I am baffled that we play an entire season with 2 freshman point guards, 3 counting Osse, get them lots of minutes and experience..... then go out and sign a juco point guard. Obviously two players are not coming back. Not sure status of our walk ons. They spent a year practicing and were not awarded a scholarship so not sure what that says. I would expect Washington was told he would have a chance to earn one. I have been baffled by Steve's recruiting more often than not. Had a great class last year, not sure what to make of this years.
We only had one true point, though, and it bit us a couple of times.
How are you on two guards? Sometimes they slide over. Playing two point guards at the same time can improve effenciency.
Hagins is a true point. Gillon is an undersized combo guard, but a good one - not at all a true point. Osse can play point OK in a pinch. One of the redshirt walk-ons committed to a D1 school, but for some reason did not sign with them, and he should be available this year.
When Hagins and Gillon play at the same time we effectively have two points, and they have worked together very well, especially late in games when ball handling and FT shooting become critical.
(04-21-2013 08:49 PM)Karl B Wrote: [ -> ]I am baffled that we play an entire season with 2 freshman point guards, 3 counting Osse, get them lots of minutes and experience..... then go out and sign a juco point guard. Obviously two players are not coming back. Not sure status of our walk ons. They spent a year practicing and were not awarded a scholarship so not sure what that says. I would expect Washington was told he would have a chance to earn one. I have been baffled by Steve's recruiting more often than not. Had a great class last year, not sure what to make of this years.
I am baffled as well. You don't sign a Juco point when you have a solid freshman point guard returning (really 2 with Gillon). This just leads to speculation like "Hagins won't be back". They must know who won't be back- it can be "quietly" leaked to Jeff and then we wouldn't have to speculate.
No panic folks. If I am a coach, THREE of the 13 would be point guards. That is the one position where you absolutely cannot afford to be caught short.
We have talked about this for years that we need more point guards who can play. I think this is a good move on Steve's part, even if everyone is coming back.
Bad move, if you ask me. If you want another point, fine, but don't get a juco that will make two of our best ayers think twice about their staying with the program. Get a freshman point guard to bring up under them, maybe even redshirt him.
(04-22-2013 10:10 AM)eh9198 Wrote: [ -> ]Bad move, if you ask me. If you want another point, fine, but don't get a juco that will make two of our best ayers think twice about their staying with the program. Get a freshman point guard to bring up under them, maybe even redshirt him.
That would be my opinion if Josh and Gillon are staying. And has been said, Osse can play the point in a pinch. I can guarantee you that a Juco, who led his team to the National Championship, isn't coming to a DI school with the idea that he will be a backup.
Josh will be just a true sophomore. Under any kind of normal circumstances he would not have been the stating point this year. If he has to play apprentice his soph and junior years instead of his frosh and soph years, so be it.
(04-22-2013 11:24 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote: [ -> ]Josh will be just a true sophomore. Under any kind of normal circumstances he would not have been the stating point this year. If he has to play apprentice his soph and junior years instead of his frosh and soph years, so be it.
How many kids that we're starters their freshman year, are willing to be a backup their sophomore and junior years? In the days of everyone thinks they have NBA talent, I don't see many kids doing it.
I don't know that he will do it, but he OUGHT to be willing to do it. (It's the other name on the jersey.)
We're potentially sabotaging ourselves by doing this. Josh and John are clearly good enough to start. They did a good job last year. It's asinine to imply to them they weren't good enough by recruiting a juco point. Is starting a freshman ideal? No. Did they do a good job anyway and earned their spot at the top, despite not fitting a model that freshman and sophomore should automatically be backup no matter what? Yes.
(04-22-2013 12:18 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know that he will do it, but he OUGHT to be willing to do it. (It's the other name on the jersey.)
Pappy, he did a very good job. He shouldn't automatically be a backup no matter what just because he's a sophomore. Applying philosophy to reality simply doesn't work every time, and this is one of those cases.
I agree he did a good job, and I assume the job is his to lose. He certainly has earned that status.
But if the other kid proves out to be better, then he is just better. Then Josh can walk, or he can stay and play through it. There is always a smaller puddle where you can be the big duck.
We complain about wanting to upgrade our talent. If we do, occasionally they will be jucos, and when they are, the pecking order gets disturbed. I figure Josh will get his minutes regardless.
(04-22-2013 12:25 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote: [ -> ]I agree he did a good job, and I assume the job is his to lose. He certainly has earned that status.
But if the other kid proves out to be better, then he is just better. Then Josh can walk, or he can stay and play through it. There is always a smaller puddle where you can be the big duck.
We complain about wanting to upgrade our talent. If we do, occasionally they will be jucos, and when they are, the pecking order gets disturbed. I figure Josh will get his minutes regardless.
Once again that's a good point. If folks want us to win more and get to postseason semi-regularly that will mean upgrading our talent. That will mean that on occasion players will get their feelings hurt (i.e. lose starting job to an incoming player) and on other occasions players will be run off (if we can bring in better talent to replace them). I've said on a number of occasions that I don't like that way of functioning. But for those whose primary concern is "winning", it seems like they should be 100% for bringing in a Juco who might knock a returning freshman from the starting line-up. I'm not sure if the new guy is good enough to do that, but certainly competition can't hurt in the long run.
Winning is the key word here. You bring in players who give you the best chance of winning. If the new players beat out a returning player, that's a plus as far as I'm concerned. This Juco point guard is a winner. He's been the starting point guard on winning teams wherever he's played. Josh will get plenty of minutes. He'll move over at times and play the two. He's a good player. And if he's about the team winning, he'll buy into having other good players competing with each other for playing time. Taggart came back after his Freshman year, but Isler won the starting job at the three.
Did that make our team better? Yes. So you don't pass up players who you think can help you win because you might hurt someone's feelings. If the Freshman forward can beat someone out, that's to our advantage. It means we're getting better.
The key isn't talent. We have the talent already. It's the coaching. Steve doesn't know what to do with the great talent he has amassed. Bringing in a point guard that we don't need, that will only serve to disturb the balance of two of our best players, is like buying yourself a new gun to shoot yourself in the foot with, when you already have a bazooka in the closet. Nice try mediocrity apologists, but we didn't need a point guard to begin with.
Some fans on this board are like Yankees fans, always wanting to be better and willing to do what it takes (myself, LRTrojan), and other fans on this board are like Cubs fans, who are just happy to have a place to watch a game and probably subconsciously HOPE we stay losers, because they love the romanticism of sticking with the lovable losers. I would put Pappy and mjs in that category. Nothing wrong with either version of fandom, but I guess a fan who wants to win will never agree with a fan who wants to lose (so to speak).
To say or imply that Pappy, mjs or any others who post on this board do not want the Trojans to win is an unfair and wrong statement. There may be disagreements about how to go about being a winner but I believe all of us want Trojan Sports to be very competitive.