Hogville Info
• 9,372,670 Posts
• 385,150 Topics
• 21,569 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Listen NOW:Game ON 103.3 
  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Gafford hurt?  (Read 7384 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

niels_boar

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 354
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #50 on: May 19, 2017, 12:44:36 pm »

That 93-94 team would crush this team, too much depth , too much size , to much strength an to much shooting..

I'm not arguing that any team next year or in my case the next is better than the '93-'94 team.  I haven't even seen 75% of those rosters play.  Just looking at needs.

However, I don't think we have a crying need to add more bigs for 2018 at this point for the sake of adding a big.  We will if Gafford is one-and-done.  Otherwise, it will depend on how the roster pans out next year that will determine our greatest need. 

Will some combination of Jones, Garland, Bailey, and Hall finally solve our small wing problem?  The most dire shortcoming that we have had in size is perpetually playing a 6-3 guard on the wing.  Going from 6-2 or 6-3 to 6-6 or 6-7 on the wing would do more to increase our effective size than going from 6-7 to 6-9 at PF, which we will be doing in any case with Perry. 

Can Hazen, Bailey, Perry, or Hall be a legit shooting option at the four?  If they can't, I'd rather add a skilled combo player at the four than a project big when we already have three 6-9+ players to rotate underneath. 

Will Harris or Garland be ready to take over the point?  Another PG might be necessary if they can't.

If all those needs are met, and I'm not saying they aren't, add a development big that sits for year like Thompson did.  I'm assuming a top-100 big will look at Henderson, Gafford, and Perry and look elsewhere for playing time.

Logged

Hollywood_HOGan45

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,847
  • Hollywood could coach better than nutt.
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #51 on: May 19, 2017, 01:52:43 pm »

That 93-94 team would crush this team, too much depth , too much size , to much strength an to much shooting..

That team would crush a lot of teams. One of the best teams of the 1990s. Any team that could overcome Duke in a title game in North Carolina, stop Kentucky's 35 game home winning streak, and paste a #1 seed undefeated big 8 team by over 50 points has IT.

Those guys will never get the credit they deserve nationally due to not winning against UCLA for #2 but in my mind they're one of the better teams since the NCAA went to 64 teams in 1985.
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

HogsonHicks

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 958
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #52 on: May 19, 2017, 04:11:25 pm »


I'm not changing the .............. narrative.  When I said the team would be bigger, I was thinking of what we would probably put on the court in 2018 versus what we actually put on the court in '94.  By your reasoning the team would have been bigger the last four years if we had put Skipper in uniform and had him wave a towel on the bench for forty minutes.  That doesn't make sense. There's a reason Pomeroy weights by minutes when looking at sizes of teams.

Look at what happened in the championship game the next season.  UCLA and Arkansas were exactly the same height when weighted by minutes.  Other than Zidek, Arkansas had a lot more beef.  However, UCLA could guard our one undersized elite post-scorer one-on-one with Zidek.  UCLA played 6-8, 217 lb Ed O'Bannon for 40 minutes at PF.  He was basically a sleek combo SF/PF.  We had two guys on the bench 6-10+ and 250 lb+ and another 6-9/265 lb PF.  Not one of them could punish UCLA inside for playing a string bean at PF and force Zidek on a big.  Dillard played almost as much as Wilson and Robinson combined off the bench.

The Bruins shut down Corliss (3-16) without doubling him. It probably isn't a coincidence that Stewart and Thurman went 2 of 12 from the arc.  Get this. UCLA had 20 TOs and made 2 treys.  They won by 11.  They moidered us inside. 21 offensive rebounds. They rebounded 55% of their misses.  They outscored us on deuces 62 - 36.  That's not a team that could bully quality opponents inside with size.  Our bigs were inconsistent role players that occasionally rose up with big games. 

Wilson and Robinson put us over the hump to get a NC with a big game here and there, but the heart of that team when the chips were down was Beck, McDaniel, Thurman, Stewart, and Corliss.  That's an average sized perimeter squad with 6-6 and 6-9 at forward.  Pitino said that team was Corliss, CNR, and role players.  Corliss was our inside game.  Looking at that roster, I appreciate him more every year.  What a freak.  If you replace him with an average college forward, I'm not sure we are in the tournament, probably the bubble. All those shooters would have had to take a lot more contested shots. I don't see how you can argue that the '94 team was effectively big if we played Scotty Thurman at SF and the most important player was a 6-6 PF.  We rarely had two guys over 6-6 on the court at the same time.

