Jump to content


Photo

SLU Commit: Austin McBroom


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#101 SShoe

SShoe

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tower Grove South

Posted 08 May 2012 - 02:36 PM

Why would you take away what RL is best at to cram into a player he is not? I want RL to improve his post offense (I thought he was serviceable with his post-defense, but definitely needs to get more physical), but don't think that needs to be done at the expense of his perimeter game. In addition to improving his 3 point %age, If RL can get 1-2 go-to moves down low (he has shown the baby hook at times) and knock down the 8-12 footer somewhat consistently, then we'll have a heckuva player. RL doesn't necessarily need to turn into Bynum.

I've always had visions of Rob becoming a poor-man's Dirk, but even Dirk sets up with his back to the basket from time-to-time. As you mention, Rob doesn't need to be Bynum, but he does need to become more serviceable down-low.

#102 MB73

MB73

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,850 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chesterfield

Posted 08 May 2012 - 02:43 PM

I think we have different recollections on how great WR was as a post-up player. Was he effective inside (on offense and defense)? Yes. Was he a great post-up player? Debatable, but I'd lean towards no.

Why would you take away what RL is best at to cram into a player he is not? I want RL to improve his post offense (I thought he was serviceable with his post-defense, but definitely needs to get more physical), but don't think that needs to be done at the expense of his perimeter game. In addition to improving his 3 point %age, If RL can get 1-2 go-to moves down low (he has shown the baby hook at times) and knock down the 8-12 footer somewhat consistently, then we'll have a heckuva player. RL doesn't necessarily need to turn into Bynum.

I think CR or CE is more likely to be the player that replaces BC's post offense. Both CE and CR sporadically showed some nice post moves last year. I hope CR has a Conklin summer and on the offensive side, works on nothing but shots/moves from 8 feet and closer.


CE would be my second choice to take on the Conklin role, but I do not think he has the post skills and potential that RL has. Leave it at that.

#103 Cowboy

Cowboy

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,774 posts

Posted 08 May 2012 - 02:48 PM

Ideally quickness vs. size wouldn't really be an either or, but I figure that if there are players that are both quick and big, plus have skill, we will not get them.. they will likely wind up at a Kentucky or North Carolina type program. So our best bet is to get quick, skilled guards, that may not get interest from BCS programs because they are a bit undersized. Think back to the recruitment of KM and MM. They both seemed to fit that profile. I would say KM has proven that he can do just fine against BCS competition. It was really striking watching KM run circles around Washington's 6-3 guard Abdul Gaddy. We did just fine with KM and MM playing together, so no reason to think that Carter and McBroom can't form another dynamic backcourt of two quick, skilled 6-0 guards. Xavier also did very well with Lyons and Holloway. I will add, that is nice to have a bigger athletic guard like JJ to add to the mix and I have stated previously that I hope there is another bigger 2/3 included in next year's recruiting class.


-thanks
-It is VERY hard work being a Billiken fan.

#104 ACE

ACE

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,071 posts

Posted 08 May 2012 - 02:48 PM

I think we have different recollections on how great WR was as a post-up player. Was he effective inside (on offense and defense)? Yes. Was he a great post-up player? Debatable, but I'd lean towards no.

Why would you take away what RL is best at to cram into a player he is not? I want RL to improve his post offense (I thought he was serviceable with his post-defense, but definitely needs to get more physical), but don't think that needs to be done at the expense of his perimeter game. In addition to improving his 3 point %age, If RL can get 1-2 go-to moves down low (he has shown the baby hook at times) and knock down the 8-12 footer somewhat consistently, then we'll have a heckuva player. RL doesn't necessarily need to turn into Bynum.

I think CR or CE is more likely to be the player that replaces BC's post offense. Both CE and CR sporadically showed some nice post moves last year. I hope CR has a Conklin summer and on the offensive side, works on nothing but shots/moves from 8 feet and closer.


I agree, plus the luxury we have is that we have a 3-man who can score in the paint and can rebound like a prototypical power forward.

#105 slu72

slu72

    I have reached billiken_roy levels of posting

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,832 posts

Posted 09 May 2012 - 06:29 AM

I've always had visions of Rob becoming a poor-man's Dirk, but even Dirk sets up with his back to the basket from time-to-time. As you mention, Rob doesn't need to be Bynum, but he does need to become more serviceable down-low.


I think we're forgetting RL is only in his 2nd year of D1 hoops. Also, that there were games this past season where he did make some nice smart plays down low. And he definitely got more physical as the season progressed. I also think we're discounting our coaching staff's ability to assess our players strengths and weaknesses. If they are thinking that RL is what RL has been and that's best for the team and him, then we'll have to count on JM and GG to be the Conklin clones. Do I think RL can be a BC type? No, but I think he can play down low and think he might turn out to be a better defender and rebounder than BC. With BC gone, we're just going to play a little different style this year. No doubt we'll miss his aggressiveness and his touch, which really only came into being this year and a little last year, but with the high quality play of our guards and the fact we can create mismatches with CE and RL, I think we'll be just fine.

#106 SShoe

SShoe

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tower Grove South

Posted 09 May 2012 - 08:01 AM

I think we're forgetting RL is only in his 2nd year of D1 hoops. Also, that there were games this past season where he did make some nice smart plays down low. And he definitely got more physical as the season progressed. I also think we're discounting our coaching staff's ability to assess our players strengths and weaknesses. If they are thinking that RL is what RL has been and that's best for the team and him, then we'll have to count on JM and GG to be the Conklin clones. Do I think RL can be a BC type? No, but I think he can play down low and think he might turn out to be a better defender and rebounder than BC. With BC gone, we're just going to play a little different style this year. No doubt we'll miss his aggressiveness and his touch, which really only came into being this year and a little last year, but with the high quality play of our guards and the fact we can create mismatches with CE and RL, I think we'll be just fine.

