Game Strategy


#1

I expect to be “attacked” for bringing this up, but I believe it needs to happen if PSU is to maximize their potential this year.

The premise is that T. Frazier needs to be the point guard when he is on the floor. This is clearly his natural position, and we will not maximize his contribution by placing him at the 2-guard. I believe he needs to have the ball in his hands to be most effective. This is not in any way to insinuate that he is somehow better than T. Battle. Battle is clearly the heart of the team. In fact, he is so good that I am confident he can play either guard position. Actually, he seems to have the qualities of a 2-guard. It may turn out to be his better position!

I would speculate that Frazier, as a freshman, might potentially average only 20-25 minutes a game (as a max). So for 20-25 minutes, Battle would be a 2-guard, and for 15-20 minutes he would be back at point guard. Instead of being totally worn down and exhausted at the end of games (and for the final third of the season), he would have the opportunity to preserve some energy and share some of the work responsibility. I know everyone on this board understands the intensity and energy necessary to play big minutes at point guard in a major program.

I envision the end result being that both players would benefit in thier productivity. And, there is no reason why this could not be viewed as a move to make the team better, and not as some sort of demotion. As Battle plays right up to 40 minutes a game, this could work out very well for him on an indiviudal basis, and certainly for the team.

Just my opinion. I better duck now.


#2

[quote=“LarryJoe, post:1, topic:276”]I expect to be “attacked” for bringing this up, but I believe it needs to happen if PSU is to maximize their potential this year.

The premise is that T. Frazier needs to be the point guard when he is on the floor. This is clearly his natural position, and we will not maximize his contribution by placing him at the 2-guard. I believe he needs to have the ball in his hands to be most effective. This is not in any way to insinuate that he is somehow better than T. Battle. Battle is clearly the heart of the team. In fact, he is so good that I am confident he can play either guard position. Actually, he seems to have the qualities of a 2-guard. It may turn out to be his better position!

I would speculate that Frazier, as a freshman, might potentially average only 20-25 minutes a game (as a max). So for 20-25 minutes, Battle would be a 2-guard, and for 15-20 minutes he would be back at point guard. Instead of being totally worn down and exhausted at the end of games (and for the final third of the season), he would have the opportunity to preserve some energy and share some of the work responsibility. I know everyone on this board understands the intensity and energy necessary to play big minutes at point guard in a major program.

I envision the end result being that both players would benefit in thier productivity. And, there is no reason why this could not be viewed as a move to make the team better, and not as some sort of demotion. As Battle plays right up to 40 minutes a game, this could work out very well for him on an indiviudal basis, and certainly for the team.

Just my opinion. I better duck now.[/quote]

You don’t need to duck on my account. I agree, and I think the coaching staff does also. Frazier will be at the point when he is on the floor. Having he and Battle out there together makes for a very quick backcourt and hopefully the 2 of them can help get the pace of the game to what Ed wants.


#3

I think it’s pretty clear that Tim will be playing the point most of the time when he’s on the court. However, Battle will probably have the ball in his hands much more than you’re normal 2 guard since much of Talor’s strength is breaking his man down off the dribble (whereas when Chris Babb is playing the 2, he’ll spend more time running off of screens and positioning himself for a 3-ball).


#4

It really won’t be that much different than last year with Stanley. Pringle brought the ball up the floor much of the time. Talor would run around screens or go to a baseline corner and rest. When the shot clock started running low Battle would come up top and take over. The major difference might be that Frazier might take control of a few more of these late possession situations.


#5

Absolutely no problem with any of that. Heck, Pringle did many point guard type things when he was on the court. Maybe my underlying concern was that since they are both point guards by definition, and Battle is quite capable of 40 minutes, that Frazier would spend alot of time on the pine this year.


#6

I think this is dead on. It is kind of funny when Talor indicates he wants the ball in the halfcourt, in that Tim doesn’t really assume the #2 role. Tim doesn’t do what Chris Babb does when he doesn’t have the ball. Talor played a lot of his HS games like Babb, running off screens, but might be tough to break his pg habit of wanting the ball to break down his man, as he’s done it for two years now. Difference between this year and last is that Pringle and Danny could both play like 2’s. Not sure either Frazier or Battle totally comfortable doing it, i.e., playing without the ball.


#7

[quote=“LarryJoe, post:1, topic:276”]I expect to be “attacked” for bringing this up, but I believe it needs to happen if PSU is to maximize their potential this year.