Good grief, you type novels Tolstoy would be proud of seeing. I agree with most of this, although UCLA beat us inside not with size, but with breaking our press and scoring easy baskets (layups/dunks) against our press, which Nolan stubbornly refused to back off for much of the game.  Zidek did well defensively, but Corliss also missed a lot of shots he typically made.

Again, the '94 team was huge in size and girth. The '18 team won't be as big, but still much larger than we've had since.  No volume of words changes that fact, and I agreed with the intent of your comments.

By the way, that '94-95 team would destroy any team we've had since, while also beating  that UCLA team 8 out of 10 times. Let's not belittle them to prove your point.
Logged

Hollywood_HOGan45

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,847
  • Hollywood could coach better than nutt.
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2017, 07:59:06 am »


I'm not changing the .............. narrative.  When I said the team would be bigger, I was thinking of what we would probably put on the court in 2018 versus what we actually put on the court in '94.  By your reasoning the team would have been bigger the last four years if we had put Skipper in uniform and had him wave a towel on the bench for forty minutes.  That doesn't make sense. There's a reason Pomeroy weights by minutes when looking at sizes of teams.

Look at what happened in the championship game the next season.  UCLA and Arkansas were exactly the same height when weighted by minutes.  Other than Zidek, Arkansas had a lot more beef.  However, UCLA could guard our one undersized elite post-scorer one-on-one with Zidek.  UCLA played 6-8, 217 lb Ed O'Bannon for 40 minutes at PF.  He was basically a sleek combo SF/PF.  We had two guys on the bench 6-10+ and 250 lb+ and another 6-9/265 lb PF.  Not one of them could punish UCLA inside for playing a string bean at PF and force Zidek on a big.  Dillard played almost as much as Wilson and Robinson combined off the bench.

The Bruins shut down Corliss (3-16) without doubling him. It probably isn't a coincidence that Stewart and Thurman went 2 of 12 from the arc.  Get this. UCLA had 20 TOs and made 2 treys.  They won by 11.  They moidered us inside. 21 offensive rebounds. They rebounded 55% of their misses.  They outscored us on deuces 62 - 36.  That's not a team that could bully quality opponents inside with size.  Our bigs were inconsistent role players that occasionally rose up with big games. 

Wilson and Robinson put us over the hump to get a NC with a big game here and there, but the heart of that team when the chips were down was Beck, McDaniel, Thurman, Stewart, and Corliss.  That's an average sized perimeter squad with 6-6 and 6-9 at forward.  Pitino said that team was Corliss, CNR, and role players.  Corliss was our inside game.  Looking at that roster, I appreciate him more every year.  What a freak.  If you replace him with an average college forward, I'm not sure we are in the tournament, probably the bubble. All those shooters would have had to take a lot more contested shots. I don't see how you can argue that the '94 team was effectively big if we played Scotty Thurman at SF and the most important player was a 6-6 PF.  We rarely had two guys over 6-6 on the court at the same time.

The 92-93 team was still really good with Corliss injured. Scotty carried us to wins at Arizona and at Mizzou.
Logged

razorbackfanatic

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 841
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #54 on: May 31, 2017, 02:37:34 pm »

no... I played play ground ball against/and with him at James Park and the L&D and he was every bit 6' 7"...+ a little. Big dude.
Didn't Corliss measure out to be 6'5"1/2?

I've met him a couple of times. 6'5.5" is very accurate, which is about 6'7" by NBA standards. Jordan is 6'4.5" or 6'4.75"  and was always listed 6'6". They list shoes on size. When I've met him I've always said he might be 6'6" at the very most. He was a beast. Great college player.
Logged

nwahogfan1

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,099
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #55 on: June 01, 2017, 11:46:26 am »

Try being a fly on the wall in Hogville, then you would know that Austin had academic issues that kept most major colleges away except Wichita State.

Laughable excuse. We never really recruited this kid except for maybe an accasional letter.  Your suggesting WSU who has a very good program works a little harder maybe? 
Logged

ShadowHawg

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,946
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #56 on: June 01, 2017, 08:06:05 pm »

Laughable excuse. We never really recruited this kid except for maybe an accasional letter.  Your suggesting WSU who has a very good program works a little harder maybe?

Kid didn't have his grades in order until late, not just a test score. Can't play a lick of defense either.

