Jump to content

Evans


ACE

Recommended Posts

I'd like to see DE play inside more just because other than him, we don't have a proven inside player. Cody and Rob are improved inside but they're still best from the outside. I don't like DE's jump shot. I don't mind him playing on the perimeter because he can beat his guy to the basket, but I'd like to see him post up more than usual. He doesn't have to replace Conklin by himself, but we will need him to help.

I'd think it might be a good idea to let practice begin and see if JM and GG can play inside before we move DE there Young players are always unproven at the new level, then they practice, they do well, they play, and become proven. If we have to move DE to the 4 this year more than to exploit a small line-up where he's still actually a guard in a 4 guard line-up we are not making the tourney.

You know what's funny, we all wanted this team where we developed good to very good upperclassmen who played and the younger guys sit and learn until their time comes. Now that we're finally getting to have that, we have people stressing because the young guys aren't proven. Which is exactly what we wanted to have happen in the 1st place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd think it might be a good idea to let practice begin and see if JM and GG can play inside before we move DE there Young players are always unproven at the new level, then they practice, they do well, they play, and become proven. If we have to move DE to the 4 this year more than to exploit a small line-up where he's still actually a guard in a 4 guard line-up we are not making the tourney.

You know what's funny, we all wanted this team where we developed good to very good upperclassmen who played and the younger guys sit and learn until their time comes. Now that we're finally getting to have that, we have people stressing because the young guys aren't proven. Which is exactly what we wanted to have happen in the 1st place

I agree. I don't want Dwayne to necessarily start at the 4 and play inside all season. We have to have players who can make up for Conklin's production down low and I think we all agree it won't all come from one player. I would like to see Dwayne score more inside especially early in the season. He doesn't have a very good jump shot and we have plenty of guys who can score from the outside anyway. He was very good driving to the basket last year, he just needed to finish more of his chances. I'd like to see that continue, but also post up a bit more especially if he has another 3 man on him.

Manning had a year to sit and learn and that's obviously what I wanted. I think he's going to be good this year, but nobody should expect him to come in and play well from the opening game. He very well could do that, but I think he'll be a lot better by conference season, once he's actually played a good amount of minutes. Once that happens, Dwayne could go back to being more of a 3.

Actually looking back, I don't even know if I care about Dwayne scoring inside. I think my biggest thing is that I don't want to see him relying on jump shots. We have plenty of shooters and through his first 2 years, Dwayne hasn't shown much with his jump shot. He has shown that he can get to the basket and that he can post up his man inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue he is still a 3 in that lineup. Even if he does postup more. It is not like you are going to send CE and RL to guard the an opposing wing.

Agree. I still want Evans at the 3 in that lineup and playing there most of the time. Just because Evans is posting up, scoring inside a lot and grabbing a ton rebounds, does not mean he is a 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evans might be the answer, someone who can post up and be a back to the basket threat. I had hoped the initial info on this thread that he had gained another 20 lbs was true. Evans is not as strong as Conklin but is quicker and is longer and has a better touch (as a soph) and could possibly be the one to fill the void to take pressure off the rest of the scorers like Conlkin did his senior year. And Evans can be fierce.

Whether he is technically a 3 or a 4 does not matter too much.

But I still think RL is the most viable for this role, but it would be a bigger change in approach for RL than Evans. Can he get tough, play down low, do some damage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sold on evans as a 2 and not wild about him as a 3 either. Just think he dominates in the lane and think it takes away his effectiveness 22 ft from the rim. His shot is not certain and his ball skills arent such i want him dribbling much. That said he is a hard worker and wouldnt surprise me to become a perimeter star. Considering how guard heavy and inside soft the team is i question if he gets the opportiunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you say evans isn't as strong as conklin? Imo he is at least as strong.

Conlkin was stronger inside IMO, bulkier, pushed people around on both ends, was an enforcer, took the leadership role his SR yr, but there is not a huge difference, roy. And DE might be stronger this year than last.

AND as I stated I think Evans has other skills and is "strong enough" and can possibly replace him as a post up "O" player.

Again, I wish RL would step up and be a post up inside player. Toughen up, play down, uh, low. The rest of the team can shoot the 3's; he steps out only 2,3 times a game for a 3. The rest of the time, he is Nate Thurmond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conlkin was stronger inside IMO, bulkier, pushed people around on both ends, was an enforcer, took the leadership role his SR yr, but there is not a huge difference, roy. And DE might be stronger this year than last.