The premise is that T. Frazier needs to be the point guard when he is on the floor. This is clearly his natural position, and we will not maximize his contribution by placing him at the 2-guard. I believe he needs to have the ball in his hands to be most effective. This is not in any way to insinuate that he is somehow better than T. Battle. Battle is clearly the heart of the team. In fact, he is so good that I am confident he can play either guard position. Actually, he seems to have the qualities of a 2-guard. It may turn out to be his better position!

I would speculate that Frazier, as a freshman, might potentially average only 20-25 minutes a game (as a max). So for 20-25 minutes, Battle would be a 2-guard, and for 15-20 minutes he would be back at point guard. Instead of being totally worn down and exhausted at the end of games (and for the final third of the season), he would have the opportunity to preserve some energy and share some of the work responsibility. I know everyone on this board understands the intensity and energy necessary to play big minutes at point guard in a major program.

I envision the end result being that both players would benefit in thier productivity. And, there is no reason why this could not be viewed as a move to make the team better, and not as some sort of demotion. As Battle plays right up to 40 minutes a game, this could work out very well for him on an indiviudal basis, and certainly for the team.

Just my opinion. I better duck now.[/quote]

Have a little faith my man. What you said makes sense


#8

[quote=“LarryJoe, post:1, topic:276”]I expect to be “attacked” for bringing this up, but I believe it needs to happen if PSU is to maximize their potential this year.

The premise is that T. Frazier needs to be the point guard when he is on the floor. This is clearly his natural position, and we will not maximize his contribution by placing him at the 2-guard. I believe he needs to have the ball in his hands to be most effective. This is not in any way to insinuate that he is somehow better than T. Battle. Battle is clearly the heart of the team. In fact, he is so good that I am confident he can play either guard position. Actually, he seems to have the qualities of a 2-guard. It may turn out to be his better position!

I would speculate that Frazier, as a freshman, might potentially average only 20-25 minutes a game (as a max). So for 20-25 minutes, Battle would be a 2-guard, and for 15-20 minutes he would be back at point guard. Instead of being totally worn down and exhausted at the end of games (and for the final third of the season), he would have the opportunity to preserve some energy and share some of the work responsibility. I know everyone on this board understands the intensity and energy necessary to play big minutes at point guard in a major program.

I envision the end result being that both players would benefit in thier productivity. And, there is no reason why this could not be viewed as a move to make the team better, and not as some sort of demotion. As Battle plays right up to 40 minutes a game, this could work out very well for him on an indiviudal basis, and certainly for the team.

Just my opinion. I better duck now.[/quote]

Duck? Why?

I don’t know of anyone who has proposed anything different from what you have written. I think that’s been everyone’s expectation from Day One and it’s the way that it’s played out in every scrimmage and game that we’ve seen so far. There’s nothing earth shattering here.


#9

Your post is perfectly sensible. Let’s face it, PSU was at their best last season when Battle and Pringle were sharing the load. In fact, I think PSU may have been even tougher to defend when Stanley brought the ball up the court and Talor moved over. Frazier is even more physically gifted than Stanley which should result in PSU’s backcourt being remarkably tough to defend. Specifically when Babb can consistenly drain that 3 ball. My honest opinion is this: Frazier should eventually bring more to the table than Stanley did and Babb certainly brings more to the table than the platoon of 3 men PSU had last year.
I don’t find it unreasonable to think that PSU’s frontcourt will be better than last year at some point. This leaves one MAJOR area of work in order for PSU to grow handsomely from last season. And that is picking up Cornley’s efforts. At this early juncture, I think Brooks has been plugging that hole remarkably well. Should Drew revert back to NIT form, this will be a formidable opponent come Big Ten play…


#10

It takes a lot of us old schoolers years (apparently) to understand what a dribble-drive motion offense requires. (This is the offensive philosophy I think we have, and it seems to result in a lot of old schoolers seeing it and saying “We don’t seem to run any plays”).

It takes more than one guy who can handle and penetrate. I think that’s what we’re going to see a lot of this year. Two point guards on the floor is also something that some other teams have run, and that’s also what I think we are going to see. (Someone made a lot of waves with this in the last few years, I can’t remember who. But they had two PGs on the floor at the same time.)

I think the reason it could work is that when TB does not have the ball, he works as hard as anyone we ever had to move without it. He doesn’t act like he doesn’t have the ball and therefore he is not interested. I am sure that attitude will trickle down to TF, too.


#11

I think the skill and diversity of our guards will make it difficult for teams to defend against us. When you look at the speed and quickness of frazier, the height and shot of babb, and the awesomeness of battle, you see three very different guards. there will be a lot of different looks on offense, and i think it’ll be really exciting


#12

[quote=“tjb, post:10, topic:276”]It takes a lot of us old schoolers years (apparently) to understand what a dribble-drive motion offense requires. (This is the offensive philosophy I think we have, and it seems to result in a lot of old schoolers seeing it and saying “We don’t seem to run any plays”).

It takes more than one guy who can handle and penetrate. I think that’s what we’re going to see a lot of this year.[/quote]

I see aspects of the DDM in our offense, but I think that we don’t run penetration or isolation plays nearly enough for our offense to be called a DDM offense. What we need is better ball movement, and with Frazier at the point, we saw more of that. When both can create off the dribble, it means you have to sag off Battle a little, which not only lets him create for himself but for others too. But when you know it’s Battle holding the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock, it’s much easier to defend.

What I’d like to see is more ball screens on the ball. We run plenty of off-ball screens, and that got open looks for Babb on a curl or something like that. But Battle has to fight off two defenders on the perimeter far too often. It seems that Ott is more apt to try a pick and roll w/ Battle than is Jones. I’ve always held that a well executed pick and roll is almost impossible to defend (Iowa showed us that last year) and wish we would run it more.


#13
[quote="tjb, post:10, topic:276"]It takes a lot of us old schoolers years (apparently) to understand what a dribble-drive motion offense requires. (This is the offensive philosophy I think we have, and it seems to result in a lot of old schoolers seeing it and saying "We don't seem to run any plays").

It takes more than one guy who can handle and penetrate. I think that’s what we’re going to see a lot of this year.[/quote]

I see aspects of the DDM in our offense, but I think that we don’t run penetration or isolation plays nearly enough for our offense to be called a DDM offense. What we need is better ball movement, and with Frazier at the point, we saw more of that. When both can create off the dribble, it means you have to sag off Battle a little, which not only lets him create for himself but for others too. But when you know it’s Battle holding the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock, it’s much easier to defend.

What I’d like to see is more ball screens on the ball. We run plenty of off-ball screens, and that got open looks for Babb on a curl or something like that. But Battle has to fight off two defenders on the perimeter far too often. It seems that Ott is more apt to try a pick and roll w/ Battle than is Jones. I’ve always held that a well executed pick and roll is almost impossible to defend (Iowa showed us that last year) and wish we would run it more.

I want to see four years of Frazier and Sasa executing a Stockton/Malone pick and roll. With his nose for the basket, Sasa is the perfect guy for it.


#14
[quote="tjb, post:10, topic:276"]It takes a lot of us old schoolers years (apparently) to understand what a dribble-drive motion offense requires. (This is the offensive philosophy I think we have, and it seems to result in a lot of old schoolers seeing it and saying "We don't seem to run any plays").

It takes more than one guy who can handle and penetrate. I think that’s what we’re going to see a lot of this year.[/quote]

I see aspects of the DDM in our offense, but I think that we don’t run penetration or isolation plays nearly enough for our offense to be called a DDM offense. What we need is better ball movement, and with Frazier at the point, we saw more of that. When both can create off the dribble, it means you have to sag off Battle a little, which not only lets him create for himself but for others too. But when you know it’s Battle holding the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock, it’s much easier to defend.

What I’d like to see is more ball screens on the ball. We run plenty of off-ball screens, and that got open looks for Babb on a curl or something like that. But Battle has to fight off two defenders on the perimeter far too often. It seems that Ott is more apt to try a pick and roll w/ Battle than is Jones. I’ve always held that a well executed pick and roll is almost impossible to defend (Iowa showed us that last year) and wish we would run it more.

I want to see four years of Frazier and Sasa executing a Stockton/Malone pick and roll. With his nose for the basket, Sasa is the perfect guy for it.

God that would be great…Sasa is one of the few guys from overseas on a Penn State squad as of late that I really see a great gamer in. No offense to some of the guys we’ve had, but his hybrid of styles could be fun to watch. I’d like to see what long range he has, bringing a big guy out top could really open up the lane if they have to guard him while he’s up top…putting Drew up top won’t exactly strike the fear of God into people.

I’d love to see that combo work together, even more so if Sasa can get a three ball like Cornley did at the end there…not deadly, but he’d hit the shot if you didn’t guard him