Not a big time miss except for those who can't stand success by the current coach.
Logged

Ham Sandwich

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 302
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #57 on: June 02, 2017, 02:40:15 am »

Laughable excuse. We never really recruited this kid except for maybe an accasional letter.  Your suggesting WSU who has a very good program works a little harder maybe?

Laughable excuse? Reeves isn't the type of player that really fits with what we're doing. We are fine with out him and making a big deal out of a player like him is what's laughable.
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #58 on: June 02, 2017, 10:01:19 am »

I'm not arguing that any team next year or in my case the next is better than the '93-'94 team.  I haven't even seen 75% of those rosters play.  Just looking at needs.

However, I don't think we have a crying need to add more bigs for 2018 at this point for the sake of adding a big.  We will if Gafford is one-and-done.  Otherwise, it will depend on how the roster pans out next year that will determine our greatest need. 

Will some combination of Jones, Garland, Bailey, and Hall finally solve our small wing problem?  The most dire shortcoming that we have had in size is perpetually playing a 6-3 guard on the wing.  Going from 6-2 or 6-3 to 6-6 or 6-7 on the wing would do more to increase our effective size than going from 6-7 to 6-9 at PF, which we will be doing in any case with Perry. 

Can Hazen, Bailey, Perry, or Hall be a legit shooting option at the four?  If they can't, I'd rather add a skilled combo player at the four than a project big when we already have three 6-9+ players to rotate underneath. 

Will Harris or Garland be ready to take over the point?  Another PG might be necessary if they can't.

If all those needs are met, and I'm not saying they aren't, add a development big that sits for year like Thompson did.  I'm assuming a top-100 big will look at Henderson, Gafford, and Perry and look elsewhere for playing time.

Not trying to single you out, but I keep seeing references to Hall playing at the 4. It won't happen. For the 1,000th time, he is a small forward/wing in the same mold as a Michael Qualls, who spent 99% of his time at the 3 (always on the floor with 2 guards and a Coty Clake/Alandise Harris/Jacorey Williams playing the combo-4 spot, and BP or MK at the 5).

The only way that happens is if there are mass injuries/departures, or CMA goes undersized lineup in a rare occasion to exploit a matchup. There are times at ends of blowouts against cupcakes that CMA will flood the floor with freshmen and walkons to run out the clock in the last couple of possessions, so conceivably Hall could be a 5 in that scenario.

But I can only remember FEWER than a handful of time that Qualls was on the court with only one other guard (as a 2) or with 3 other guards (presumably as a 4). Hall, too, is a 3 all day every day.

Logged

niels_boar

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 354
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #59 on: June 02, 2017, 11:28:05 am »

Not trying to single you out, but I keep seeing references to Hall playing at the 4. It won't happen. For the 1,000th time, he is a small forward/wing in the same mold as a Michael Qualls, who spent 99% of his time at the 3 (always on the floor with 2 guards and a Coty Clake/Alandise Harris/Jacorey Williams playing the combo-4 spot, and BP or MK at the 5).

The only way that happens is if there are mass injuries/departures, or CMA goes undersized lineup in a rare occasion to exploit a matchup. There are times at ends of blowouts against cupcakes that CMA will flood the floor with freshmen and walkons to run out the clock in the last couple of possessions, so conceivably Hall could be a 5 in that scenario.

But I can only remember FEWER than a handful of time that Qualls was on the court with only one other guard (as a 2) or with 3 other guards (presumably as a 4). Hall, too, is a 3 all day every day.

CMA played 6-3 Watkins at the four more than once in a blue moon over the last two years.  The team will see a wide variety of matchups during the season and even within games.  There have been times that we really could have used a player that was a legit perimeter option at the #4 but not a significant mismatch on D when teams were daring the #4 to shoot.  Even though it won't be our base lineup, I could also see CMA putting a lineup of guys between 6-5 and 6-8 on the floor to dial up the pressure and pace against poor ballhandling teams or matching up with small ball.  We also need a player that we can stick there that handles well and knocks down FTs at a high rate to close out games. It's an option that we need, even if only for a crucial 4-minute run.   
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #60 on: June 02, 2017, 11:43:28 am »

CMA played 6-3 Watkins at the four more than once in a blue moon over the last two years.  The team will see a wide variety of matchups during the season and even within games.  There have been times that we really could have used a player that was a legit perimeter option at the #4 but not a significant mismatch on D when teams were daring the #4 to shoot.  Even though it won't be our base lineup, I could also see CMA putting a lineup of guys between 6-5 and 6-8 on the floor to dial up the pressure and pace against poor ballhandling teams or matching up with small ball.  It's an option that we need, even if only for a crucial 4-minute run.