AND as I stated I think Evans has other skills and is "strong enough" and can possibly replace him as a post up "O" player.

Again, I wish RL would step up and be a post up inside player. Toughen up, play down, uh, low. The rest of the team can shoot the 3's; he steps out only 2,3 times a game for a 3. The rest of the time, he is Nate Thurmond.

...or Paul Hogue, maybe George Yardley if he develops his hook shot. Cliff Hagan, anyone ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What position do you think evans played? From my seat it appeared he played both the 3 and the 4 about equal time. If he plays only 3 this coming year, imo we will be weaker because that means one of our very good guards will be sitting on the bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What position do you think evans played? From my seat it appeared he played both the 3 and the 4 about equal time. If he plays only 3 this coming year, imo we will be weaker because that means one of our very good guards will be sitting on the bench.

Agree. (edit: but I want him to change his game, post up down low often and do Conklin's job if RL cannot; somebody has to...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What position do you think evans played? From my seat it appeared he played both the 3 and the 4 about equal time. If he plays only 3 this coming year, imo we will be weaker because that means one of our very good guards will be sitting on the bench.

Roy, you and I agree - just let him play what/where he played last year and we will fine. My point was why argue about him having to be one or the other when in all probability he will simply play as he did last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, keep DE at the 3 and the lineup is? MM, KM, DE, CE, RL? or MM, KM, DE, RL, JM/GG/CR? I think CE's comfortable being the 6th man, so I guess the 4's coming from the usual suspects. Or go with KM, MM, KC/JJ/JB, DE, and RL? This lineup looks like a Nova starting 5, I don't see RM going that way unless KC is as good as advertised. Bottom line; we've never seen a Billiken team w/ this many options open to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, keep DE at the 3 and the lineup is? MM, KM, DE, CE, RL? or MM, KM, DE, RL, JM/GG/CR? I think CE's comfortable being the 6th man, so I guess the 4's coming from the usual suspects. Or go with KM, MM, KC/JJ/JB, DE, and RL? This lineup looks like a Nova starting 5, I don't see RM going that way unless KC is as good as advertised. Bottom line; we've never seen a Billiken team w/ this many options open to it.

Your point is not wrong - we could go with a 3 guard line up. Where I think things get all confused is when people try to create a traditional line up and honestly lots of teams do not play a traditional line up. If our guard play is our strong suit then why not play 3 legit guards and two front court players - DE did well last year playing how he did both floating between the paint and out on the perimeter. We can still do that and take advantage of his rebounding acumen but not force him to have to play with his back to the basket on offensive all the time where quite frankly he will struggle against bigger teams. I would guess that he has worked on his outside shot and if he can improve to where he hits 2-3 consistently in a game then his work around the basket will be improved since he will be able to beat his man to the basket when he attacks for passes or short drives. Between RL, JM and CE we can easily man the other rebounding side and this does not take into account if GG produces anything. All I am saying is think about this more out of the box and not so narrowly as you have just started to outline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the discussion could be more one of when do we play our best players, our lineup, rather than alter it to counter the other team's strengths? DE playting time and position on the court varies according to how he is playing, as well as how the other team matches up with us. That approach worked well for us last year. Do we stay with that philosophy or do we impose our will on them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the discussion could be more one of when do we play our best players, our lineup, rather than alter it to counter the other team's strengths? DE playting time and position on the court varies according to how he is playing, as well as how the other team matches up with us. That approach worked well for us last year. Do we stay with that philosophy or do we impose our will on them?

We can do both - some teams we will be able to "impose our will" but others we will be best to match up better. DE is an asset if he can float between positions rather than be relegated to one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What position do you think evans played? From my seat it appeared he played both the 3 and the 4 about equal time. If he plays only 3 this coming year, imo we will be weaker because that means one of our very good guards will be sitting on the bench.

From my seats, I don't remember Evans playing too much 4 last season. So I decided to go back and look at the numbers. Here is what I found.

The team played 6,825 minutes last year. 40% of those must have gone to the 4 and 5 spots so 2,730 were for the "bigs." BC, RL, CE, CR, JM and GG played a total of 2,667 minutes. I don't remember any times when Cody played the 3 but maybe there were a few occasions.

Nevertheless, if you assume the "missing" 63 minutes (2,730 - 2,667) were played by Evans that means he played 7% of the time at the 4 (he played a total of 852 minutes on the season).

