Just a few notes


#1

We’ve been riding the struggle bus around for a while and I understand why we’re all a little on edge with the defense the way it is but I’ve noticed a few things that we haven’t really talked about that much–

1. We do have the offensive struggles…but we’ve also dropped 51 and 46 points in a half.

2. We’re only .6% from shooting the same from field as we were last year

3. We’re averaging more PPG than last year

4. We’re shooting free throws 12% better than last year 77.2%

5. We’ve got 6 guys averaging 7 or more PPG (3 of them over 10ppg), last year we only had 3 over 7 PPG ( can you guess who?)


#2

This team’s better than last year’s. They just need to work some things out. That was an outstanding effort tonight. Lots of contributions. And DJ blew me away with his inside play. Why hasn’t he played that way before, back to the basket? Is this the new DJ? Bye, bye wing.(D’oh, that word again) Hello, power forward.


#3

I must say I was expecting a rebounding thread from you tonight, although I haven’t read the whole IGT yet so there is still time…I was actually at the game reading the stats at halftime thinking about how the rebounding must be driving you crazy :wink:


#4
[quote="kidcoyote, post:2, topic:358"]This team's better than last year's. They just need to work some things out. That was an outstanding effort tonight. Lots of contributions. And DJ blew me away with his inside play. Why hasn't he played that way before, back to the basket? Is this the new DJ? Bye, bye wing.(D'oh, that word again) Hello, power forward.[/quote]

I must say I was expecting a rebounding thread from you tonight, although I haven’t read the whole IGT yet so there is still time…I was actually at the game reading the stats at halftime thinking about how the rebounding must be driving you crazy :wink:

No, not really. The inside offensive play of DJ was so outstanding, I didn’t really notice. Looking at the stats, the rb’s are kind of poor. I just thought DJ’s game set the tempo for PSU, made the passing better, as it opened up more lanes. It provided an option in the passing scheme which created opportunities. I guess I blocked out the rebounding. Early in the second half, not sure DJ was out, but he wasn’t posting up as much, and SHU got close, but as he went back to it, we opened up a lead again. We shot 63% for the game, but I thought it was the quality of shots. 38 points in the paint. We’ve had games where there were only 8 baskets inside the arc, other than Battle. If DJ’s game was not a one shot, this is a different team. And Edwards is excellent. He scored 10 points in 13 minutes. And Cam. A very good night, IMO. We’ll work on the rebounds.


#5

I haven’t seen the guys play yet. Am I correct in assuming DJ starts at 4 and Brooks starts at 3. Does DJ ever play 3? How about Brooks, does he ever play the 4?


#6

Brooks got into serious foul trouble, barely played with only 13 minutes. I’d forget the numbering, but I guess you have to say DJ played the 4. He played in the paint almost all night and showed great footwork, and got fouled a bunch. It was an outstanding performance. Cornley like at his best. His added height helps. Hope it continues but he showed a game I never saw in him before.


#7

Jackson rarely plays the three anymore. He’s almost always at power forward. Brooks is the one who swings back and forth. Babb, Woodyard, and Edwards also get time at the three so there’s basically nothing left for Jackson.


#8

Last night watching DJ play reminded me of last year when I was watching Mel launching 3’s at the beginning of the year. The first few shots I was like “What the hell is he thinking?” Then I saw that he worked on the shot to expand his range. You can tell DJ spent a bit of time on his game since we last saw him.


#9
[quote="kidcoyote, post:2, topic:358"]This team's better than last year's. They just need to work some things out. That was an outstanding effort tonight. Lots of contributions. And DJ blew me away with his inside play. Why hasn't he played that way before, back to the basket? Is this the new DJ? Bye, bye wing.(D'oh, that word again) Hello, power forward.[/quote]

Jackson rarely plays the three anymore. He’s almost always at power forward. Brooks is the one who swings back and forth. Babb, Woodyard, and Edwards also get time at the three so there’s basically nothing left for Jackson.


Gee, Lar, interesting that a guy who for two years was described as a perimeter player(or wing, D’oh) due to his skill set, size, etc., is now something else. Funny how that happens. DJ was never, ever a perimeter player, at least not a good one. And if Kobe and Carmelo can post up better than most, no reason why lots of guys couldn’t help their teams. Being described as a wing, is a sign of an incomplete game, a weakness, not a strength. Perimeter players should be guys like Danny Morrissey, guys who can obviously not play in the paint, and might have trouble beating guys off the dribble to the hole, but can shoot lights out. But there’s limits to that game, and with Danny, the limits were evident. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t good, but Brooks and DJ can’t shoot like him. Brooks a perimeter player, NFW. You want to call him a wing, go ahead, but it’s a term describing limitation, not strength. DJ proved that last night, with that explosive game, where he kind of stopped being a wing. Bird and McHale played together and both posted up regularly. Who was the 4? Was the other a wing? Throw the labels out. Scoring inside improves your game.