Again, Hall won't play the 4. He's a 3, and just like Qualls, it will be a rare situation that he'll be on the floor with 3 guards. I described those rare situations that he might be on the floor w/3 guards and a big (injuries, rare match-up situations, end-of-game blowouts).  Guys like Clarke, Harris, Williams, Thomas, Bailey, and Osabuohien were/are 'tweeners who played/will play almost exclusively the combo-4, but Hall is not in the same mold. As for Watkins, CMA was forced to play him as a 3 (last 2 seasons), even a few times as a 4 (mostly in '15-16), because of limited personnel options the past 2 seasons. Hogs now have a stable of wings and combo-4s.
Logged

niels_boar

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 354
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #61 on: June 02, 2017, 01:06:33 pm »

Again, Hall won't play the 4. He's a 3, and just like Qualls, it will be a rare situation that he'll be on the floor with 3 guards. I described those rare situations that he might be on the floor w/3 guards and a big (injuries, rare match-up situations, end-of-game blowouts).  Guys like Clarke, Harris, Williams, Thomas, Bailey, and Osabuohien were/are 'tweeners who played/will play almost exclusively the combo-4, but Hall is not in the same mold. As for Watkins, CMA was forced to play him as a 3 (last 2 seasons), even a few times as a 4 (mostly in '15-16), because of limited personnel options the past 2 seasons. Hogs now have a stable of wings and combo-4s.

Again, I fully expect Cook, Thomas, Gafford, and Bailey to be our primary rotation at forward, but I disagree that CMA will play a #3 at the #4 in only the situations that you list.  You can repeat it again, and I still won't buy it.  We desperately needed a more perimeter oriented player at the #4 in not-rare situations last season.  We just didn't have one.  I don't care what Hall naturally is if he is a more offensively skilled perimeter player than Bailey, Cook, or Thomas and a more skilled perimeter defender than Cook or Thomas.  I don't know if that is true. I don't know how much the returning players will expand their games, but somebody needs to fill that niche. I would prefer for us to be ecstatically happy with Thomas, Cook, and Bailey filling all needs at the #4.

Qualls didn't play any at the #4 mainly because we already had a #3 Harris, who is almost the same size as Hall, getting most of the minutes there.  Harris was our best perimeter defender.  It didn't do much for our lineup at either end moving Qualls to the #4 and taking Harris out.  It made our defense worse, and there was rarely another guard available that made our O better unless Bell was en fuego.  The weakness on that team was the backcourt.  It wasn't like there was another wing on the bench that CMA was desperate to see on the court. Plus, our options at the #4 next season are almost identical as last season, pending summer improvement, with Gafford being the big option instead of Thompson.  CMA tends to put the five players on the court that are playing best in a particular game, and he doesn't care what anybody classifies them as.  I wouldn't even be shocked to see, say, Jones at the #4 briefly to get a team out of a zone.  And, no, I don't think he is a #4. 
« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 01:16:50 pm by niels_boar »
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #62 on: June 02, 2017, 01:21:46 pm »

Again, I fully expect Cook, Thomas, Gafford, and Bailey to be our primary rotation at forward, but I disagree that CMA will play a #3 at the #4 in only the situations that you list.  You can repeat it again, and I still won't buy it.  We desperately needed a more perimeter oriented player at the #4 in not-rare situations last season.  We just didn't have one.  I don't care what Hall naturally is if he is a more offensively skilled perimeter player than Bailey, Cook, or Thomas and a more skilled perimeter defender than Cook or Thomas.  I don't know if that is true. I don't know how much the returning players will expand their games, but somebody needs to fill that niche. I would prefer for us to be ecstatically happy with Thomas, Cook, and Bailey to fill all needs at the #4.

Qualls didn't play any at the #4 mainly because we already had a #3 Harris, who is almost the same size as Hall, getting most of the minutes there.  Harris was our best perimeter defender.  It didn't do much for our lineup at either end moving Qualls to the #4 and taking Harris out.  It made our defense worse, and there was rarely another guard available that made our O better unless Bell was en fuego.  Plus, our options at the #4 next season are almost identical as last season, pending summer improvement, with Gafford being the big option instead of Thompson.  CMA tends to put the five players on the court that are playing best in a particular game, and he doesn't care what anybody classifies them as.  I wouldn't even be shocked to see, say, Jones at the #4 to get a team out of a zone.  And, no, I don't think he is a #4.