Admittedly, the flaws in my analysis could have been Cody playing a lot of 3 spot (which would increase the number of minutes DE played at the 4) or if JJ played any 4 spot (which would decrease the number of minutes DE played at the 4).

Simply put: Evans was a 3 last season.

http://www.slubillik...NTENT_ID=170965

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant dispute that. However it sure seems that three of jett, mcall, mitchell and cassity would be playing together in games when we were most effective. I guess that translates to our more effective team then was with evans on the bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Jett ever played the 4. He guarded a 4 twice during the season, but still think we had 2 bigs on the floor at that time.

There were some periods where we went really small, playing Conklin and or Ellis at the 5, specifically in a couple games where Loe was benched for matchups, but nearly every game had a scenario where Conklin or Ellis was the pivot man. Evans would have seen minutes at the 4 then. Ellis and Evans on the floor together would also switch from post to outside frequently.

Still I would say Evans playing the PF spot was fairly rare and wouldn't have constituted much more than 10% of his playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant dispute that. However it sure seems that three of jett, mcall, mitchell and cassity would be playing together in games when we were most effective. I guess that translates to our more effective team then was with evans on the bench.

1 game that was notable to me was the Dayton home game, where the 3 guard lineup turned the tide. They played for several minutes together in that game in the 2nd half. Evans was in with them only about half the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys. Keep in mind that DE mostly played the 4 his Freshman year. And last year, BC was a fixture at the 4. According to the stats on this Board, BC played 29.4 mpg. Factoring in many of the blowout games when RM rested his starters (including BC), this means that BC rarely came out of the game when the game was on-the-line. Therefore, for one of our better players, DE, to get minutes, yes, I guess he played the 3 as opposed to playing the 1, 2 or 5 (I don't remember this ever happening).

Skip. The problem, of course, is that DE's game is not typically played by a 3. DE's outside shot and guard skills hopefully have improved but DE was not all that helpful with dribbling skills last year and he was anything but a threat from the outside. Trying to think of prior players who played the 3 and TL comes to mind. Yes, TL greatly improved his outside shot during college/after this Freshman year; however, he was a natural guard having always played the guard position. As to Scott Highmark, yes, I held my breath when he dribbled to break the other team's press; however, he was pure outside shooter, was a natural guard and played guard his whole life. Same with Virgil Cobbin who was much more of a guard as opposed to a "back to the basket" type of player. Donnie Dobbs was only 6'2" but he was always an undersized 4. Luke Meyer played a little at the 3, hit a few outside shots, etc. but he was mostly an undersized 4. At this time last year, this Board had alot of discussions and hope that CE would change his game to become a 3 (mostly b/c he can hit the outside shot) but that didn't happen and probably won't happen this year either. Probably the same with DE as it is very rare and difficult for a player to change his game during his college career. DE is a tweener. DE's natural game is that of a post player (4) but he stopped growing at 6'4" and he is not 6'9".

Even if he plays the 3 this year, I don't see him dribbling much more than he did last year and I don't see him being our outside threat. Instead, he plays like a small forward and I see him hitting the open 15 footer, him taking the ball inside, him making smart interior passes and him battling like a beast on the boards. Believe we will see this same game from him if he plays the 4 this year. DE will get his minutes this year. The only real difference will be which other 4 players RM puts out on the floor with him. Therefore, IMO, as long as DE remains healthy and continues to develop, he will be on the floor playing his regular game (that of a small forward) and his actual position of 3 v. 4 will probably be dictacted less by him and more by his teammates. If RL, CE, CR, JM and GG are playing so well that RM is forced to play 2 at all/most times, then DE will play the 3. If, on the other hand, KM, MM, JJ, JB and Keith Carter are playing so well that RM is forced to play 3 at all/most times, then DE will play the 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm... the small forward is the 3 and DE's game is played by 3's all over the country.

I hope he doesn't dribble alot either except to attack the basket.

Thanks for the history lesson.

Count this as fact. If DE plays the 4 consistently we won't make the tourney, but no worry there because he won't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm... the small forward is the 3 and DE's game is played by 3's all over the country.

I hope he doesn't dribble alot either except to attack the basket.

Thanks for the history lesson.

Count this as fact. If DE plays the 4 consistently we won't make the tourney, but no worry there because he won't

Skip. You are wrong. Small forward is different than a wing or 3 guard. Get with the program.

Frankly, believe I know understand where you are coming from. For over a year now, we've been reading your some old tired posts about DE converting to a 3 based almost exclusively upon his height. Thought you were stating something new this time. Sorry for my mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...