I've been involved in an interesting discussion

[Patch]

I personally believe that of the 13 scholarships available 2 should always be held by "Big Men".

 

Big are hard to get at our level and therefore may have to be transfers or gambles often referred to as "Projects".

 

The other 11 can go to the best and most talented players available.

 

Any thoughts on this topic??

 

Please chime in.

[DaneFan2k3]

It depends what type of Bigs you're talking about. If you're solely talking about projects or gambles, then I could see someone arguing against your point.

 

However, if you're talking about just big men in general, then you should always have two, maybe more.

 

The main point should be that of the 13 players you're going to have on scholarship, most coaches are going to use a 7-9 man rotation. Most go 7-8 deep, if that. So if you're even going 8 deep, that is five basically unused scholarship players.

 

Of those five, you have to assume that 2-3 are freshmen skill players on a yearly basis, who may or may not see time.

 

So one or two big men taking up those final scholarship spots is a reasonable number, even if they don't pan out or see limited action at best.

 

Also, stashing away 1-2 big men still gives your larger skill players something to practice against. You can't learn to post up and rebound by practicing against guards all day. (At least not effectively).

 

If you have a very basic 8-man rotation (G-G-F-F-C, G-F-G/F), your final five players could be two "Bigs" (C-C) and three young skill players (G-F-G/F).

 

The big plus to having a big man is that at this level you are going to play a team that doesn't, and if they're not good enough to press, trap and run you out of the gym, even a stiff big man can make a contribution against a small team. And at best he could dominate a small team.

Edited July 18, 2004 by DaneFan2k3

[Dane Pound]

I agree with that number and maybe one more. I'm not sure if it statistically bears out but it seems like big guys have more injuries. That may not be true of all teams but it certainly seems like it for Albany.

In fact as much as I like the lineup for this coming year I'd like to hear Hughes is returning just to have another big guy on the roster. Seeing how we've made some pretty average centers look terrific by guarding them with smaller players I can't wait to see opponents have to play someone their own size or bigger.

By the way Patch, speaking of big guys, have you heard anything about the Ryan Sheilds guy they were talking about on the $iena board? Insiders mentioned Albany was interested and then said he had a scholarship offer but didn't say who. It'd would be a nice luxury to be able to bring a guy like that in next year and play behind Z and Dyson while he gets used to DI basketball.

[professor]

I would think Albany is looking to recruit two big guy's since Wyatt and St. Hillaire will graduate. You would have Zollner, Dyson, B.Wilson, and Knotts left so I would think Brown would add two more big guy's.

[Patch]

At UA's level the Coaching staff tries to get involved with as many Bigs as possible knowing that most will go higher.

 

I would believe that on next year's "wish list" you will have as the professor states 2 Big Guys, not necessarily 6'9"+ guys but as big as we can get - a real rugged PF even at 6'6" or 6'7" about 230+ would be a welcome addition.

 

I would think Albany is looking to recruit two big guy's since Wyatt and St. Hillaire will graduate. - professor