Is it possible the Hogs will play 3 guards with Hall and a big on the floor? Yes, but it will be virtually the same amount time we saw Qualls in those situations, which was almost never. Hall is a 3. Hogs have three senior options at the 4 (Thomas, Cook, and Thompson when he is not playing the 5), plus a sophomore in Bailey who is more suited to the combo-4 than he is the 3, and now Gabe Osahuobien is another option who is more suited for that combo-4 role than Hall. After next season, Perry (ultimate combo-4) and Henderson (a true 4) arrive.

Again, outside of specific matchup situations (outside the norm), injuries, or just burning off the game clock in a blowout, you'll see Hall at the 3.
Logged

batmanfan

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2,105
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #63 on: June 02, 2017, 01:23:47 pm »

Is it possible the Hogs will play 3 guards with Hall and a big on the floor? Yes, but it will be virtually the same amount time we saw Qualls in those situations, which was almost never. Hall is a 3. Hogs have three senior options at the 4 (Thomas, Cook, and Thompson when he is not playing the 5), plus a sophomore in Bailey who is more suited to the combo-4 than he is the 3, and now Gabe Osahuobien is another option who is more suited for that combo-4 role than Hall. After next season, Perry (ultimate combo-4) and Henderson (a true 4) arrive.

Again, outside of specific matchup situations (outside the norm), injuries, or just burning off the game clock in a blowout, you'll see Hall at the 3.

In your opinion, do you think Gabe could come in an help some next year or do you figure he'll have a Jones/Hazen like freshman year? I figure he could get some PT if he has a skill that can translate over quickly.
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #64 on: June 02, 2017, 01:29:26 pm »

In your opinion, do you think Gabe could come in an help some next year or do you figure he'll have a Jones/Hazen like freshman year? I figure he could get some PT if he has a skill that can translate over quickly.

The Hogs are deep with veterans at the 4 spot, which is Gabe's most-likely position, which leads me to believe his role will be similar to guys like Jones and Hazen last season.
Logged

Rock City Razorback

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,005
  • Gotta love that helmet!
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #65 on: June 02, 2017, 01:59:42 pm »

Sooooooo, about Gafford...
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #66 on: June 02, 2017, 02:03:48 pm »

Sooooooo, about Gafford...

Dan told me recently his knee was better, but Hogs will get it evaluated soon if they haven't already.
Logged

rude1

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,307
  • Razorback Basketball Another New Beginning....
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #67 on: June 02, 2017, 08:10:52 pm »

Is it possible the Hogs will play 3 guards with Hall and a big on the floor? Yes, but it will be virtually the same amount time we saw Qualls in those situations, which was almost never. Hall is a 3. Hogs have three senior options at the 4 (Thomas, Cook, and Thompson when he is not playing the 5), plus a sophomore in Bailey who is more suited to the combo-4 than he is the 3, and now Gabe Osahuobien is another option who is more suited for that combo-4 role than Hall. After next season, Perry (ultimate combo-4) and Henderson (a true 4) arrive.

Again, outside of specific matchup situations (outside the norm), injuries, or just burning off the game clock in a blowout, you'll see Hall at the 3.
As others have said I am not sure I buy he will be totally a 3 only. You seriously can't see a lineup of Barford, Macon, Hall, Garland, and a Big? That lineup would be a nightmare to defend with 4 ball handlers on the floor at the same time. Who do you think is going to play the 4 in that lineup?  Bad comparison IMO with Qualls, totally different team who just didn't have  enough guards are versatile players to slide Qualls around.
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #68 on: June 02, 2017, 09:28:38 pm »

As others have said I am not sure I buy he will be totally a 3 only. You seriously can't see a lineup of Barford, Macon, Hall, Garland, and a Big? That lineup would be a nightmare to defend with 4 ball handlers on the floor at the same time. Who do you think is going to play the 4 in that lineup?  Bad comparison IMO with Qualls, totally different team who just didn't have  enough guards are versatile players to slide Qualls around.

Qualls is the best comparison because Arkansas has not had a true SF/wing since him until the addition of Hall.

