(01-07-2016 12:18 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:07 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  A caller to a radio show the other day was railing about how great Josh would be if we had Skal, Nichols, Lawson and Shaq all on the same team. I almost wrecked my car laughing.

Not a shot at Pastner, just an observation.

One day, we will look back in time and realize that the City of Memphis, never known really for producing that many DI big men, produced Tarik, Stokes, Nichols and Skal all in a 7 year period. Crazy.

Would've loved to have seen a Tarik/Stokes frontline and a Nichols/Skal frontline and the funny thing is I think I would've rather seen the Tarik/Stokes frontline.

True NBA big men are at least 6'10" for power forwards or taller for NBA centers. The tallest one in that group isn't playing every well right now in college. Out of the other, two are marginal NBA talent and the other is D-league talent. To win the way people here think the Tigers should win its going to take better talent than what you have mentioned. Those guys would get the coach fired.

Size is much less important in college...It is the skillset that would cause issues

Neither Skal nor Austin were great rebounders so we would get killed on the glass...

Neither Stokes or Black could score outside the paint so the lane would be clogged.

If I were going to pair any bigs listed it would be Austin + Stokes because of their differing play styles.

(01-08-2016 10:41 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:18 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:07 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  A caller to a radio show the other day was railing about how great Josh would be if we had Skal, Nichols, Lawson and Shaq all on the same team. I almost wrecked my car laughing.

Not a shot at Pastner, just an observation.

One day, we will look back in time and realize that the City of Memphis, never known really for producing that many DI big men, produced Tarik, Stokes, Nichols and Skal all in a 7 year period. Crazy.

Would've loved to have seen a Tarik/Stokes frontline and a Nichols/Skal frontline and the funny thing is I think I would've rather seen the Tarik/Stokes frontline.

True NBA big men are at least 6'10" for power forwards or taller for NBA centers. The tallest one in that group isn't playing every well right now in college. Out of the other, two are marginal NBA talent and the other is D-league talent. To win the way people here think the Tigers should win its going to take better talent than what you have mentioned. Those guys would get the coach fired.

Size is much less important in college...It is the skillset that would cause issues

Neither Skal nor Austin were great rebounders so we would get killed on the glass...

Neither Stokes or Black could score outside the paint so the lane would be clogged.

If I were going to pair any bigs listed it would be Austin + Stokes because of their differing play styles.

I'll disagree to a point - Gray and Alexander were a good tandem and neither could do anything outside of a few feet of the basket...occasionally they could hit a FT jumpshot.

At the worst, it would've been nice that when Tarik picked up his second foul to turn to the bench and have Stokes or vice versa.

I do agree that differing styles of play make for better fits, but I'm not ready to say that Tarik and Jarnell couldn't co-exist or that having both wouldn't have meant a better team.

(01-08-2016 11:12 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-08-2016 10:41 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:18 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:07 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  A caller to a radio show the other day was railing about how great Josh would be if we had Skal, Nichols, Lawson and Shaq all on the same team. I almost wrecked my car laughing.

Not a shot at Pastner, just an observation.

One day, we will look back in time and realize that the City of Memphis, never known really for producing that many DI big men, produced Tarik, Stokes, Nichols and Skal all in a 7 year period. Crazy.

Would've loved to have seen a Tarik/Stokes frontline and a Nichols/Skal frontline and the funny thing is I think I would've rather seen the Tarik/Stokes frontline.

True NBA big men are at least 6'10" for power forwards or taller for NBA centers. The tallest one in that group isn't playing every well right now in college. Out of the other, two are marginal NBA talent and the other is D-league talent. To win the way people here think the Tigers should win its going to take better talent than what you have mentioned. Those guys would get the coach fired.

Size is much less important in college...It is the skillset that would cause issues

Neither Skal nor Austin were great rebounders so we would get killed on the glass...

Neither Stokes or Black could score outside the paint so the lane would be clogged.

If I were going to pair any bigs listed it would be Austin + Stokes because of their differing play styles.

I'll disagree to a point - Gray and Alexander were a good tandem and neither could do anything outside of a few feet of the basket...occasionally they could hit a FT jumpshot.

At the worst, it would've been nice that when Tarik picked up his second foul to turn to the bench and have Stokes or vice versa.

I do agree that differing styles of play make for better fits, but I'm not ready to say that Tarik and Jarnell couldn't co-exist or that having both wouldn't have meant a better team.

Oh it definitely would have been better to have him, adding Stokes to any team would make for a better team. But Stokes wouldn't have been a huge improvement over Goodwin.

(01-08-2016 11:17 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  Oh it definitely would have been better to have him, adding Stokes to any team would make for a better team. But Stokes wouldn't have been a huge improvement over Goodwin.

Stoke and Tarik could've been great together.

Stokes' frontcourt partner at UTK was 6'8" 260 Jeronne Maymon, who's game really didn't differ very much from Stokes'. He could step out a bit more, but he made his living around the basket.

They got to a sweet 16 together. They co-existed just fine.

Stokes and Shaq together would be equally as great.

I don't know why people get surprised at all.. Iverson was gonna be a great contributor in another team... He sure had talent while at Memphis... Pastner can't even win with the Lawson twins... I don't know how long more we have to endure this guy.

Sh*t, if this wouldn't be for Ricky Tarrant... This team would be AWFUL this year.

I've always been a small ball guy myself. Skill + speed > Braun and Size in my book if I'm the one setting schemes. But you gotta shoot and you gotta rebound with muscle guards (AAnderson types).

Having said that, I'd still find a way to make some of the size Memphis has produced useful and good if I were Pastner. There has been some great size recently and good talent (Shaq, Nichols, King, Stokes, etc, as previously noted). Even a small ball team still needs a solid 3 man big rotation and you still gotta have some beef and braun to anchor the bees buzzing around.

I like the 4 kings team, but they should have played 3 kings at a time.

I don't mind small ball coaching (I prefer it), but you have to make up the difference on the glass and hit shots. Those aren't optional tasks for the smaller and quicker.

(01-05-2016 02:56 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(01-05-2016 02:53 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-05-2016 02:27 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-05-2016 12:38 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  Averaging nearly 12 and 7 for 9-5 Rhode Island.

Averaging 12 ppg against P5/BE teams.

High game in points was 19 twice and high game in boards was 13.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...an-iverson

You might want to look at the schedule again

Staggering...

RPI - Memphis 103
RPI - Rhode Island 105

SOS - Memphis 85
SOS - Rhode Island 103

Down goes Sta... Errrr Smith

Sounds like a good place to post this. The mod team discusses alias stuff occasionally and Smith is still here and Stammers isn't.

It's possible that Smith is Stammers, but I don't see it.

(01-08-2016 10:21 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:18 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:07 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  A caller to a radio show the other day was railing about how great Josh would be if we had Skal, Nichols, Lawson and Shaq all on the same team. I almost wrecked my car laughing.

Not a shot at Pastner, just an observation.

One day, we will look back in time and realize that the City of Memphis, never known really for producing that many DI big men, produced Tarik, Stokes, Nichols and Skal all in a 7 year period. Crazy.

Would've loved to have seen a Tarik/Stokes frontline and a Nichols/Skal frontline and the funny thing is I think I would've rather seen the Tarik/Stokes frontline.

True NBA big men are at least 6'10" for power forwards or taller for NBA centers. The tallest one in that group isn't playing every well right now in college. Out of the other, two are marginal NBA talent and the other is D-league talent. To win the way people here think the Tigers should win its going to take better talent than what you have mentioned. Those guys would get the coach fired.

We were 6 seconds from a title with 6-7 Joey Dorsey and rail thin Robert Dozier as our starting bigs. College and the NBA are different especially now. Keith Lee was a dominant college player who wasn't dominant in the NBA. Ronnie Robinson wasn't an NBA player. Neither were Vaughn, Massie and Omar Snead. Ren was a role player. All those guys except Snead and Massie went to at least a sweet 16.

I hear you.
Hustle / Muscle > 6'10".

We need a few bangers and if they are not 6'-10", but rather Joey esque, that is fine with me.

I like a skilled 1-4 small ball squad, but you still need a guy that eats glass because he likes the taste.

(01-08-2016 02:25 PM)Sundanceuiuc Wrote:  

(01-08-2016 10:21 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:18 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 12:07 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-07-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  A caller to a radio show the other day was railing about how great Josh would be if we had Skal, Nichols, Lawson and Shaq all on the same team. I almost wrecked my car laughing.

Not a shot at Pastner, just an observation.

One day, we will look back in time and realize that the City of Memphis, never known really for producing that many DI big men, produced Tarik, Stokes, Nichols and Skal all in a 7 year period. Crazy.

Would've loved to have seen a Tarik/Stokes frontline and a Nichols/Skal frontline and the funny thing is I think I would've rather seen the Tarik/Stokes frontline.

True NBA big men are at least 6'10" for power forwards or taller for NBA centers. The tallest one in that group isn't playing every well right now in college. Out of the other, two are marginal NBA talent and the other is D-league talent. To win the way people here think the Tigers should win its going to take better talent than what you have mentioned. Those guys would get the coach fired.

We were 6 seconds from a title with 6-7 Joey Dorsey and rail thin Robert Dozier as our starting bigs. College and the NBA are different especially now. Keith Lee was a dominant college player who wasn't dominant in the NBA. Ronnie Robinson wasn't an NBA player. Neither were Vaughn, Massie and Omar Snead. Ren was a role player. All those guys except Snead and Massie went to at least a sweet 16.

I hear you.
Hustle / Muscle > 6'10".

We need a few bangers and if they are not 6'-10", but rather Joey esque, that is fine with me.

I like a skilled 1-4 small ball squad, but you still need a guy that eats glass because he likes the taste.

Rebounding and defense is more about attitude than anything. Will Barton was a fantastic rebounder and was about 150 pounds it looked like.

(01-08-2016 01:43 PM)Sundanceuiuc Wrote:  I've always been a small ball guy myself. Skill + speed > Braun and Size in my book if I'm the one setting schemes. But you gotta shoot and you gotta rebound with muscle guards (AAnderson types).

Having said that, I'd still find a way to make some of the size Memphis has produced useful and good if I were Pastner. There has been some great size recently and good talent (Shaq, Nichols, King, Stokes, etc, as previously noted). Even a small ball team still needs a solid 3 man big rotation and you still gotta have some beef and braun to anchor the bees buzzing around.

I like the 4 kings team, but they should have played 3 kings at a time.

I don't mind small ball coaching (I prefer it), but you have to make up the difference on the glass and hit shots. Those aren't optional tasks for the smaller and quicker.

The only reason I would run the 1-4 set is if I had big physical athletic guards. The reason we lose against good/ranked teams with this set is because we can’t defend them. Most good/ranked teams have good small forwards who can dominate the wing.

Teams with 2 true bigs + a good SF can sag against the 1-4 and make you beat them from the outside. The dribble-drive-motion offense we are using with the players we have would have a difficult time scoring. It made a difference to have AA & CDR on the wings because they were super tough college players and could play D too.

If you won’t matchup against good or ranked teams then don’t expect a decent winning % against them. We haven’t matched up and our winning % against them is terrible at best.

Give me Michael Cage and Keith Lee.