#10
[quote="kidcoyote, post:2, topic:358"]This team's better than last year's. They just need to work some things out. That was an outstanding effort tonight. Lots of contributions. And DJ blew me away with his inside play. Why hasn't he played that way before, back to the basket? Is this the new DJ? Bye, bye wing.(D'oh, that word again) Hello, power forward.[/quote]

Jackson rarely plays the three anymore. He’s almost always at power forward. Brooks is the one who swings back and forth. Babb, Woodyard, and Edwards also get time at the three so there’s basically nothing left for Jackson.


Gee, Lar, interesting that a guy who for two years was described as a perimeter player(or wing, D’oh) due to his skill set, size, etc., is now something else. Funny how that happens. DJ was never, ever a perimeter player, at least not a good one. And if Kobe and Carmelo can post up better than most, no reason why lots of guys couldn’t help their teams. Being described as a wing, is a sign of an incomplete game, a weakness, not a strength. Perimeter players should be guys like Danny Morrissey, guys who can obviously not play in the paint, and might have trouble beating guys off the dribble to the hole, but can shoot lights out. But there’s limits to that game, and with Danny, the limits were evident. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t good, but Brooks and DJ can’t shoot like him. Brooks a perimeter player, NFW. You want to call him a wing, go ahead, but it’s a term describing limitation, not strength. DJ proved that last night, with that explosive game, where he kind of stopped being a wing. Bird and McHale played together and both posted up regularly. Who was the 4? Was the other a wing? Throw the labels out. Scoring inside improves your game.

It’s only in YOUR mind that describing a guy as a wing player is a limitation. Frankly, the best small forwards are often the best athletes on the team since they need the skill sets of guards and forwards. Lebron James is a small forward. Michael Jordan was originally a small forward when he came into the league. Geary Claxton was a small forward for us and he was a monster at the position, basically carrying the team for most of his four years here. I have no idea why you think it’s a weak position. What we are looking for in Brooks is Claxton type play, not Morrissey type. Claxton (and Jordan/James) could take guys to the hoop from off the wing and that’s what we’re looking for in Brooks.


#11
[quote="kidcoyote, post:2, topic:358"]This team's better than last year's. They just need to work some things out. That was an outstanding effort tonight. Lots of contributions. And DJ blew me away with his inside play. Why hasn't he played that way before, back to the basket? Is this the new DJ? Bye, bye wing.(D'oh, that word again) Hello, power forward.[/quote]

Jackson rarely plays the three anymore. He’s almost always at power forward. Brooks is the one who swings back and forth. Babb, Woodyard, and Edwards also get time at the three so there’s basically nothing left for Jackson.


Gee, Lar, interesting that a guy who for two years was described as a perimeter player(or wing, D’oh) due to his skill set, size, etc., is now something else. Funny how that happens. DJ was never, ever a perimeter player, at least not a good one. And if Kobe and Carmelo can post up better than most, no reason why lots of guys couldn’t help their teams. Being described as a wing, is a sign of an incomplete game, a weakness, not a strength. Perimeter players should be guys like Danny Morrissey, guys who can obviously not play in the paint, and might have trouble beating guys off the dribble to the hole, but can shoot lights out. But there’s limits to that game, and with Danny, the limits were evident. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t good, but Brooks and DJ can’t shoot like him. Brooks a perimeter player, NFW. You want to call him a wing, go ahead, but it’s a term describing limitation, not strength. DJ proved that last night, with that explosive game, where he kind of stopped being a wing. Bird and McHale played together and both posted up regularly. Who was the 4? Was the other a wing? Throw the labels out. Scoring inside improves your game.

It’s only in YOUR mind that describing a guy as a wing player is a limitation. Frankly, the best small forwards are often the best athletes on the team since they need the skill sets of guards and forwards. Lebron James is a small forward. Michael Jordan was originally a small forward when he came into the league. Geary Claxton was a small forward for us and he was a monster at the position, basically carrying the team for most of his four years here. I have no idea why you think it’s a weak position. What we are looking for in Brooks is Claxton type play, not Morrissey type. Claxton (and Jordan/James) could take guys to the hoop from off the wing and that’s what we’re looking for in Brooks.

I assume the point that kid was trying to make is that not all small forward’s are “wing” players, and that describing someone as a wing points out limitations in their game, keeping them on the perimeter. I’m not sure why he went that direction since I hadn’t seen anyone else in the thread throwing the term around, but that’s how I took it. I would agree with his points though. Also, I would never refer to Jordan or LeBron as a wing, regardless of them playing at the 3 at times. Same with Geary.


