
Ames
Imac
Saunders
Blake
with Taine and Power rounding out the 7-man rotation, and Rohde being a less used 8th man. I would love to see Cofie, Sharma, and Robinson get minutes, but that seems unlikely in my view.
3 Likes
And you all will know me well if we start the season and Warley and Ames are both on the floor for the tip… please check in on me as my heart will be breaking.
9 Likes
I could see it changing throughout the season, but I would be shocked if Dai Dai and Warley both start game 1. I will be very surprised if its not Warley-iMac-Taine-Saunders-Blake. My big concern is that Rohde stays in there.
3 Likes
Just going on Tony’s habits there will be two facilitators on the floor.
Warley + 1 of DaiDai Rohde or Bliss + McKneely. I do agree having Taine, Sharma, or even Saunders as the 3 and Power at the 4 is better floor spacing wise with Warley getting downhill (we can give Warley what we never gave Reece; 3 competent shooters AND a playable big all at once).
9 Likes
Great stuff. I remain very bullish on this team, deep, versatile, athletic, big
2 Likes
That’d be great, but I bet we see less than 100 possessions all season of Warley-iMac-Saunders-Power-Blake.
3 Likes
Reading this has convinced me that one of the biggest swing factors for the rotation will be whether Power-Saunders can be a credible pairing at the 3 and 4. It would unlock more Cofie minutes, it’s one of our routes to a max-shooting lineup, and it takes a little pressure off of Murray-Sharma-Rohde in terms of needing a lot of quality minutes at the 3, or maybe it keeps Warley at the 1 more.
3 Likes
I tend to disagree with this notion. I think you can have 2 “drivers”, 2 “shooters”, and a “picker/rebounder” on the court at the same time. Many good teams use this combo successfully.
What would Ames have to shoot from 3 to make he and Warley a playable duo together? Just be a threat (call it 33-37% ish)? I’m assuming iMac plays most of the game and those three will share the floor a decent amount. On D I don’t think we’d be in trouble w Ames on their PG, iMac SG, Warley on SF.
As long as Warley is the initiator and not in the Dunn “stand in corner and play 4 on 5 O” role, I think they could work, although yeah I’d rather roll out a bigger lineup if possible.
Asking this because I think we see a good bit of Warley and Ames together and I want to talk myself into not freaking out over it
7 Likes
Generally agree with this, but it really helps if the drivers can make an open 3 here and there. Otherwise the one driver clogs the lane for the other driver.
Edit: @JoeBoxley I think that’s a good way to think about Ames and Warley. I think that range is right, but it might be volume that establishes some gravity. If he can shoot 33% on more threes than what Reece shot last year (6.2 per 100 possessions), I’d be satisfied.
3 Likes