Mike Minyard Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 My theory is that it will create more spacing, and help post play out in a big way. You want to guard the three point line, but now you are another foot away from helping with a double team. Something will probably have to give, and I would expect to see more sagging defenses (a lot like Washington State). You might not double team as often with a longer three point line, but you might tend to sag off of average shooters. I think the future of basketball will not really include true big men. The game is spreading out and requires too much speed. It's going to be hard to double team if a team has a bunch of sharp shooters around the three point line. Zone defenses are going to be extended out way too far, and man-to-man defense will almost be encouraged (unless the team doesn't shoot well). I just think the future will be smaller post players and taller guards. I don't think it will be rare to see a line-up that isn't very big. The best teams will have rosters like Memphis. Just a bunch of athletes that can just about do it all. The Big Ten teams will not be very competitive in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 I'd agree, Mike, along these lines - not big, in the sense of Glen "Big Baby" Davis, at LSU (although for his size he's still VERY athletic), but I think you'll continue to see big men along the lines of Joakim Noah at Florida. Tall and athletic will always be in demand in basketball. There is just too much value to height under the basket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share Posted May 8, 2007 I'd agree, Mike, along these lines - not big, in the sense of Glen "Big Baby" Davis, at LSU (although for his size he's still VERY athletic), but I think you'll continue to see big men along the lines of Joakim Noah at Florida. Tall and athletic will always be in demand in basketball. There is just too much value to height under the basket. Who was it (Abe Lemmons?) that said, "Quick can fade in a game, but tall stays tall the whole game long." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 Over the last year or so I've had the conversation with several, although I don't remember exactly who, that it seems to me primer teams are moving in the direction of Noah-type players, and away from bulk in the middle. I think a big man that can play will always be in demand, regardless of his bulk, but if given the choice, I think teams are moving towards tall and athletic in the middle rather than tall and bulky. That's just my observation - I'd be curious what others think about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share Posted May 8, 2007 What a load of crap. (Just kidding - thought this board could use a little controversy, that's all.) Seriously, it should be pointed out that the movement away from the "aircraft carrier-types" playing in the middle in college has been out of necessity: those big guys, until last year, were going straight from high school to the NBA. We never got a chance to see what big men like Kevin Garnett, Chris Bosch, Amare Stoudemire, Dwight Howard, Jermaine O'Neil, Kwame Brown, Andrew Bynum, etc. could have done in the college ranks. But now that these big guys have to play at least one year in college, we see 7-footer Greg Oden lead his Ohio State team to the NCAA finals as a freshman last season. You mean to tell me a team with a young Yao Ming or even a Darko Milicic in the middle wouldn't have won a game or two in the NCAA tournament? There will ALWAYS be a place for a GOOD big man in the college game, whether he's a great athlete or not... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Minyard Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 Well I'm not talking about the premier five to 10 programs that take the top talent. I'm talking about 250+ teams that take the best available. The majority of teams try to take the best available player and fit him into their program. Teams won't take as many gambles on 7 footer "projects" anymore. Teams would rather take a 6-7 proven athlete that can run the floor and is versatile. The big boy from UMKC a few years back probably won't be in as high of demand. He can't guard anyone if a team rolls out a bunch of 6-8 and shorter athletes that can shoot the ball. You can't play zone because of the new spacing. It will be one-on-one, and any good athlete should be able to get around him to score or pass to an open man. The spacing in my opinion will eliminate the slower post players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 Interesting take, Mike. It will be interesting to see how it works out. It will probably take a couple of seasons for teams to work out the details of working with the new arc, or at least for us to see how it affects recruiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Titan Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share Posted May 8, 2007 Well, who wouldn't want a 6-7 athletic guy who could play?!? Once these big guys who were going pro start going to the traditional college powers, maybe there will be a little bit of a trickle down effect to where some bigger guys are available to smaller schools. Or, if the theory is true that no one wants these big goons now, maybe we'll have our pick of them. Either way, WHEN THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO SIGN ONE OF 'EM?? Just ONCE, I'd like to see a 300-pounder in an ORU uniform - other than a couple of cheerleaders we had when I was in school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUTerry Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 Well, we have had Michalec.... and Charlie Ludwig. You could even include Cameron Tragradh. Valpo had a bevy of foreign big guys in the late 1990's and early 2000's. I agree that a big body in the middle can be helpful.... especially when playing larger (major) schools. I think they can actually be a disadvantage of sorts in the Mid-Con because of how our officials call the game. An active/physical big guy in our league would not play enough to make a real difference. The Mid-Con refs do not know how to call a game that incorporates a big guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 J.D. Collins does - he never calls fouls under the basket!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Minyard Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Well, who wouldn't want a 6-7 athletic guy who could play?!? Once these big guys who were going pro start going to the traditional college powers, maybe there will be a little bit of a trickle down effect to where some bigger guys are available to smaller schools. Or, if the theory is true that no one wants these big goons now, maybe we'll have our pick of them. Either way, WHEN THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO SIGN ONE OF 'EM?? Just ONCE, I'd like to see a 300-pounder in an ORU uniform - other than a couple of cheerleaders we had when I was in school. What I'm saying is that these coaches know that there are more 6-7 guys that can play than the 7 footers that can play. So why don't we change some rules that will allow these 6-7 guys to play at their maximum potential??? The floor will spread out a little more and allow guys to drive to the basket. If they can shoot a regular three, another 12 inches will not mess with them. The spacing will allow for athletes to do more things out on the floor. There aren't very many schools just loading up on 300 lbs players. They just aren't out there for everyone to have one. It's just a lot easier to go out and recruit a very athletic team. So why not just change the rules to fit the majority of schools in college basketball. Think about how basketball was before the three point line. Didn't a good big man just dominate a game more than they do today? The three point line allowed an advantage for guards and added balance to the game. Now they are moving the line back to give shorter players even more help. I don't like changing the rules, because I don't see anything wrong with the game right now. If it ain't broke.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORU Eli Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 ...did somebody say Charlie Ludwig??? THE MAN! THE MYTH! THE LEGEND!!! Speaking of players that played my freshman year when I was one of 5 fans that stood up during the game cause the team was so boring minus the almighty Nebraska win, did anybody know that Markius is a club promoter here in Dallas now? Saw him not long ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Eddie Sutton on the Sports Animal this AM said that he's glad they moved the line back, and every coach he knows feels the same way. He thinks they should have moved it back even further, though. That's Eddie Sutton's take . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterns78 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Here's a big name and a big man for you ... Tom Prusator. 7'0" and 285 or around there.... 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.