Possible starting linup change

[Clickclack]

In todays TU blog, there was a mention of a possible lineup change. I'm wondering what everyone thinks of the possibility. After watching/hearing the last two games, I think it would be reasonable to get a quicker PG in there. Lillis is really struggling with the TO's and we are very susceptible to the press from smaller quicker teams. I don't think this would be a panic move on the part of coach Brown it simply might be the prudent thing to do.

 

Purely for the purposes of shooting the #$%^....move Lillis to the 2 and start Josh. You lose nothing on defense, you get another ball handler in there to help Lillis and make Jerell the first guard of the bench.

[purplehaze]

Put Josh in to start at the point.

[GODANESGO]

Not sure you wouldn't lose anything on defense, as Coach Brown has said Jerel can challenge Lillis as being the best defender on the team. Nonetheless, I agree that getting Lillis off the ball and having Scrap at the point could likely help our speed, ball handeling, and the type of fouls we had last night.

 

But regardless of what I think, I want our starting 5 to be the 5 that Coach Brown thinks give us the best opportunity to win.

[UA_MA_2000]

Given the extent to which minutes are spread out with this team -- due to our depth -- I don't see too much significance to the starting-five lineup. Having said this, however, giving Lillis a breather on the PG duties would probably help his offense and defense because playing the PG can be tiring. It was exhausting for me whenever I got the PG duties in college.

 

It's hard to want to put one of our top defenders and more athletic players (Jerel H.) as the first man off the bench, though.

 

I think my for-fun vote would be to simply change the lineup given the type of team we're playing on any given gameday, as well as the type of game situation(s) at hand. For quicker, smaller teams like Siena and Delaware, lineups along the lines of those mentioned in the foregoing posts might be best, whereas if we're playing a team like Vermont from last year, the bigger lineup we've been using might be best.

[ALBANY ALUM '94]

Not sure you wouldn't lose anything on defense, as Coach Brown has said Jerel can challenge Lillis as being the best defender on the team. Nonetheless, I agree that getting Lillis off the ball and having Scrap at the point could likely help our speed, ball handeling, and the type of fouls we had last night.

 

But regardless of what I think, I want our starting 5 to be the 5 that Coach Brown thinks give us the best opportunity to win.

freshman at the point?

 

Makes me nervous but I guess I would rather him get the seasoning now and get ready for another title run come tourney time!

[Clickclack]

Of all the true freshman, I think he's most capable of playing solid/under control basketball. I agree though, it's a risk but one perhaps we try and see how it goes.

[reeder]

IMO, UA has not had a true point guard since moving to D1 - until now. I think you move Martin to the point and Lillis becomes the 2. The Lillis situation is no different than Jamar the last two years - get him off the ball...

[Clickclack]

IMO, UA has not had a true point guard since moving to D1 - until now. I think you move Martin to the point and Lillis becomes the 2. The Lillis situation is no different than Jamar the last two years - get him off the ball...

 

reeder,

 

I totally agree with your assessment, in the true meaning of the word we haven't had a TRUE PG in my limited time following the program. I've been around since the 2005/06 season and Josh might be the first true PG. He is simply young and inexperienced but I think you give him a chance and see what transpires. I don't mean this to be a knock on Brian, he's done an admirable job running the point and is very experienced but I think he would be best served off the ball now that we have a capable ball handler. Whether or not Josh can run an effective offense and maintain his composure remains to be seen but I liked his poise in the Siena game. He handles the pressure much better, only had one TO is 25 minutes, in a crazy environment.

[slickwilly]

If we are playing teams with no true center I think the starting lineup should be:

 

PG: Martin

SG: Hastings

SF: Lillis

PF: Wilson

C: Connolly

[Clickclack]

If we are playing teams with no true center I think the starting lineup should be:

 

PG: Martin

SG: Hastings

SF: Lillis

PF: Wilson

C: Connolly

 

My only question is, can we really keep changing the starting five depending on the match up? Constantly changing the starting five would derail any continuity the team might have. I'd also love to see a bit more of Moores, he was pretty highly touted but I haven't gotten any kind of feel for him or his game.

[Dane96]

IMO, UA has not had a true point guard since moving to D1 - until now. I think you move Martin to the point and Lillis becomes the 2. The Lillis situation is no different than Jamar the last two years - get him off the ball...

 

I coached against Todd Cetnar- Todd was as pure a PG as they come with the added ability to light it up.

[UA_MA_2000]

If we are playing teams with no true center I think the starting lineup should be:

 

PG: Martin

SG: Hastings

SF: Lillis

PF: Wilson

C: Connolly

 

My only question is, can we really keep changing the starting five depending on the match up? Constantly changing the starting five would derail any continuity the team might have. I'd also love to see a bit more of Moores, he was pretty highly touted but I haven't gotten any kind of feel for him or his game.

 

 

I'm not so sure I agree with the continuity argument because of the high rate of substitutions and the extent to which players on our team get action. If we were Siena or Delaware and only went 7 or 8 players deep in terms of those who get substantial playing time, I would agree with that position. But since we go 10 or 11 deep, and as many as 9 or 10 players get substantial playing time, I'm not so sure that we have that much "continuity" to begin with; rather, we have a system that players can be swapped in and out of. Thoughts?

 

Moreover, I'd be curious to know the number of minutes per game that all starting five players are on the court at the same time. With the exception of the first few minutes of each half, I bet it's not too many.

 

PS - Boisy, where on earth did you find that avatar? I keep staring at it, and I don't know whether to laugh or simply be intrigued by it. Who is that?? (LCC alumna?)

[Clickclack]

IMO, UA has not had a true point guard since moving to D1 - until now. I think you move Martin to the point and Lillis becomes the 2. The Lillis situation is no different than Jamar the last two years - get him off the ball...

 

I coached against Todd Cetnar- Todd was as pure a PG as they come with the added ability to light it up.

 

Dane,

 

Perhaps you can expend a bit more on Todd, are you saying that he was a true point? Some of us (ME) only very recently started to follow UA and don't have much knowledge of the players in the system prior to Levi, Lucious and Z.

 

Thanks

[UA_MA_2000]

Another thought I had that fits into this thread is that we seem to have a team designed this year to beat a team like Vermont from last year. We are big and can rebound. I think we will do great in conference play. A thought I had that maybe some UVM fans who browse this Forum (or UA fans with more knowledge than I) can help me out with is how UVM scored points last year with their big lineup against smaller, quicker teams. With Trimboli, it seems like they featured an offense last year with a quick and able PG who could shoot from outside and handle the ball (i.e., Martin?) and that Kyle C. kid (6'4", I think?) who could shoot well from outside.

 

Maybe a quicker smaller backcourt, with a loaded and big frontcourt is the way to go for us in conference play?

 

How about:

 

PG: Martin/Iati/Moores

SG: Lillis/Ambrose/Anderson

SF: Connelly/Hastings/Lillis

PF: Wilson/Connelly/Covington

C: J.C./Turley/Gifford

 

Thoughts?

[GODANESGO]

PG: Martin/Iati

SG: Lillis/Ambrose/Anderson

SF: Connelly/Hastings/Lillis

PF: Wilson/Connelly/Covington

C: J.C./Turley/Gifford

 

Thoughts?

 

Other than moving Lillis of the point, I think this is exactly what we do.