The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I don't think his defense is the issue. I could see him guarding the 3 position easily. I think in Hawks system, he won't play tava at the 3 unless he's a true threat at hitting 15+ foot jumpers. Without looking, I bet he's taken less than 10 three pointers in his 3 years at wmu. He's reluctant to even shoot 15 footers.

(04-23-2015 12:18 PM)EA3 Wrote:  I don't think his defense is the issue. I could see him guarding the 3 position easily. I think in Hawks system, he won't play tava at the 3 unless he's a true threat at hitting 15+ foot jumpers. Without looking, I bet he's taken less than 10 three pointers in his 3 years at wmu. He's reluctant to even shoot 15 footers.

... and that reluctancy and lack of outside threat weakens the Broncos offense. Hopefully he and Lamont will work on their outside games to open up the middle.

There aren't many MAC players at the 4 that are shooting 15+ foot jumpers or threes.

CMU and Akron are the only teams that come to mind. In that regards 10 or so teams in the MAC have the same issue.

But yes, I agree with you

(04-23-2015 12:18 PM)EA3 Wrote:  I don't think his defense is the issue. I could see him guarding the 3 position easily. I think in Hawks system, he won't play tava at the 3 unless he's a true threat at hitting 15+ foot jumpers. Without looking, I bet he's taken less than 10 three pointers in his 3 years at wmu. He's reluctant to even shoot 15 footers.

I agree with your premise if the definition of a 3 is someone who is a consistent long range threat.

I would argue you re-define the 3. Or have CT play the O role of the 4 while Kellen hangs at the arc (your definition of the 3) and AJ, LaMont, Dugan can kick out to the short corner or wing if not posting up. Why does the "3" have to be defined as a reduced role such as a long range shooter?

(04-23-2015 01:58 PM)EA3 Wrote:  There aren't many MAC players at the 4 that are shooting 15+ foot jumpers or threes.

CMU and Akron are the only teams that come to mind. In that regards 10 or so teams in the MAC have the same issue.

So do you accept the "Me too MAC" mentality and fit others paradigm and battle it out for the title of the Worlds tallest midget or do you use your assets to set the rules of the game and force others to adjust.

This isn't really complicated.

(04-23-2015 02:08 PM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 01:58 PM)EA3 Wrote:  There aren't many MAC players at the 4 that are shooting 15+ foot jumpers or threes.

CMU and Akron are the only teams that come to mind. In that regards 10 or so teams in the MAC have the same issue.

So do you accept the "Me too MAC" mentality and fit others paradigm and battle it out for the title of the Worlds tallest midget or do you use your assets to set the rules of the game and force others to adjust.

This isn't really complicated.

No it's not complicated. But if you think trying to fit a round peg into a square hole is the way to go...then I don't know what to tell you.

Absolutely nothing, besides being 2 inches too short, about Tava's game in the last 3 years has given anyone any reason to believe he would be effective at playing the 3 position in Hawk's offense.

No I don't accept the "me too MAC" mentality. I accept the fact that Tava, while an all MAC performer, has limitations in his game. If you think he's gonna all of a sudden start shooting the ball like Tucker from deep, or pulling up for 15 foot jumpers like AJ...I think it's a pipe dream. He knows his game and plays to his strengths.

talking about accepting the MAC mentality is a completely different discussion that should be focused on our recruits and where WMU is headed as a program.

gbl, if you put Tava at the 3, it likely negates his ability to drive from 15 feet. He's being guarded by slower players at the 4. This gives him a distinct advantage in getting position and using his body. Again, I would argue that advantage gets negated when he's being guarded by a quicker SF type player. Yeah, he could post up easier at the three. But then you still have to deal with him not being a threat from long range. Pick your drink of choice.

I'm sorry but I would support the notion that you cannot have someone play the 3 in Hawk's offense who is a complete non threat from 15 feet and out. Maybe playing against a zone if paired with a SW and DP type players that complement his passing. Other than that...I just don't ever see him being a 3.

(04-23-2015 03:52 PM)EA3 Wrote:  gbl, if you put Tava at the 3, it likely negates his ability to drive from 15 feet. He's being guarded by slower players at the 4. This gives him a distinct advantage in getting position and using his body. Again, I would argue that advantage gets negated when he's being guarded by a quicker SF type player. Yeah, he could post up easier at the three. But then you still have to deal with him not being a threat from long range. Pick your drink of choice.

I'm sorry but I would support the notion that you cannot have someone play the 3 in Hawk's offense who is a complete non threat from 15 feet and out. Maybe playing against a zone if paired with a SW and DP type players that complement his passing. Other than that...I just don't ever see him being a 3.

A lot of assumptions here.

I don't expect Derek Drews to emerge. But then I wouldn't want that.

I don't believe for an iota that if Connar doesn't work hard this summer he cant develop an effective range on his jumper. It takes work but that is all. No surgery. No brain transplant. Simple hard work that he can accomplish. For those who wouldn't agree I would argue that you want a soft schedule because competition doesn't challenge and force a team to get better.

Connar's limitations are limited if you have him stand in one spot.

With motion or by cutting you place people in various positions that force the D to adjust. Connar's strength is indeed 15 and in. But that is a wide arc and his impact isn't limited to him having the ball and scoring. He can and does screen effectively for others who can shoot with range. He can screen for others "diving down the lane", "flashing across the lane" or "back cutting of a screen on the wing or baseline". He can deliver the ball to others effectively. He has also displayed being effective with either hand around the basket. The only "hole" in his game is confidence in making a 17' jumper with consistency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTWn-60nnvQ

IMO the biggest improvement CT needs is to reduce his turn overs. Seems like 90% of his are from trying to pass the ball thru a needle that is already closed off by defenders.

As a three CT could score a bunch of points in the 12-15 ft range. He would also be a nightmare matchup for opponents defense.