#12

Lar, Pezlion gets it. For two years I’ve been saying Brooks could better help the team playing inside. With him, I never saw him as a perimeter player. You did. I did not see DJ as being a strong enough player to play inside. I thought Brooks would be better. He’s taller, better ups, greater reach. In short, DJ surprised me the other night.

My point is that when mentioning that someone needed to play like a 4, many of the responses here was that Brooks was a wing, DJ was a wing, it wasn’t in their skill set. To that I say phooey. If you’re good, you can play inside, period. If you can’t play inside, you’re limited as a player. Describing a player as a wing, at least to me, describes a player who doesn’t want to, or can’t play inside, like McHale mentioned in the post play thread. Look at it this way. If Brooks improves his inside play,and starts to be able to dominate inside like DJ just did, will the the wing description still fit? Does it fit DJ? If DJ was a wing last year, and this year he isn’t, which player is better, last year’s DJ or this year’s? IMO, inside play removes the wing description, and makes you a more complete player.

FYI, Taran Buie posted up a bunch in HS. Go to a game, see for yourself.


#13

[quote=“kidcoyote, post:12, topic:358”]Lar, Pezlion gets it. For two years I’ve been saying Brooks could better help the team playing inside. With him, I never saw him as a perimeter player. You did. I did not see DJ as being a strong enough player to play inside. I thought Brooks would be better. He’s taller, better ups, greater reach. In short, DJ surprised me the other night.

My point is that when mentioning that someone needed to play like a 4, many of the responses here was that Brooks was a wing, DJ was a wing, it wasn’t in their skill set. To that I say phooey. If you’re good, you can play inside, period. If you can’t play inside, you’re limited as a player. Describing a player as a wing, at least to me, describes a player who doesn’t want to, or can’t play inside, like McHale mentioned in the post play thread. Look at it this way. If Brooks improves his inside play,and starts to be able to dominate inside like DJ just did, will the the wing description still fit? Does it fit DJ? If DJ was a wing last year, and this year he isn’t, which player is better, last year’s DJ or this year’s? IMO, inside play removes the wing description, and makes you a more complete player.

FYI, Taran Buie posted up a bunch in HS. Go to a game, see for yourself.[/quote]

Kid, I don’t recall people describing DJ as a wing. That’s just the position he played last year when he and Cornley were on the floor at the same time (which would be most of DJ’s minutes since Cornley played a lot of minutes). Personally, I always thought DJ would make a better 4 than Brooks because he seems to embrace doing the dirty work – whatever it takes to win. I’ve always thought Brooks was more finesse. Yeah, he’s taller and longer, but I still don’t see him embracing the 4 like DJ.

What’s the difference between a wing and a three anyway? It’s technically the same position, so isn’t the term more based off the style of offense the team runs?


#14

This wing = deficiencies view strikes me as ludicrous, although I agree with kid’s conclusion that Brooks would help the team if he would get in there and fight for some boards.

I just think the rationale is off. Does playing point guard get defined as “can’t play inside”? A wing is someone who can handle the ball, can shoot to some range, can mix it up inside, can create from the perimeter. As Geary’s jumpshot developed, he was probably only two inches shy of being prototypical.

Because college teams (aside from maybe UNC) can’t line up five prototypes, a wing in college is usually interchangeably a big guard or a small forward. That’s why they practice in the same group at Penn State.

Power forwards are also skilled but in different ways. DJ is probably not big enough to be a PF in the Big 10 (even though he is the strongest guy on the team). His skills on the wing are better than we think (the first two and a half months of last season probably have to be expunged from our memories – the DJ that we saw the other night is the one that ED absolutely fell in love with while recruiting). He is a tweener.

Until we start regularly signing the recruits that the top teams also want, Penn State will always be about putting together a group of tweeners in ways that can win. That is one reason why I think we look bad at the beginning of the season. We’re still trying to figure that out. With the right combinations, like last year, we can still end up pretty good.


#15

I keep trying to remind myself that there were a lot of time the last 2 years where I’d be yelling at 'Melle to stop hanging out at the top of the key and get under the hoop. I think the guys finally figured out what works about mid-season, but before that there was a lot of questioning what would work best.

I have to remind myself that this team is still at the point last year’s team would have been up in Canada, in terms of putting the peices together. In all, I think there’s more talent on the floor then we’ve had in a long time, but it’s going to take some time to figure out who’s role it is to do what, and until then it’s going to a rough ride. We’re not at the point were we can out-talent people yet, while we “figure it out” like the big programs do.

After getting to watch Edwards on Wed for the first time, I think these guys are going to be pretty good once they get it.


#16

[quote=“tjb, post:14, topic:358”]This wing = deficiencies view strikes me as ludicrous, although I agree with kid’s conclusion that Brooks would help the team if he would get in there and fight for some boards.

