Agreed. Saunders can slide on D much better than I expected, but while he’s strong, I don’t think he gets as much mileage out of it as you’d expect. I think he could more effectively guard an ACC-level 2 than a 5.
2 Likes
I agree fully. Many were the examples of him getting switched onto a quick guard and defending well vs. many were the examples of him getting switched onto a Center and giving up an easy bucket or rebound or foul.
3 Likes
It’s debatable how much Tony falls in love with it vs how much Tony just dislikes his alternatives.
In 2022-23 we played BVP/Gardner/Dunn in small frontcourts because Kadin was in the doghouse in a way I’ve never seen a Bennett player before (maybe Sene in 2012? not counting Nichols, obviously) and because Papi couldn’t stay consistently healthy.
In 2023-24 we played Dunn/Groves frontcourts because Minor stumbled badly in the move to the ACC/Packline and Blake had predictable freshman inconsistencies.
The question is twofold: (1) Are Blake/ARob/Lang/Cofie (two true sophs, a RS Frosh, and a True Frosh) up to the task of 40 mpg at the 5-spot against the majority of power conference lineups? and (2) Has Tony become too comfortable defaulting to a small frontcourt, for better or worse, when his centers are struggling?
Keep in mind in 2021-22 we played a very traditional 5-man rotation with Papi and Kadin combining for effectively 40 mpg all season, and we ended up in the NIT.
6 Likes
After re-reading my post and then your post.
3 Likes
All I know is great minds think alike!
1 Like
I think it’s both. Tony picks his lineups based on disliking the alternatives, but then he hates his alternatives so much such that to the casual fan with a lower than average ability to process information (I.e., me) it appears that he’s falling in love.
Like, Tony coulda just been cool with Rohde. Go to the movies, get a malt after. He didn’t have to Y’know introduce him to his mom and go shopping at Reines and Rogers, where Charlottesville gets engaged.
6 Likes
I know this is a Saunders thread, but as this has evolved to a wider discussion of frontcourt lineups and Tony’s habits toward them, one thing I do want to point out about Blake, ARob, and Cofie (maybe not so much Lang) is that all of these guys seem to be a little more rangy and athletic than guys like Tobey/Papi/Salt, and hopefully a little more coordinated in space than Kadin. Part of the drawback about those guys was that they struggled when put in space, defending away from the basket. Obviously Mamadi and even Jay were fine there, not consistently exposed by high PnR’s. Salt as well got there eventualy in a way Kadin and Papi never did. I like our centers in that range of 6’9-6’10 235ish and mobile for their size, rather than the 7’ monsters. Getting guys who have both the massive size AND the athleticism means a 5-star like Bacot, and we’re not in that weight class. I’m hopeful that our current crop can effectively be Atkins-type bigs with a little more size than Darion brought. (This is intended as a compliment to Darion, who’s one of my all-time favorite Hoos.)
4 Likes
Does the distinction matter, though? Falls in love with it vs. disliking alternatives? If the output is the same (playing a small lineup that is a worse alternatives to options you have… by the eyeball test of us getting killed inside and by metrics re: lineup efficiency) then I’d argue “no.”
I don’t really want to re-litigate all of these different situations but I would suggest that the Kadin situation certainly started because of a CTB playing time preference and then one can place blame how one is so inclined by how it went from there. The communication around that situation was pretty terrible all around and it would be impossible, IMO, to argue that our coaching staff didn’t mismanage it.
Dunn could have played more that season than he did and you simply cannot put yourself in a situation where you’re unwilling to play your most impactful frontcourt player (and, in CTB’s mind, he wasn’t, which is part of the disconnect). That year, from an efficiency standpoint Dunn/Shedrick > BVP/Caffaro > Shedrick/Gardner > BVP/Shedrick > BVP/Dunn > Gardner/Caffaro > Gardner/Dunn >>>>>> Gardner/BVP (which was negative -1 efficiency compared to the 8.4 of the next closest Gardner/Dunn!!! So much worse.). And yet, that last grouping got the most run of any of those pairings. Sample size was lower on the first two - but then give it more run to see if it’s a fluke or would regress to the mean. Clearly, though, the pairing we used the most was by far our worst duo out of many viable options. Really, you could isolate that variable - CTB clearly thought that pairing was his best option… and it was far worse than virtually every other option - so that’s a concern and a clear disconnect re: perception vs. reality.
The Minor situation was also a CTB playing time preference which we justify by saying that he wasn’t ready yet - but game repetitions help that and the team immediately started playing better when we played him. To argue that was the earliest we could have inserted him requires some suspension of disbelief. Also, we consistently got tempted AWAY from that solution even after seeing that playing with a Center was pretty essential, Groves saw meaningful minutes at the 5 late in the year. This is also compounded by the fact that we’re going to be getting more bigs in the portal over time - so we need to be willing to let them work through the bumps in the road on the floor, especially when the alternative is something like Jake Groves defending 5s.
2021-2022 was just a worse team than the others. He actually played Gardner at 5 and Stattmann at 4 a non-insignificant amount of time that year but the real issue with that team (IMO aside from total talent) were the size issues that stemmed from playing so small 1-4. Consistently you’d see that playing Franklin at the 2 with Stattmann at the 3 was better than what we were doing the rare number of times we’d do it, but we’d just play Stattmann at the 4 or instead of Armaan. Also - the lack of Igor when we only had two players over 6’7" we were playing… but anyway, that season was still an issue with not playing enough length but with a slightly different lens.
The main point being that whether it’s “falling in love” or simple “player preference” the outcome has been undesirable vs. available alternatives. Our teams are consistently better when we’re not playing undersized, especially in the frontcourt but also across the board. So, it would be good if we’d update our equation with regard to how we compose a lineup and what gets certain guys on the floor to account for that.
5 Likes
One quick follow up thought as it relates to the “equation” discussed above.
I’d bet virtually anything that the weight CTB places on “mental errors” vs. “physical errors” is not proportional to how often mental errors actually hurt our output on the floor vs. physical errors/limitations. And that’s probably the crux of the disconnect right now/a mental shift that would likely greatly help us (and, as an aside, probably also help with tightness).
7 Likes
Also, Blake’s best stretches last year were when Minor was the starter and Blake was playing against backups (even upperclassmen who are solid like Ben Middlebrooks)
1 Like
Still have it planned to break down the frontcourts of all the ACC opponents to get a feel for whether or not there’s actually any step back this season in quality of opponent big men around the ACC. Waiting to see where Hawkins lands (UNC or UL seemingly the finalists).
3 Likes
Yeah, if you’re skeptical that it’ll actually be much worse, I’m with you.
I just watched a ton of Jaedon LeDee who went from an 18mpg, 8ppg player to a 33mpg, 21ppg player in one offseason. Often thoughts about drop off in quality are just sleeping on player improvement/opportunity/role/confidence.
2 Likes
Maybe not the best example because LeDee was a former 4-star recruit (247 composite) who’d played in the B1G and Big XII before finally finding a competent coaching staff and getting a 6th year to finally blow up.
But also still relevant because this is the final year of the COVID classes and we’ve seen guys like Quentin Post and Blake Hinson go from “who?” to “whoa!” seemingly overnight, always going to be someone surprising every year.
1 Like
I mean… it’s still a BIG jump, even with that pedigree… and most players on ACC rosters are pretty high-quality recruits just looking for an opportunity. Certainly not to say that everyone’s going to do that but, to your point, there are going to be surprises every year.
1 Like
Is the overall takeaway from your Saunders analysis positive or do I need to wait to find out? Haha
2 Likes
Yeah, very positive as long as Saunders/Power 4/5 is minimized.
Think he could be a good answer at SF if we’re willing to chill on the ball handling need just a little. A fine PF. Still lots of room to improve and very good athleticism and upside.
4 Likes
Warley
iMac
Saunders
Power
Buchanan
Back-ups:
1: Bliss; Ames (each guy with some time at the 2 spot)
2/3: Taine; Rohde (fighting for one spot)
4/5: Robinson; Cofie (fighting for one spot, so probably Robinson)
Sharma redshirt
4 Likes
Excellent analysis. Agree the point isn’t falling in love v no alternatives- there is a fundamental preference towards certain players/ combinations that are proven to be less effective. I think its good old fashioned stubbornness. CTB sets on a preferred combo and prefers to see the preferred combo “play through” mistakes, v. his refusal to let alternative player combos “play through” their mistakes.
2 Likes
Honestly, I think/hope this is our best lineup, with Saunders playing the 3 on Defense and the 4 on Offense. Driving (Warley, Bliss, Ames), Shooting (iMac, Power, Saunders, Bliss, Taine), Size (Everyone but Ames) and defensive versatility (Warley 1-3, Saunders 3-4, Robinson 4-5).
Also shows why taking Ames wasn’t as much of a necessity as some thought, assuming Bliss is ready.
2 Likes
That roster usage would please me.