Also, going back to Hogs' '14-15 NCAAT / 27-win team, the Hogs were much thinner on the frontline than they were in the backcourt, and they were much thinner on the frontline then than they are now -- Alandise and Jacorey splitting time at the 4, and BP dominating the 5 minutes w/MK getting just a few. That was it, yet Qualls still didn't play the 4 in that thin rotation. Hogs now have Thomas, Cook, Bailey and the addition of Gabe to play the 4, and Thompson and Gafford to split the 5 minutes, w/Trey being able to play some 4. A lot more size and depth up front. After next season, Perry and Henderson come in to offset the 4-spot losses of Thomas and Cook.

I'm not saying that a Macon, Barford, Garland, Hall, and a big lineup will NEVER happen, or even a Beard, Macon, Barford, Hall and a big lineup, or variations that include CJ Jones -- but that will be very limited given the frontline depth and experience that is readily available.

At same stage, Hall has better perimeter skill than Qualls, and he's a better perimeter defender. Certainly CMA likes to tinker with lineups and experiment, but Hall will be a 3 at Arkansas and will see very limited time as a SF/wing playing with 3 guards and a big.
Logged

Dominicanhog

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5,659
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #69 on: June 07, 2017, 08:20:23 am »

Mike wants enough players to match up with any type of team... his style is to play small and fast when need be and big across the front if that's what he thinks works.. he's not had enough players but he's getting there... 3 guards. or 3 bigs.. if DH is rebounding and can cover a certain 4 better than our PF's,  he'll do it.... agree it's limited opportunities, but Mike's system is versatility and often he'll use a smaller player to out quick a big...
Logged

Kevin McPherson

  • Moderator
  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,451
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #70 on: June 07, 2017, 11:25:32 am »

Mike wants enough players to match up with any type of team... his style is to play small and fast when need be and big across the front if that's what he thinks works.. he's not had enough players but he's getting there... 3 guards. or 3 bigs.. if DH is rebounding and can cover a certain 4 better than our PF's,  he'll do it.... agree it's limited opportunities, but Mike's system is versatility and often he'll use a smaller player to out quick a big...

Which is what I'm saying. Qualls had a few moments like that too, but very few. Whereas guys like Jacorey Williams (brought in to play the 3, and did as a freshman, but did not have the floor skill to stick there) and Adrio Bailey (jury still out, but looking more and more like he'll play that undersized combo-4 role) did or will carve out a role at the 4.

Arkansas has not had a legit SF/wing/3 since Qualls, and Hall finally brings that again. Then, you factor in Arkansas's versatility and depth at the 4 for really the first time ever w/5 deep of Thomas, Cook, Thompson, Bailey, and Osabuohien -- and I go back to the belief that you simply won't see Hall enough at the 4 to say he was a 3/4 combo. He is a 3, all day every day (w/rare exceptions) in similar fashion to Qualls.

Again, CMA will tinker and experiment in the non-con, and he may run a small lineup out on the floor in "matchup situations", but it won't be the norm. If Hall sees significant time as a 4 consistently, I'll be the first to search out this thread and admit I was wrong.




Logged

Polecat

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,976
  • WPS!
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #71 on: June 09, 2017, 02:49:38 pm »

I said the 2018 roster, as in 2018-19, if Gafford stays (for his sophomore season).
According to the always informed Jimmy Carter, the listed sizes of the 2018 roster (some of whom are still growing),


http://www.wholehogsports.com/news/2016/aug/19/future-arkansas-basketball-rosters/



Furthermore, if the heights are weighted by minutes, I suspect the 2018 roster will turn out to have a larger average height. Biggers, Martin, Biley, and Wilson all played less than 10 minutes per game.  They made contributions but were not critical rotation players.  My wild guess at the starters for 2018 would be Gafford - C, Perry - PF, CJ Jones - wing, Khalil Garland - SG, Jalen Harris - PG.  That's a bigger team than Robinson/Stewart, Corliss, Scotty, McDaniel, and Beck.   

That squad with Biggers had a lot of guys averaging more than 10-12 minutes per game



:)
Logged

jgphillips3

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 10,350
  • Life is too short for bad beer.
Re: Gafford hurt?
« Reply #72 on: June 15, 2017, 11:28:04 am »

That squad with Biggers had a lot of guys averaging more than 10-12 minutes per game

:)

Even so, this team could be cumulatively 10-12 inches biggers than that team.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas