menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Recruiting Topic
Topic: Bigs, bigs and more BIGS!!!
Page: 1 of 1
FlashGary
General User
FG
Member Since: 6/18/2013
Location: Long Island, NY
Post Count: 391
person
mail
FlashGary
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 1:21 AM
settings_applications edit_note
After watching North Carolina sneak by Oregon last night, I dialed up Ohio's 2012 Sweet 16 OT loss to North Carolina on YouTube. I never could bring myself to watch it again until now. What a terrific second half! Watching that game again, along with viewing a lot games in the current Big Dance, further cements in my mind that we need bigs, bigs and more BIGS if we plan to do anything in the NCAA tournament next season. Have I forgotten the MAC? Nope. With what we have coming back and coming in already, if we get a big or two, the MAC should fall in the process.

In that classic loss in 2012, North Carolina's long and athletic front line had Reg Keely and Ivo Baltic taking horse shots near the hoop. They didn't go in. D.J. Cooper was on his way to stretching Ohio's four-point lead to six with just over three minutes to play, but NC's 6-10 Henson blocked his layup attempt off a steal. Cooper went to the basket again with Ohio leading by one with 1:26 to play. That shot was altered, although D.J. should have gotten a foul call when he was clubbed in the face. Ohio was in position to win that game because it hit a zillion treys.

If Bobcat Nation has been watching this tournament over the years, height matters--if the guys can play. I just don't see us being that dominant a team in the MAC next season with two 6-8 guys playing in the post whose strengths do not include altering or blocking shots. It's going to be a struggle and who goes in the hole when Taylor and Carter get in foul trouble? You want to put the untested Dozier there, if he's still here? Gareri, who, like most frosh, needs to bulk up?

So I again contend we need bigs, bigs and more BIGS. A JC transfer and a freshman we can develop who can play some minutes now would be great.
Last Edited: 4/2/2017 1:22:39 AM by FlashGary
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
General User
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 1,926
mail
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 2:29 AM
settings_applications edit_note
In my opinion guard play is more important. Did we get exposed by UNC's frontcourt? Yes. But remember it was our backcourt that got us to the Sweet 16 in the first place.

We are never going to be able to compete with guys like Tyler Zeller and John Henson, but if you have extra skilled ball handlers then you have a chance against anyone.
shabamon
General User
Member Since: 11/17/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 7,300
mail
shabamon
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 9:20 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Got to agree with tilly here. The success of the 2012 season should have proven that you don't need to be big in order to be good. That USF team was every bit as big as that UNC team and we beat them. Every team has strengths and weaknesses each year, and that year we were good because we had good shooters, athletic bigs who could run, and we played a defensive style that forced a ton of turnovers. A mid-major team that focuses on post play may win its conference, but will probably not win in the tournament.

That being said, I too would like to see us get a guy who can rebound and block shots.
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 10:07 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I agree with BT and Shabby from a more practical point. Looking at FF teams that have been successful over the years. Guards have driven them. You can look at teams that are big. This year's Zona, NC and such. Lots of the teams folks remember have been TEAMS that are driven by guards. Butler, VCU are a couple of examples.

In our boat we are not gonna get the length that NC has....not even one. We would be happy to have several 6'1- or 7 footers but we are not gonna do that. If you were to head off to tourneys in your state and count the number of kids that are recruitable you would be surprised how few and far between they are and how many coaches are sitting around the court on which they are playing.

Have you ever stood down on the court or in an airport when a team like NC walks by? The game you watched last night was the 39th tallest team in the country against the 91st. THe NC /Ohio game was 1 vs 252.

THe flip side is the quality of length available. One of the tallest teams I remember in the Convo was Norfolk St ...they were huge. Looking them up ...in 2011 they were the 49 th tallest team that year...but they were all really long. They all had height but more important their wingspans were incredible. ut,alas, they could not really play.