Agree with much of what you said, and I believe Rob has the potential to be a real star. I'm just asserting that he needs to become more than a pick-and-pop player if he's to take the next step forward, while many on this board seem to be suggesting that Rob shouldn't work on his low post game simply because that's not his game.

#107 kshoe

kshoe

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,170 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kirkwood

Posted 09 May 2012 - 08:56 AM

Agree with much of what you said, and I believe Rob has the potential to be a real star. I'm just asserting that he needs to become more than a pick-and-pop player if he's to take the next step forward, while many on this board seem to be suggesting that Rob shouldn't work on his low post game simply because that's not his game.


Maybe a good comparison is a tennis player that has a good forehand and a weak backhand. Given there are only so many hours in the day, should he focus his efforts on perfecting the forehand but ignore the backhand or should he strive to get to a point where he can hit both shots well?

We can debate all day what we as fans want him to do, but I've been told from people within the program that the coaches want him to focus his summer on low post play.

#108 ACE

ACE

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,071 posts

Posted 09 May 2012 - 09:17 AM

Maybe a good comparison is a tennis player that has a good forehand and a weak backhand. Given there are only so many hours in the day, should he focus his efforts on perfecting the forehand but ignore the backhand or should he strive to get to a point where he can hit both shots well?

We can debate all day what we as fans want him to do, but I've been told from people within the program that the coaches want him to focus his summer on low post play.


I've heard RM mention this in interviews as well. The reason RL needs to become a low post threat is so teams can't just put a smaller, quicker player on him to chase him around the perimeter. If opponents put a small guy on RL, then Rob can go in the post and do damage. If they put a big slow guy on him, then RL goes outside to draw the other team's big guy away from the basket. It's all about creating match-up problems. To a lesser extent Cody needs to do the same and in an opposite way, this is why DE needs to continue to develop his perimeter game.

#109 Clock_Tower

Clock_Tower

    Listener of the Streets

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,660 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chesterfield, Missouri

Posted 09 May 2012 - 11:02 AM

I've heard RM mention this in interviews as well. The reason RL needs to become a low post threat is so teams can't just put a smaller, quicker player on him to chase him around the perimeter. If opponents put a small guy on RL, then Rob can go in the post and do damage. If they put a big slow guy on him, then RL goes outside to draw the other team's big guy away from the basket. It's all about creating match-up problems. To a lesser extent Cody needs to do the same and in an opposite way, this is why DE needs to continue to develop his perimeter game.


+1 And to add.

Don't get me wrong. I am as big of a BC fan as anyone on this Board. The contributions he made these past 4 years have been great and much needed. BC was our ONLY real inside threat (within 12' of the basket) last year. BC drew fouls and hit his FT's. At the same time, BC played most of the team's minutes at the 4 position last year which worked against CE and DE who also play the 4. With these minutes, of course, BC was a great contributor for the team - especially the first half of the season - and even carried the team on his back to some victories. BC was undersized but made up for it with grit and determination. BC scored b/c of his superior footwork, positioning and the savvy skills he developed while competing these past 4 years. At the same time, he did not block shots, he did not take up space in the lane, his rebounding was not his greatest strength and he may not have been the best complement for the exterior players like CE and even RL.

Maybe it's just me, but has anyone thought how CE would do playing with a guy like IV or Heinrich -- a truly large interior guy? Possibly, BC could have been a compliment to Heinrich like Baniak was. Being the alone interior force, though, was unfair to BC. Even better, we might find that CE does even better at the 4 with another mobile perimeter big like RLwith whom he can exchange positions, defenders, etc. For instance, CE can take his man outside and either shoot from the outside or dump back in to RL. Unlike BC whose defender would not follow BC out to the perimeter, RL can draw his defender out and can hit the 3 pointer.

It all comes down to opportunity. While BC was great for us, he also commanded most of the minutes at the 4 position. Unfortunately, BC could not shift over to either the 3 or the 5. Unfortunately, we relied upon 6'6" BC to control the inside while 6'8" CE and 7' RL were out on the perimeter. BC will surely be missed but the remaining guys, namely CE and DE, will now be given the opportunity to shine with these same minutes given to BC. Maybe CE and DE do worse and maybe they do better. Either way, they will have the opportunity to play and to play at their natural and normal position - the 4.

While CE can hit the 3 pointer, he is simply lacks true guard skills and cannot realistically play the 3. At the same time, his game is not really the interior space eater and cannot really play the 5. Putting both BC and CE out on the floor together meant we were playing without a 5. Similarly, DE played at the 3 alot last year, greatly improved his perimeter game (dribbling, shooting, etc.) but clearly he was more comfortable with his back to the basket playing the 4. Playing DE and BC meant we were weaker at the 3 position.

This year, if the goal is to replace BC and play the same style as last year, then DE is the most likely to continue doing what BC did -- fight hard on the interior as an undersized 4 with CE again coming off the bench as our sixth man. If the goal, though, is to put the best 5 player unit on the floor, then we might be pleasantly find to watch a revised role for our 4 and 5 next year lead by CE and RL.

Non-Insider and Second Class Bills Fan