How much talent is on this team?


#1

So I got to thinking, why are we 0-8 in the conference? Maybe it 's the coach? Maybe it’s the players? Maybe we’re unlucky? :frowning:

If you asked me if we have a talented group of basketball players I’d say yes, so obviously it’s the coach’s fault, but when I got to thinking about it I wondered if we’re really that talented.

If you took each player (as they are performing this season, so don’t consider what year they are or future potential) from our team and put them on a team that reaches the NCAA tourney as a #7 team, what sort of contribution would you get from each player in our nine-man rotation:

Battle - Starter
Babb - Fringe Starter/6th man
Jackson - 6th man
Ott - reserve big man seeing regular minutes each game
Edwards - mop-up duty
Frazier - mop-up duty
Woodyard - mop-up duty
Jones - maybe 9th or 10th man off the bench
Brooks - maybe 9th or 10th man off the bench

So basically 4 guys that would be in a regular rotation and 5 guys that wouldn’t probably see regular minutes. Maybe that explains why we’re 0-8. So, maybe the talent level isn’t quite what I thought it was? Or maybe talent is not equivalent to what I see on the floor? Maybe what I see on the floor is a reflection of the coach? I don’t know.


#2

[quote=“Finding Forrester, post:1, topic:755”]So I got to thinking, why are we 0-8 in the conference? Maybe it 's the coach? Maybe it’s the players? Maybe we’re unlucky? :frowning:

If you asked me if we have a talented group of basketball players I’d say yes, so obviously it’s the coach’s fault, but when I got to thinking about it I wondered if we’re really that talented.

If you took each player (as they are performing this season, so don’t consider what year they are or future potential) from our team and put them on a team that reaches the NCAA tourney as a #7 team, what sort of contribution would you get from each player in our nine-man rotation:

Battle - Starter
Babb - Fringe Starter/6th man
Jackson - 6th man
Ott - reserve big man seeing regular minutes each game
Edwards - mop-up duty
Frazier - mop-up duty
Woodyard - mop-up duty
Jones - maybe 9th or 10th man off the bench
Brooks - maybe 9th or 10th man off the bench

So basically 4 guys that would be in a regular rotation and 5 guys that wouldn’t probably see regular minutes. Maybe that explains why we’re 0-8. So, maybe the talent level isn’t quite what I thought it was? Or maybe talent is not equivalent to what I see on the floor? Maybe what I see on the floor is a reflection of the coach? I don’t know.[/quote]
Battle - Starter
Frazier - Role Player for now
Babb - 6th Man
Jackson - Role Player
Jones/Brooks - Limited to no PT
Edwards - Role Player should see starters mins with more experience
Ott - Role Player also would see limited to no PT on most other B10 teams
Woodyard - I guess mop up duty, haven’t seen enough of him to guess (prob not a good thing)
Sasa- I’m guessing mop up duty if he can’t take mins away from Ott and Jones


#3

It’s not unlucky. IMO, given the talent level, which I don’t think is strong overall, I think it’s the coach. Cornley is really the missing piece here. His inside efforts need to be duplicated. I don’t think we have the talent/determination on this team, but Ed needs to create an offensive scheme where these guys participate, and to me, that’s not happening.

Pete Newell talks about it in his book, that big men can either shoot or cannot shoot, but in either case, they need to be involved in the offense, give n go’s, pick n rolls, etc. It’s not happening. This offense is arc centered, easy to defend and boring to watch.


#4

Good question. This team finds ways to lose. No matter what the rotation they lose. We played Iowa (who is terrible by the way) we lose. Indiana we lose.
I will address Ed’s goal when he came to PSU. To be in the TOP part of the league. Year 7 and we are NOT close. One quality player and he is not going to be at PSU forever. Next year we might compete for 7th place in the BigTen (if Battle stays.) After that the future looks very bad.
The program is in bad shape.
A “good shot” for this team a 28 footer! We can not guard anybody! Nuff said!