I think the prudent course would be to recruit team players with a credible one or two taller and longer players that can compete. If you are dreaming of FF type players...6that is fine. I think most here are realizing enough and understand we have to be able to consistently compete to make the dance and advance before we can start being picky about who we put in the middle. That model takes guards/wings and a big or 2

Chart of Ohio Height/NCAA d1 rank and average d1 height that year

2010 76.8" 138 76.5"
2011 76.9" 127 76.5"
2012 76.0" 252 76.5"
2013 76.4" 203 76.6"
2014 76.5" 197 76.7"
2015 76.6" 188 76.7"
2016 78.2" 28 76.8"
2017 77.4" 93 76.8"
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,400
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 11:32 AM
settings_applications edit_note
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
I think most here are realizing enough and understand we have to be able to consistently compete to make the dance and advance before we can start being picky about who we put in the middle. That model takes guards/wings and a big or 2
100% on board with you, Shaba, Tilly. In general, guards/wings win in March. If we wanna refer back to that Sweet 16 game, consider that Walt, Nick, DJ is not only what got Ohio to that game, but also what got them down to the final minute with a chance to win.

Next year's team will go as far as Simmons, Dartis, Butler (perhaps) can carry them. This isn't to say that Carter and other big fellas aren't important. I'm saying without a good PG or two, big guys are less effective because they don't have that guy to feed them the ball the right way, in the right place, at the right time.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 12:52 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Carter and Taylor are not shot-blocking specialists, but both have shown they can block shots. I'm more concerned that DT develop more offensive game and stay out of foul trouble. More of what we saw against Kent in the mac tourney... he had a great game and created some offense, which we haven't seem often from him.
crackerbaby00
General User
C00
Member Since: 3/9/2007
Post Count: 442
person
mail
crackerbaby00
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 2:09 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Hopefully the 3 recruits are committed to playing intense defense. Other than 3-point shooting, that is what carried us to the Sweet 16. All seem to be athletic enough to play defense. The question will be their willingness to do so.

Simmons, Dartis, Laster, and Carter should be able to provide outside shooting. Probably need to find another shoot to help Laster off the bench.
PhiTau74
General User
PT74
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Columbia, SC
Post Count: 458
person
mail
PhiTau74
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 7:04 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bigs beat South Carolina against Gonzaga, go big or sit at home watching the tournament year 4 without a team.
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 9:02 PM
settings_applications edit_note
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
crackerbaby00
General User
C00
Member Since: 3/9/2007
Post Count: 442
person
mail
crackerbaby00
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 9:54 PM
settings_applications edit_note
allen wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Oregon and UNC had the same number of rebounds. Obviously the 2 offensive rebounds are what everyone will focus on but the larger issues were the 16 turnovers, 26% from 3, and their top 2 scorers going 5 for 22 from the field
FlashGary
General User
FG
Member Since: 6/18/2013
Location: Long Island, NY
Post Count: 391
person
mail
FlashGary
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 10:07 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead wrote:expand_more
In my opinion guard play is more important. Did we get exposed by UNC's frontcourt? Yes. But remember it was our backcourt that got us to the Sweet 16 in the first place.

We are never going to be able to compete with guys like Tyler Zeller and John Henson, but if you have extra skilled ball handlers then you have a chance against anyone.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 10:21 PM
settings_applications edit_note
allen wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Genius! Where do you come up with this?!
FlashGary
General User
FG
Member Since: 6/18/2013
Location: Long Island, NY
Post Count: 391
person
mail
FlashGary
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 10:33 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead wrote:expand_more
In my opinion guard play is more important. Did we get exposed by UNC's frontcourt? Yes. But remember it was our backcourt that got us to the Sweet 16 in the first place.

We are never going to be able to compete with guys like Tyler Zeller and John Henson, but if you have extra skilled ball handlers then you have a chance against anyone.

I agree with you that teams aren't going anywhere in The Big Dance without guards who can handle and shoot from the perimeter. I'm begging for some bigs, because I believe we'll have really good guard play next season, assuming Simmons returns and the likes of Dartis, Laster and Gollon continue to improve.

Since we have a scholarship or maybe two to play with, why can't we have both--the guard play and the bigs? I'm telling ya, Ohio will have the potential to dominate the MAC next season if we get a long, athletic inside guy. Besides the need defensively, Simmons' ability to drive the ball and kick out to the perimeter shooters greatly will be enhanced if the opposition can't "cheat" inside.

Finally, I must admit that I have an agenda here, as I know how close we came several times to getting that elusive "big" who could have been the missing piece to Ohio becoming a Top 40 team several times, dating back to when I was in Athens during the Walter Luckett era. This has generally been a point of frustration from there on.

I see us being so close to doing some serious damage if Jaaron still is here. Perhaps the differences of opinion on our needs is based around varying visions. I see this need not looking to get back to the Sweet 16. I see this need looking to GO BEYOND the Sweet 16.

As the saying goes, if you aim for the moon, you may land among the stars!
Last Edited: 4/2/2017 10:34:45 PM by FlashGary
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 11:34 PM
settings_applications edit_note
crackerbaby00 wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Oregon and UNC had the same number of rebounds. Obviously the 2 offensive rebounds are what everyone will focus on but the larger issues were the 16 turnovers, 26% from 3, and their top 2 scorers going 5 for 22 from the field

Meeks scored 14 points on offensive rebounds. That is why I stated that Oregon lost because of rebounding. Oregon started two 6'2" guards, one 6'4" guard and Dillon Brooks a 6'7" wing along with Bell. Meeks was able to get lose.
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 4/2/2017 11:47 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Genius! Where do you come up with this?!
Iowa State beat kansas early in the year, Monte Morris is a very efficient point guard, ISU played Burton at the power forward, he is 6'5" and very athletic, but he could not stop Biggie and Haas. They lost to Purdue because Purdue out rebounded them 38 to 28 and they gave up 9 offensive boards and only got 3. Purdue was able to convert more. In the case of Oregon, there graduate guard was phenominal on the defensive board, they tied North Carolina in total rebounds, but they gave up a whopping 17 offensive rebounds, Meeks scored 14 second chance points. While a medi might see the rebound total and think that I was wrong, a true basketball mind and coach would agree that you cannot let Meeks score 14 second chance points and shoot 11-13.
Although the rebounding total was even for the game at 43, North Carolina big man Kennedy Meeks, 6'10" at 260 pounds, had his way against the undersized Ducks' front line. The senior forward led the Tar Heels with 25 points and grabbed 14 rebounds.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/02/5223432...
Last Edited: 4/2/2017 11:54:51 PM by allen
crackerbaby00
General User
C00
Member Since: 3/9/2007
Post Count: 442
person
mail
crackerbaby00
mail
Posted: 4/3/2017 12:07 AM
settings_applications edit_note
allen wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Oregon and UNC had the same number of rebounds. Obviously the 2 offensive rebounds are what everyone will focus on but the larger issues were the 16 turnovers, 26% from 3, and their top 2 scorers going 5 for 22 from the field

Meeks scored 14 points on offensive rebounds. That is why I stated that Oregon lost because of rebounding. Oregon started two 6'2" guards, one 6'4" guard and Dillon Brooks a 6'7" wing along with Bell. Meeks was able to get lose.
Only because their 6'10'' center couldnt play due to injury. UNC out-rebounded opponents by an average of 13 per game this year. Oregon managed to match them. The other three areas were much bigger reasons for the loss IMO.
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 4/3/2017 12:09 AM
settings_applications edit_note
crackerbaby00 wrote:expand_more
We need bigs that can run, rebound, block shots and shoot a high percentage around the basket and hit free throws. Iowa State and Oregon had great guards and athletic wings but both ultimately loss because they could not rebound.
Oregon and UNC had the same number of rebounds. Obviously the 2 offensive rebounds are what everyone will focus on but the larger issues were the 16 turnovers, 26% from 3, and their top 2 scorers going 5 for 22 from the field

Meeks scored 14 points on offensive rebounds. That is why I stated that Oregon lost because of rebounding. Oregon started two 6'2" guards, one 6'4" guard and Dillon Brooks a 6'7" wing along with Bell. Meeks was able to get lose.
Only because their 6'10'' center couldnt play due to injury. UNC out-rebounded opponents by an average of 13 per game this year. Oregon managed to match them. The other three areas were much bigger reasons for the loss IMO.
The turnovers and poor three point shooting was also critical, I agree.
Showing Messages: 1 - 17 of 17
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)