crymdg2 Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I was informed last night that Lance really likes SLU and is very interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Definately good news. Just curious, I've heard different reports about his size. I've heard 6'6 and also 6'8. Which is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schasz Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 He seems like the type player we really need. A player who can shoot the trey with some accuracy. In today's college game you cannot have enough of those type players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Crean to take a hike and gives us an oral sooner rather than later. We certainly good use his size and shooting ability next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 He was 6'6 in high school and grew another inch and put on 20 lb since he's been in college. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Absolutely, and in my mind he kind of gets the "two birds one stone" award. We do need another shooter, but we also need a 4-man. He can obviously shoot the ball. While, some have said he's not a typical 4, he can play it at his size and would probably do a better job defensively on opposing 4's than Luke (not his fault, as he is out of position). I've thought all year a player like Novak or Doellman would be a great addition. I'm not saying he's as good because I really don't know, but Stemler seems to fit that bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 dont count me in the group that thinks stemler would be more effective than luke. other than outright shooting, i do not think stemler is better than luke meyer at any other aspect of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 You don't think a 6-7 player could guard an opposing power forward easier than a 6-5 player? By the way, I think Luke's a great defender, but he should be defending he opposing 3, not 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 i believe that luke will be a more capable defender than stemler. i do agree that i'd rather and i believe that luke would be the small forward instead. imo, the rightful starting and primary power forward will be either obi or someone yet to be named in this post. i.e. not stemler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSLU68 Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 he said he is 6 foot 6 and 1/2" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 This topic made me curious. Marquette's late interest. They already have a Novak replacement recruit for next year in Lazar Hayward...stud East Coast prep school kid who picked them over Uconn, Pitt, UVa etc...looking at the roster...they have 3 seniors...and two incoming kids...and a redshirt kid(conveniently enough a 6'6 outside shooter)...so why would they look at Stemler? Didn't make sense. No offense to him but Novak was a top 50 kid and will be NBA draft pick next year. Did some digging...I asked around....and apparently Soph Ryan Amoroso is transferring, possibly to UNLV at season's end. ...was in coach's doghouse, didn't practice hard enough...etc...so they are looking to fill his spot, last minute, find a player, and it makes much more sense. Amoroso is a guy Billiken Law insisted would be their inside player this year when I questioned they didn't have one, and didn't think he would be their answer. To their team's credit they are a top 25 caliber team with serviceable at best inside rotation....but where is B-Law on this one? just teasing. Amoroso is classic tweener, 6'6 inside outside game, can be a good scorer...but doesn't defend well inside, and has fallen out of favor. Not sure of the level of interest, or bank the scholarship....and as of now, Amoroso hasn't transferred. But why else would Crean be there? As for SLU, ...without a good true point guard...how many quality looks would he get? SLU needs shooters, yes, a point guard, and a power forward. I would like to see an upgrade in point guard recruiting as a top priority. You can never have too many shooters, but you better have a true point...obviously Liddell and Lisch are being counted on to create for others...but need a point guard who can do it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I am also told Marquette is hot after an inside juco player .....don't know name yet...so I am uncertain of the level of their Stemler interest...I believe they have one spot open if the above kid transfers.......so they can only sign one kid.....Not sure where it is at for SLU...but that is the info I was given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 you dont consider lisch and liddell as capable point guards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Roy, Your term was "capable." That says it all to me...it says, well if they have to, those two can do it... So, no, I don't, I suppose is the answer. I want a true point guard....now, backing up that true point guard with one of them is fine. Those guys are not true point guards, and against future high level competition, wouldn't be good enough imo to do it a whole season without someone else to be the main pt. Are they getting by in the A-10 with them, this year sure. I really believe this should be a high priority. just my opinion....you want Liddell to have more freedom on the wing...and Lisch to get comfortable not having to worry about being the main ball handler....etc...doing it some of the game with a main pt guard out sure, fine, anything more...no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 actually i do not want liddell on the wing. i want liddell on the point in a more agressive offense where he is asked to be a score first point guard. i do not think they can upgrade either lisch or liddell this year