I just think the rationale is off. Does playing point guard get defined as “can’t play inside”? A wing is someone who can handle the ball, can shoot to some range, can mix it up inside, can create from the perimeter. As Geary’s jumpshot developed, he was probably only two inches shy of being prototypical.

Because college teams (aside from maybe UNC) can’t line up five prototypes, a wing in college is usually interchangeably a big guard or a small forward. That’s why they practice in the same group at Penn State.

Power forwards are also skilled but in different ways. DJ is probably not big enough to be a PF in the Big 10 (even though he is the strongest guy on the team). His skills on the wing are better than we think (the first two and a half months of last season probably have to be expunged from our memories – the DJ that we saw the other night is the one that ED absolutely fell in love with while recruiting). He is a tweener.

Until we start regularly signing the recruits that the top teams also want, Penn State will always be about putting together a group of tweeners in ways that can win. That is one reason why I think we look bad at the beginning of the season. We’re still trying to figure that out. With the right combinations, like last year, we can still end up pretty good.[/quote]

Tim, I guess when a guy is 6’7"-6’8", I don’t like hearing he’s a wing. At that height, he may be a great shooter, so great a shooter, like Carmelo, Kobe, Brandon Roy, that he may be a guard. But a guy that size has to rebound. I think the Celtics comparison is legit. Of Bird and McHale, who was the wing? If Bird never rebounded, but stayed as a perimeter player, he would’ve been a wing, and how could you argue with that, as he was such a great shooter? I don’t believe Brooks and DJ are such great shooters that they can really be considered wings, and that they’re much more effective helping the team on the boards, and in trying to score inside, like DJ did the other night. Does the team need two guys doing that? Maybe not equally. It’s just funny that both these guys were pegged as perimeter players, and I don’t really see it, and never did. Danny Morrissey was a perimeter player. Our guards are so fast, I’d like to see our forwards crash the boards on offense, as we’re less likely to get beat on the break with Talor and Tim.

I also think that if forwards are going to play like perimeter players, are they the best “wings” on this team, or does that go more to Babb, Woodyard, Edwards?


#17

I think of Michael Jordan as the prototypical wing, and he could rebound, post up and do pretty much anything. I always thought of wing as a position, not a kind of limitation.


#18

Kid, would you consider Geary Claxton a wing? To me, he was the prototype for what I’d look for in a wing for PSU.


#19

I think this is one of the silliest discussions on this board.

You’ve got 5 players. The names come from sort of a generic setup. The 1 (point) starts at the top of the key. The 2 and 3 (wings) are on either side usually around the 3-pt line. The 4 and 5 (PF and C), are on the blocks down low. It’s just a bit of terminology to describe the standard spacing at the start of an offensive set. After that, it really means nothing. Players run off screens, switch positions, post up, run back-cuts, etc, etc, etc.

To argue that calling someone a wing means that they are always out at the 3 point line is ludicrous.

Now, to say whether or not Brooks, at the 3 (wing), should be playing underneath more is an entirely different question. He can play down low and score most of his points there, but still be a wing (if he is playing the 3). It’s just a term. Nothing more, nothing less.

When we have our starting lineup in, Brooks is the 3 (or wing). DJ is the 4. Due to spacing, it’s just not good strategy to play with more than 2 people on the block at a time. The stock set has DJ and Andrew there. You can’t fit anyone else. Now obviously they move a lot and switch places often. DJ will hit the 3, Brooks will post up. Jones, for the most part, will stay at the high or low post.


#20

[quote=“ronb89, post:19, topic:358”]I think this is one of the silliest discussions on this board.

You’ve got 5 players. The names come from sort of a generic setup. The 1 (point) starts at the top of the key. The 2 and 3 (wings) are on either side usually around the 3-pt line. The 4 and 5 (PF and C), are on the blocks down low. It’s just a bit of terminology to describe the standard spacing at the start of an offensive set. After that, it really means nothing. Players run off screens, switch positions, post up, run back-cuts, etc, etc, etc.

To argue that calling someone a wing means that they are always out at the 3 point line is ludicrous.

Now, to say whether or not Brooks, at the 3 (wing), should be playing underneath more is an entirely different question. He can play down low and score most of his points there, but still be a wing (if he is playing the 3). It’s just a term. Nothing more, nothing less.

When we have our starting lineup in, Brooks is the 3 (or wing). DJ is the 4. Due to spacing, it’s just not good strategy to play with more than 2 people on the block at a time. The stock set has DJ and Andrew there. You can’t fit anyone else. Now obviously they move a lot and switch places often. DJ will hit the 3, Brooks will post up. Jones, for the most part, will stay at the high or low post.[/quote]

This might be the most sensible post in the entire thread.