Our biggest recruit in basketball for the new coach...
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
a frontline of Moultrie, Pollard and Hood with backups as the foriegn player and Lewis would be a big upgrade from last year. However, I am still very concerned about stabilizing the point guard slot. Unless something changes our best case scenerio is a sophmore that was erractic at best last year and unproven freshmen. If neither are here next season, we would have to work some serious magic.
and we get Pollard, the only question mark we'd have on the team would be point guard. Be a huge different from virtually guaranteed rebuilding year to potential tournament team, a good tournament team if Deville gets his head on straight and makes normal freshman to sophomore improvement.<div>
</div><div>Is his draft stock plummeting? Or does he just want to stay in college?</div>
</div><div>Is his draft stock plummeting? Or does he just want to stay in college?</div>
Here are two potential starting lineups next year.
Choice 1 (No postseason)
PG D. Smith (if he comes back)
SGSteele
SF Hood
PF Foreign Guy/R. Johnson
C Wendell Lewis
Choice 2 (possible NCAA bid)
PG Gray
SG Steele
SF Hood
PF Foreign Guy/Pollard
C Moultrie
Choice 1 (No postseason)
PG D. Smith (if he comes back)
SGSteele
SF Hood
PF Foreign Guy/R. Johnson
C Wendell Lewis
Choice 2 (possible NCAA bid)
PG Gray
SG Steele
SF Hood
PF Foreign Guy/Pollard
C Moultrie
he is literally the spitting image of Hood, they remind me a lot of each other - same body type. Hood will play SF and Pollard will play PF @ 6'7 and lanky?<div>
</div><div>I want Pollard just as bad as the next guy, but we need a 6'9 - 6'10, 220-240 guy at the 4 position.</div>
</div><div>I want Pollard just as bad as the next guy, but we need a 6'9 - 6'10, 220-240 guy at the 4 position.</div>
inside and out. He plays more inside than Hood did in high school and would be fine at the four for us.
when we play a team that has both an ideal 4 and 5. Pollard won't be able to defend a 6'9", 230 lb. 4 with average offensive ability. Then again, we managed somehow in 2008-2009 with Phil Turner playing most of the season at the 4. I'd just be more comfortable with a 4 who wouldn't ever have to to worry about being out-sized, even if that meant starting Lewis across from Zeidaks in some situations.
I'm also worried about us talking about Pollard like he's a sure thing. Feels like bad karma.
I'm also worried about us talking about Pollard like he's a sure thing. Feels like bad karma.
Obviously if he is a projected lottery pick, it doesn't matter who our coach is, he will be gone. <div>
</div><div>I am well aware of Moultrie's flaws, i.e. putting the ball on the floor when he shouldn't, but I would love to see him in an offense that was actually designed to utilize him (and other big men on the inside). You could see the frustration on his face this season as he would fight for position and no would give him the ball, except on oops. </div><div>
</div><div>As stated above, if his stock has fallen a bit, and we get a real x's and o's coach, there would be a big upside for him to come back. Aside from being in a better offense, he might actually get some better coaching on how to move on the inside with the ball without putting it on the floor, etc. As good as he is, imagine how good he would be with some good coaching. </div>
</div><div>I am well aware of Moultrie's flaws, i.e. putting the ball on the floor when he shouldn't, but I would love to see him in an offense that was actually designed to utilize him (and other big men on the inside). You could see the frustration on his face this season as he would fight for position and no would give him the ball, except on oops. </div><div>
</div><div>As stated above, if his stock has fallen a bit, and we get a real x's and o's coach, there would be a big upside for him to come back. Aside from being in a better offense, he might actually get some better coaching on how to move on the inside with the ball without putting it on the floor, etc. As good as he is, imagine how good he would be with some good coaching. </div>
moultrie 24th to the celtics. i know that's a guaranteed contract but i'm not sure how much that usually is $ wise
I'd like to see Rodney play some point next year. His ball handling skills are good enough, and he's got size that would cause a mismatch for anyone trying to guard him on penetration. If he bulks up a bit in the off season, he could be a "Lebron-esque" type of player for us. You see point-forwards in the NBA, but never in the college game; that could really set us apart. And if we lose Deville, and Gray decommits, he may be our only option. However, if we get a great hire that can hold on to Moultrie and get Pollard, we could cause all kinds of match up problems for teams, at almost every position. Kristers is a good stretch 4, and will provide some good size and skill next year; once he's eligible, obviously.
My ideal starting line-up, with reserves:
PG-Hood (Smith/Gray)
SG-Steele (Thomas/Sword)
SF-Pollard (Hood/S.Smith)
PF-Kristers (Pollard/Lewis/Johnson)
C-Moultrie (Lewis/Ware)
This lineup would make Steele our shortest starter, everyone else would be atleast 6'6"; that's pretty sick.
My ideal starting line-up, with reserves:
PG-Hood (Smith/Gray)
SG-Steele (Thomas/Sword)
SF-Pollard (Hood/S.Smith)
PF-Kristers (Pollard/Lewis/Johnson)
C-Moultrie (Lewis/Ware)
This lineup would make Steele our shortest starter, everyone else would be atleast 6'6"; that's pretty sick.
Granted he <span style="font-style: italic;">looks</span> a little awkward and even out of control sometimes, but I think that's just because of his height. He's rarely turned it over off the dribble. Granted he wouldn't be an ideal point guard, but I think he could get the job done, and putting him there would be an interesting solution to the problem of getting our best five on the court(assuming we get Pollard) without having any huge mismatches.