#5

For me, the easiest way to compare the talent on this team to the talent on a 7 seed is to compare this group to the 2000-2001 squad (I posted this in another thread last week). Since I watched pretty much every game that both teams played, I think I’d have a pretty good feel for what a 7 seed looked like. That said, if we were to have a draft tomorrow with everone on this team and everyone on the 2000-2001 team (using their talent level at that time), how would it go? Talor/Crispin would go 1-2 (personally, I’d take Joe but you certainly can’t argue with someone taking Talor). After that? I’d say it goes Titus Ivory -> Gyasi -> Jon Crispin or Tyler Smith -> Crispin or Smith, then you’d start to get into guys from this team (I guess you could argue with Babb in the mix with Jon/Tyler, however I’d take those two). If you did the same thing with the 95-96 team (albeit that was a 5 seed so they might be better than we need to be), I’d take Talor first, then Lisicky -> Gaudio -> Earl -> Booth -> Sekunda. I wouldn’t even think about someone else from this team until that group was gone.

This tells me that we really need to raise our talent level over the next year if we’re going to be good enough to be a 7 seed. The addition of Buie will certainly help, however other guys need to really step up their game so that they are in the mix with those starters on the 01 and 96 teams.

If you looked at the future for the 2001 team in January of 2000, how would it have looked? I would have said that Joe Crispin was clearly a starter on any team, Titus a starter but maybe a 3rd/4th option, Gyasi a reserve big man taking up minutes, Jon Crispin a reserve coming off the bench to make shots, Tyler Smith deep in the bench as a role player, and the rest of those guys (Banta, Witkowski, Bekale, etc) not seeing the floor at another program. Look what happened, Gyasi made the leap, Titus kept stepping up his game, Tyler kept improving every week, and Tate/Watkins stepped in and contributed quality minutes in the roles that they were asked to play. Will it happen again? I certainly hope so, but I certainly wasn’t that hopeful in January 2000 that we were looking at a future sweek 16 team.


#6

I really disagree there. A future of Frazier, Buie, and Babb playing the 1-2-3 (with Burke coming off the bench) and Edwards as an undersized 4 (or bumping one of those other 3 to the bench) doesn’t look “very bad” to me, however there is an obvious need for a couple of big guys to finish out that group.


#7
[quote="tundra, post:4, topic:755"]After that the future looks very bad.[/quote]

I really disagree there. A future of Frazier, Buie, and Babb playing the 1-2-3 (with Burke coming off the bench) and Edwards as an undersized 4 (or bumping one of those other 3 to the bench) doesn’t look “very bad” to me, however there is an obvious need for a couple of big guys to finish out that group.

Buie will prob be a big time player but that’s yet to be determined. Talor is everything for this team. Can you imagine how bad this team would be without Talor?? Its down right scary

#8

There have been some very competitive teams that made and advanced in the NCAA Tournament with one star player and four guys who understood and executed their roles. This team hasn’t developed much on-court chemistry. Ultimately, that lies at the coach’s doorstep.


#9

Other guys will need to step up. I thought we’d be in big trouble without Claxton, and the team actually got better without him. I thought lising Jarrett Stephens would be a huge loss for the 2000-2001 team, and instead they got better without him. We’re obviously going to miss Talor a bunch when he leaves, but when he does leave other guys will obviously have to lift their game to take his place. I just hope that they lift their game now while he’s still here rather than waiting until he’s gone.


#10

People said the same thing about Geary a few years ago. If a player isn’t there, the rest of the team will adapt. We wouldn’t be good, but wouldn’t be as horrible as you think.


#11

Agree. I sang Ed’s praises all last year for the great chemistry on last year’s team. Well, this year’s team has “negative chemistry.” Developing chemistry on the court with young humans is not an exact science and not really easy. But, it is the profession Ed chose and the one he for which he is getting paid big bucks!


#12

I was talking with someone last night about our talent level, specially shooters. We commonly hear Ed say pre/post game that we just have to hit our open shots. Over the course of the game, I’d say we get our fair share. I just don’t think we have the talent right now to consistently hit what should be makeable jumpers. Babb is probably the best pure shooter out of anyone on our roster, but still has those moments when you wonder what was thrown up there. I think this also leads to the issue of missed free throws. Without the fundamentally sound shooters, I don’t believe we will ever be “reliable” at the line. While we are improved over last year in that department, it’s still hurting us in very key moments.