with what is still available nor do i want to. i want inside power period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schasz Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 If Polk could shoot the ball with even decent accuracy then he would be the PG. I don't know that we spend one of our remaining scholies on a true PG. The only way I would see Coach Soderberg going for a PG is if he was 100% sold on Obie stepping in and playing some decent minutes at the 4. As it is now, I would tend to agree with Roy that we will make good with what we have at the guard spots and try and bring in the elusive 4 and a 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I am not sure that we will ever find a better point guard than Liddell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I urge you to watch the games more closely. Tommie is terrific in seeing the court and finding the open man. A stud who can shoot from outside would be the perfect beneficiary of passes from Tommie and Ian out of the double team. Our offense creates a huge number of open outside shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 First off Billikan, it is alright to disagree with someone...I will let your watch games more closely comment slide for one time only...that is the kind of garbage I don't like seeing on the board. I'd be happy to break down hoops with you any time. Disagree fine, nothing wrong with that. Roy, I didn't base my opinion on time of year and who they can get at this point. It was based on need and preference. SLU needs shooters, an inside rebounding/scorer, and a point guard. That's my opinion. Liddell can play the point in different offensive sets, and at times during the game. But imo they need a true point guard to carry the ball handling load and run the team. I think keeping the same group for next year is undervaluing the position. Schasz, I don't think Polk would be a point guard even if he did have a jumper. He doesn't create for others. He is a 2 guard who can't shoot, in a pt guard's body....assist to turnover ratio...etc.. He does two things, adds team speed and quickness, and he is a Vashon kid, and it doesn't hurt to build relations with them. IMO, in order for a team to be successful in NCAA, they need a good inside outside balance...but if you had to start with one thing, it is at the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Great post. Get ready to get ripped for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 First off Billikan it is ok to disagree with someone as long as it isn't courtside. Because you may not know this but Polk and Liddell's Zone Ratings are terrible. What is that? Well, it is when a PG can create a standard shot in his typical dribbling zone within the usual time in the shot clock that the average RPI team from 100-200 would normally score a two point basket. If it is a three point basket then it falls under perimeterimatracity. I won't even get to that on this post. To summarize, eventhough everyone on the team (who sees the court) is too undersized to play the 4 position and a capable 4 would help Ian to be even more dominant inside, a "true" PG is our #1 priority in courtside's opinion. Eventhough we don't have the personnel to adequately guard most 4s in the A10 SLU's biggest need is a point guard. Eventhough we have Liddell for 3 more years, Lisch (serviceable PG) 3 more years, Danny Brown 2 more years and Polk 2 more years who can all play the point and only JJ (who never sees the court) 1 more year, red-shirt Freshman Obi (coming off serious knee injury and over a year off of playing) for 4 more years to play PF a "true" PG should be our #1 priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Band Legend Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Blibbity blob fan, your comment is inane. You're the only one who deserves to be ripped. Courtside, I couldn't disagree with you more. I think you need to recruit over what you have, and there is a much greater need to recruit over JJ and an out of position Luke Meyer. As far as Obi is concerned, I hope he's the second coming of Anthony Bonner but we just don't know what he is going to be. At the five spot IV is going to be a senior and Husak hasn't shown the ability to be anything more than a good backup. For years our weakness has been against teams with too many athletes at the forward positions. I'm much more secure with our guard play, even though we might lack the quintessential point guard. Actually, I think TL is that guy. I don't mind having a pg who can drive around people, post other guards up, and hit the mid range jumper. Remember he's still a freshman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Ahhh the Abomb troll is back. Genius post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Thanks, I thought so as I wrote it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Again...of those who didn't actually READ my posts...I said SLU needs shooters, an upgraded inside player who can board and provide some scoring, and a point guard. Nowhere in my posts did I say it was number one or only thing... I did however say it was necessary to have one to win in post-season. I don't expect the reading challenged Abomb to comprehend, but for everyone else, that is what I said. Obviously SLU has a lot of need in multiple spots...as evidence as to where they are as a program right now. First you recruit the best available players regardless of position, and that was done this year...obviously you need to start locally and this has been done...and eventually you recruit based on need, once something is established. I would rather not have Liddell be the primary pt guard for the next few years. We disagree that's fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.