With guys more capable of putting the ball in the basketball on a consistent basis, it takes pressure off Battle, who won’t have to do it all himself (imagine his assist numbers then!).

Of course we need better interior presence, but I believe first and foremost is recruiting guys who can create shots and/or consistently hit open ones.


#13

Frats…I like the comparison w/ the 01 team…

How does the picture change if you add Pringle and Cornely to this year’s team? I have to think Cornley and Pringle could both start on a lot of middle of the road tourney teams. My point being, it’s taken me an 8-12 start to this season to realize just how much talent and leadership we lost from last year’s team to this year’s team.


#14
[quote="battlesway2, post:7, topic:755"]Can you imagine how bad this team would be without Talor?? Its down right scary[/quote] People said the same thing about Geary a few years ago. If a player isn't there, the rest of the team will adapt. We wouldn't be good, but wouldn't be as horrible as you think.
Wasn't :-\ there a guy named Mel on that team? Honestly (w/out bw goggles) who could you stepping up and replacing all the points,assists,boards, he gives this team? I bet when Geary went down we had at least one other guy who was avg double digit points

#15
After that the future looks very bad.

I really disagree there. A future of Frazier, Buie, and Babb playing the 1-2-3 (with Burke coming off the bench) and Edwards as an undersized 4 (or bumping one of those other 3 to the bench) doesn’t look “very bad” to me, however there is an obvious need for a couple of big guys to finish out that group.

Disagree. People are WAY WAY too high on Frazier and Edwards. I’m not convinced those guys are capable of being starters on an NCAA tourney team. Babb probably is and Buie we’ll have to see.

I still can’t believe how many people are raving about Edwards and Frazier. Look at their numbers through 8 big ten games - they’re hardly making any impact.


#16

Both have had VERY rough BigTen seasons where half court defenses are much better than what we saw in the preseason. Will they ever figure it out??
Maybe.


#17
[quote="battlesway2, post:7, topic:755"]Talor is everything for this team. Can you imagine how bad this team would be without Talor?? Its down right scary[/quote]

Other guys will need to step up. I thought we’d be in big trouble without Claxton, and the team actually got better without him.

Wasn’t Talor and Mel the 2 who stepped up?

#18
[quote="tundra, post:4, topic:755"]After that the future looks very bad.[/quote]

I really disagree there. A future of Frazier, Buie, and Babb playing the 1-2-3 (with Burke coming off the bench) and Edwards as an undersized 4 (or bumping one of those other 3 to the bench) doesn’t look “very bad” to me, however there is an obvious need for a couple of big guys to finish out that group.

Disagree. People are WAY WAY too high on Frazier and Edwards. I’m not convinced those guys are capable of being starters on an NCAA tourney team. Babb probably is and Buie we’ll have to see.

I still can’t believe how many people are raving about Edwards and Frazier. Look at their numbers through 8 big ten games - they’re hardly making any impact.

Buie will be fine. Looks to beat players and attacks the basket, like Talor, but taller, something we desperately need. A 6’2" Manny Harris. Yes, he’s that good. He just scored 39 points in a game, won a NYS top division championship, MVP in that tourney as a soph, and two weeks later outlplayed and outscored 5th nationally ranked '09 player, Lance Stephenson. Probably played vs. 10 major DI players in his frosh and soph years, Kemba Walker, Kevin Jones, Brandon Triche, etc. He’ll be more than ready.

Still doesn’t solve the frontcourt problem. IMO, Ed needs to do something drastic here, and sooner, rather than later. Can’t wait 'til Alexis arrives.


#19

Kid - what Big Ten player would you say Buie plays like? :wink:


#20

Yes, I know. But some of the posters keep wondering how good, what kind of an effect, etc. I mean “with Buie we have to see”? I don’t have to see. I saw Talor, and had my opinion. I saw Taran, and I have an opinion. Curry, also. Rather than poke fun at my consistent opinion, why don’t you venture one on Taran yourself? You think, “we have to see?” I say major impact, day 1.

How’s that man crush feelin? :wink: