BASKETBALL New offer for '19 class

[MTFNBY5]

Just noticed that we apparently extended an offer earlier this week to Curt Lewis, a 6'4" PG for "this" year's class.

If true this beings up several questions not the least of which are:

Is this an "insurance offer" just in case or are we confident someone is leaving therefore freeing up a scholarship?

And, just how many perimeter players does a team need to carry?

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

I think we know CNM MO...he likes big guards that can flex - think about how our existing smaller guards are rebounding so well - amazed at the rebounds both Sims and Green have...our bigs tend to get the offensive rebounds but on the defensive side, our guards either lead or have about the same amount of rebounds....and of course, Green and Sims are small. Sims averages 5.4 rebounds per game and leads us in defensive rebounding.

So don't think of these guys as just perimeter players. And if this is our strategy then we need lots of them.

 

[TrueBlue147]

The loss to ODU should show him that we need big post players. We could not do anything in the post because of their big man, and because of that they were able to smother Green and Sims. We have to have big men to compete in this league. Going up against Bassey Thursday will prove this case again.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

The loss to ODU should show him that we need big post players. We could not do anything in the post because of their big man, and because of that they were able to smother Green and Sims. We have to have big men to compete in this league. Going up against Bassey Thursday will prove this case again.

And yet we out rebounded them...but when the 7'1" guy was in it was tough. I prefer to say we need "good" post players not necessarily "big" post players. Its more about team rebounding in CNM system.

 

[MTLynn]

Both ODU (35.8%) and MT (31.7%) shot the ball poorly.

That said, the ODU guards hit more shots than the MT guards and the MT bigs hit more shots than the ODU bigs.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401088377

 

[MT01]

And yet we out rebounded them...but when the 7'1" guy was in it was tough. I prefer to say we need "good" post players not necessarily "big" post players. Its more about team rebounding in CNM system.

We were actually out rebounded. We benefited by four team rebounds which typically occurs when a ball is tipped out of bounds by the other team following a shot.

And their bigs shot 10 free throws. Our bigs (err...our taller players) shot three. It was literally the difference in the game.

This is perhaps my biggest gripe with CNM. I don't care about style of play as much if you can actually find the players. Easier said than done. But I do care about defense where we have gotten better but still give up way too many easy buckets. But you cannot win this league without strong 6'8" 6'9" guys who both post up and pop out and knock down 17 foot jump shots and give you 8 to 10 rebounds a game. If CNM doesn't get that he will never win this league. Ever. It's simply mandatory in league like this one which performs at the lower end of the high majors. It's simply not going to happen. You are never going to win this league with a bunch of 6'5" guys.

 

[MightyRaider]

No we didn't.

And their bigs shot 10 free throws. Our bigs (err...our taller players) shot three. It was literally the difference in the game.

This is perhaps my biggest gripe with CNM. I don't care about style of play as much if you can actually find the players. Easier said than done. But I do care about defense where we have gotten better but still give up way too many easy buckets. But you cannot win this league without strong 6'8" 6'9" guys who both post up and pop out and knock down 17 foot jump shots and give you 8 to 10 rebounds a game. If CNM doesn't get that he will never win this league. Ever. It's simply mandatory in league like this one which performs at the lower end of the high majors. It's simply not going to happen. You are never going to win this league with a bunch of 6'5" guys.

Reggie Upshaw comes to mind as that type of player. I want the ability to grind out games inside when the outside shots are not falling.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

We were actually out rebounded. We benefited by four team rebounds which typically occurs when a ball is tipped out of bounds by the other team following a shot.

And their bigs shot 10 free throws. Our bigs (err...our taller players) shot three. It was literally the difference in the game.

This is perhaps my biggest gripe with CNM. I don't care about style of play as much if you can actually find the players. Easier said than done. But I do care about defense where we have gotten better but still give up way too many easy buckets. But you cannot win this league without strong 6'8" 6'9" guys who both post up and pop out and knock down 17 foot jump shots and give you 8 to 10 rebounds a game. If CNM doesn't get that he will never win this league. Ever. It's simply mandatory in league like this one which performs at the lower end of the high majors. It's simply not going to happen. You are never going to win this league with a bunch of 6'5" guys.[/QUOpoTE]

All fair points. I agree with you...I just think we are very limited this year due to the talent. lack of size and what I am noticing is despite all our weaknesses we are playing much better basketball than earlier in the year. We really are limited. I was at the ODU game, we looked like a HS team versus a college team (ODU). And yet we were right there up till the last few minutes.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

To MTO1

Not sure what I wrote posted properly - trying again.


All fair points. I agree with you...I just think we are very limited this year due to the talent. lack of size and what I am noticing is despite all our weaknesses we are playing much better basketball than earlier in the year. We really are limited offensively. I was at the ODU game, we looked like a HS team versus a college team (ODU). And yet we were right there up till the last few minutes.

 

[MT01]

I didn't think we were going to witness any improvement this year. So, there is something to take from this season - particularly the last couple of weeks. Nick has a difficult road ahead of him though to flip this roster.

 

[blueboro007]

Their 7'1" guy was a non-factor...did not even play that many minutes.

 

[crposton]

I thought Scurry did fairly well against their 7'1" post. Next year we will have the incoming 6'8" freshman, Dishman (6'6" 220), Scurry (6'6" 230), and as of now Massenburg (6'8" 225). Not to mention a 6'8" guard in Crump. He puts on 10-15 lbs. and he will be basically the same size as Hawthorne is right now. For reference when we beat Michigan State we started Harris at 6'8" and Upshaw at 6'7" both around 225-230. We did have Gamble and Walters coming off the bench at 6'9" and 6'10". So with Dishman and Scurry we are giving up 1 inch and the ability to take people outside with consistency (unless Dishman can). I am sure McDevitt would love to have 6'9" and 6'10" forwards that can play his style, but most players like that end up at Duke, UK, etc. Having a bunch of 6'5" guards will help us. I am not arguing the fact we need bigger players. I am just pointing out we have never really been that big of a team. I am hoping next year's class has another player or two at 6'8" or taller.

 

[MTBig Blue]

I think McDevitt will look at the transfer market and try to bring in a forward that can play immediately.

 

[RandallThomason]

I thought Scurry did fairly well against their 7'1" post. Next year we will have the incoming 6'8" freshman, Dishman (6'6" 220), Scurry (6'6" 230), and as of now Massenburg (6'8" 225). Not to mention a 6'8" guard in Crump. He puts on 10-15 lbs. and he will be basically the same size as Hawthorne is right now. For reference when we beat Michigan State we started Harris at 6'8" and Upshaw at 6'7" both around 225-230. We did have Gamble and Walters coming off the bench at 6'9" and 6'10". So with Dishman and Scurry we are giving up 1 inch and the ability to take people outside with consistency (unless Dishman can). I am sure McDevitt would love to have 6'9" and 6'10" forwards that can play his style, but most players like that end up at Duke, UK, etc. Having a bunch of 6'5" guards will help us. I am not arguing the fact we need bigger players. I am just pointing out we have never really been that big of a team. I am hoping next year's class has another player or two at 6'8" or taller.

We didn’t have Walters against Michigan State. That was his sit year. He played very well against Minnesota in 2017, but wasn’t a part of the 2016 team. Gamble is the last remaining player of the guys that played against Michigan State.

 

[crposton]

Yea you are right.

 

[crposton]

Did we pull the Demontay Dixon offer? Would be a good get at 6'9" and would likely contribute right away.

 

[MTFNBY5]

Was Demontay Dixon a qualifier? Will he graduate JUCO after one year therefore able to be a member of this year's class?

 

[crposton]

Yea early qualifier with 3 years eligibility from what I have read.

 

[dukewayne]

I have been pretty outspoken in my defense of CNM this year, and I continue to support him. Still, calling it like I see it, the lack of size in the frontcourt has been one of my biggest complaints. I haven't made too much noise about it since he was so late to recruiting in the offseason for MT that almost all the players were already picked over. As he is now starting to get some time to recruit, I really do hope he is earnestly pursuing strong big and good frontcourt players. In the early signing period, he at least signed one frontcourt player at 6-8 or 6-9. That is good in addition to the SF type signee around 6-6 also signed. Despite landing some good signees in the early going, it would still seem imperative for CNM to land one more frontcourt player in the 6-8 or above range.

Particularly playing some of the top teams in the conference, hopefully CNM is getting a good feel for the necessity of signing good big and strong frontcourt players in order to seriously compete for C-USA championships. ODU was really strong in the frontcourt, and it will only get tougher with WKU and that monster they have at Center.

 

[dukewayne]

I thought Scurry did fairly well against their 7'1" post. Next year we will have the incoming 6'8" freshman, Dishman (6'6" 220), Scurry (6'6" 230), and as of now Massenburg (6'8" 225). Not to mention a 6'8" guard in Crump. He puts on 10-15 lbs. and he will be basically the same size as Hawthorne is right now. For reference when we beat Michigan State we started Harris at 6'8" and Upshaw at 6'7" both around 225-230. We did have Gamble and Walters coming off the bench at 6'9" and 6'10". So with Dishman and Scurry we are giving up 1 inch and the ability to take people outside with consistency (unless Dishman can). I am sure McDevitt would love to have 6'9" and 6'10" forwards that can play his style, but most players like that end up at Duke, UK, etc. Having a bunch of 6'5" guards will help us. I am not arguing the fact we need bigger players. I am just pointing out we have never really been that big of a team. I am hoping next year's class has another player or two at 6'8" or taller.

It does seem that CNM's approach to tall athletic guards and SFs has already started to demonstrate some positive outcomes. It still seems that the lack of depth and quality in the frontcourt has continued to be a hindrance to the team. As much as Gamble has good a good attitude, length, and athleticism, let's face it, he has never really developed beyond being a role player 2nd string type PF/C. Still Gamble has to start and get a bulk of the mins in the frontcourt. For lacking height, Scurry seems to make the most of his situation. Hawthorne brings tremendous effort and hustle, but the quality of depth is just not there this year.

 

[dukewayne]

I thought Scurry did fairly well against their 7'1" post. Next year we will have the incoming 6'8" freshman, Dishman (6'6" 220), Scurry (6'6" 230), and as of now Massenburg (6'8" 225). Not to mention a 6'8" guard in Crump. He puts on 10-15 lbs. and he will be basically the same size as Hawthorne is right now. For reference when we beat Michigan State we started Harris at 6'8" and Upshaw at 6'7" both around 225-230. We did have Gamble and Walters coming off the bench at 6'9" and 6'10". So with Dishman and Scurry we are giving up 1 inch and the ability to take people outside with consistency (unless Dishman can). I am sure McDevitt would love to have 6'9" and 6'10" forwards that can play his style, but most players like that end up at Duke, UK, etc. Having a bunch of 6'5" guards will help us. I am not arguing the fact we need bigger players. I am just pointing out we have never really been that big of a team. I am hoping next year's class has another player or two at 6'8" or taller.

While MT had that great season and the huge win vs Mich St, I've long maintained that MT was one true Center away that year from the Sweet 16 or possibly even further. Against the style of play of Mich St, the athletic stretch 4s for both starters for MT in the frontcourt worked out. Then in the next round, Syracuse brought big size with that sticky zone they play. It seemed to have the effect of forcing you to score over them. That is where MT's frontcourt struggled most of the game. Upshaw and Harris at 6-8 and 6-7 were being forced to have to shoot over 6-11 athletes and good defenders in the low post or high post. Raymond was like the third option at PG due to injuries, but he worked out well vs Cuse at 6-4 vs their backcourt size. MT was able to stay in the game with a chance to win until Raymond fouled out. Of course once he fouled out, Syracuse ran away it. It always seemed that if MT had a quality Center in the 6-11 range who could post up with that similar size to have a reasonable chance of scoring in the face of that Syracuse zone, then maybe MT would have been able to get a good shot at winning that game.

Over the years in the Big East, many rivals such as Georgetown were able to compete each year vs Syracuse with plenty of size and depth at Center. I could be wrong, but it seems those type of high quality big Centers are what separates good NCAA tournament teams from Final Four teams.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

We are NEVER going to get high quality big centers...these guys don't go to MT. The only way we beat a team like Syracuse was to shoot well and open things up, we didn't and once we went cold we lost, its really that simple. Even today, our biggest problem isn't lack of height, its poor shooting, we are hitting 41%, this is lower than just about any team that we play. And our 6'6" center Scrurry is hitting a very high % which is interesting...he's hitting .590%, to me, the biggest difference lately has been his play and Sims play.

We have multiple guards, including 2 starters hitting below .400. Crump before he got hurt was below .400. Sims is the only guard that plays a lot of minutes above .400. Now some of this is the difficulty of shots we have to take and some of that may be lack of height.

Now don't get me wrong, who doesn't want taller players...our biggest issue right now is lack of offensive fire power not height. We are playing decent D and rebounding despite the lack of height.

We also know next years team will look drastically different...I think the new guys will be an upgrade and hopefully the new guys this year will develop.

 

[dukewayne]

Wow, my friend. The two of us are seeing things differently on the hows and whys for the performance of the team. Although I have not checked the stats recently, your stats on the players seem accurate enough to me. That part I do not dispute. My main focus or contention is on the reason for the shooting percentages. Obviously there are a myriad of factors effecting overall shooting percentages. For MT, it has become increasingly clear to me that their improved outcomes are mainly a result of the players learning how to play in the coach's system and time playing together to improve on court chemistry. Shot selection is a key factor in those shooting percentages. Well timed and placed passes are crucial in helping shot selection (and assists). I know most of this is obvious. I'm just focusing and think it's important for a successful college team to focus on those important details that help produce better overall success. In my opinion, MT has finally been able to start to pull together all these details in addition to increasing experience and improving chemistry.

I'm not suggesting height alone is some singular factor in quality and success of a bball player. Obviously, it certainly helps. While it is more challenging for C-USA type programs, decent quality Centers can be landed including MT. Despite Kermit's preference for smaller stretch 4s, he still often seemed to have a decent to good Center with legit size, Brandon Walters & Torin Walker come to mind. It can be done. For doubts, see tonight vs WKU who has a 5 star Center and likely high pick in the NBA draft. I'm just saying it can be done.

For all of Scurry's success and good shooting, he was still effectively shut down by a tough, big, and strong ODU defense despite coming on the heels of a few highly productive games. No doubt Scurry is a good player. Despite lacking a couple of more inches of height, he is huge as in strong. He also has incredible length i.e. wingspan. Also, he has great bball IQ in my opinion. He knows how to position himself well with patience and strength to score even amongst the trees.

While aspects such a quickness and bball IQ can negate some of the height in the post, most of the high quality and especially elite programs have Centers with height, quickness, and bball IQ. When facing quality athletic players who are not allowing you to get around them, a 6-7 Forward has more difficulty and decreasing chances of making a shot in the low post if they are having to shoot over an outstretched 6-11 defender compared to a similarly sized 6-7 defender. Regarding Syracuse, their well coached and recruited team are expert at making opponents shoot over their quality size.

Tangentially related but worth mentioning, the team and coaches have done a real good job of getting the extra effort for rebounds. Rebounding can really help on nights when the shooting percentage is off.

Lastly, this team has been improving. To me, they are impressively improving from where they were in the first half of the season. With key players returning and much being added, I fully expect the team to improve next year as well.

 

[TrueBlue147]

We are NEVER going to get high quality big centers...these guys don't go to MT. The only way we beat a team like Syracuse was to shoot well and open things up, we didn't and once we went cold we lost, its really that simple. Even today, our biggest problem isn't lack of height, its poor shooting, we are hitting 41%, this is lower than just about any team that we play. And our 6'6" center Scrurry is hitting a very high % which is interesting...he's hitting .590%, to me, the biggest difference lately has been his play and Sims play.

We have multiple guards, including 2 starters hitting below .400. Crump before he got hurt was below .400. Sims is the only guard that plays a lot of minutes above .400. Now some of this is the difficulty of shots we have to take and some of that may be lack of height.

Now don't get me wrong, who doesn't want taller players...our biggest issue right now is lack of offensive fire power not height. We are playing decent D and rebounding despite the lack of height.

We also know next years team will look drastically different...I think the new guys will be an upgrade and hopefully the new guys this year will develop.

No one is saying that we have to have Tim Duncan here. We just need more Shawn Joneses, Jacorey Williams, and Laron Dendys not 6'-6' post players. Also there is more to basketball than the offensive side of the ball. We need tall post players desperately for the defensive side. We will see tonight how well our small post players defend against Bassey.

I don't understand why you're arguing against recruiting tall post players? That's an odd position to take in basketball recruiting.

 

[crposton]

Gamble is not that small of a post player. 6'9" 230 is plenty big. I do not think anyone is arguing against recruiting tall players. From what I see they are saying height is not everything. Of course no one is arguing that either. I think the biggest problem on this board and on other social media is people think that if someone does not completely agree they are completely against. I mean in that post he actually said he would want taller players, so obviously not arguing against recruiting taller players. Would you rather have Gamble at 6'9" or Scurry at 6'6"? Some may say Gamble and others will say Scurry. Neither is necessarily wrong. They provide different things. I think Massey will get his, but putting Gamble and Massenburg (if needed) on him and playing zone should be sufficient enough. Gamble is 6'9 230 and Bassey is 6'11" 245, so it is not like he towers over him. Next year Jackson will be our biggest player at 6'8" 230, so same thing big enough. I would love to have our post players being 6'8" to 6'10" with guards all around 6'4" to 6'6". I think that would be ideal, but I would give up a 6'8" player for a better 6'6" player.

 

[MTCasey]

Duke, good post and I agree with you for the most part. I couldn’t help but chuckle, however, when you said that Kermit “often” had a good center with legit size, and proceeded to name Walters and Walker. Walters was a key contributor for a year and part of another; Walker rarely saw the floor. And that’s basically it in terms of true 5s.

Granted, we were usually big enough down low in most cases, but no one can argue us having a 6’10 back to the basket guy has been the norm the last several years.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

To be clear. I’d love CNM to get the tallest players he can get that can play and thrive in his system.

We have a new coach with a different philosophy; one that I believe can be successful and in a few years fun to watch.

Our roster was gutted due to The players we lost due to graduation and the ones we told to leave. It is also partly gutted due to Kermit’s philosophy and the multiple grad transfers. His risks paid off right up till this year - his leaving was perfect for him. But he left one crappy roster. So some of the posts I see seem to not acknowledge what went down. If I came on to strong or misunderstood your points I apologize.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

I know it’s only halftime but our very small ream is out rebounding WKU 21-15. We have the lead despite only hitting 38% of our shots.

 

[crposton]

To be clear. I’d love CNM to get the tallest players he can get that can play and thrive in his system.

We have a new coach with a different philosophy; one that I believe can be successful and in a few years fun to watch.

Our roster was gutted due to The players we lost due to graduation and the ones we told to leave. It is also partly gutted due to Kermit’s philosophy and the multiple grad transfers. His risks paid off right up till this year - his leaving was perfect for him. But he left one crappy roster. So some of the posts I see seem to not acknowledge what went down. If I came on to strong or misunderstood your points I apologize.

I agree with you. He recruited some good players in Upshaw, Giddy, Perrin, Kerry, Shaun Jones, etc., but he also relied on transfers of Jacorey and King. The best post he left us with was Gamble. Hawthorne is a true SF and Massenburg and Thomas are both not that great.

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

I know it’s only halftime but our very small ream is out rebounding WKU 21-15. We have the lead despite only hitting 38% of our shots.

Our little team crushed them on the boards 46=30. But we shot even worse in the 2nd half and lose

 

[MTLynn]

Winning and losing almost always comes down to shooting.

Kermit's teams always played great defense and when they lost it was because of poor shooting. Once Kermit signed Dendy, Massey, Knight and Cintron the offense improved to the point of winning championships.

This years team has got to shoot better as 34.4% shooting (tonight's shooting percentage) ain't gonna win many games

 

[sWiley]

ugh

 

[dukewayne]

Duke, good post and I agree with you for the most part. I couldn’t help but chuckle, however, when you said that Kermit “often” had a good center with legit size, and proceeded to name Walters and Walker. Walters was a key contributor for a year and part of another; Walker rarely saw the floor. And that’s basically it in terms of true 5s.

Granted, we were usually big enough down low in most cases, but no one can argue us having a 6’10 back to the basket guy has been the norm the last several years.

I wouldn't necessarily say it was the norm for Kermit. During his 6 big years of success, it seems MT had some true Center size for 3 or 4 of those years. That may not amount to the norm, but it was a reasonably decent amount of that time.

Walters could be absolutely dominant when he really brought the intensity to games in his senior year. Walker wasn't a major contributor, but he didn't necessarily have to be with a good number of good sized 6-8 and 6-9 frontcourt players who were pretty darn good. What I recall about Walker was that he was available when that true center type size was needed. It seemed that often Walker's size was needed on defense as much if not more than on offense. I thought he did a decent to good job for a role player.

Take the WKU game the other night for instance. MT could have benefitted from a decent role player type of true center at 6-11 or so to help with Bassey. Even a role player center who could provide 12-15 mins of depth off the bench especially when the fouls were piling up and Hawthorne was injured would have been helpful perhaps more so on the defensive end.

 

[dukewayne]

To be clear. I’d love CNM to get the tallest players he can get that can play and thrive in his system.

We have a new coach with a different philosophy; one that I believe can be successful and in a few years fun to watch.

Our roster was gutted due to The players we lost due to graduation and the ones we told to leave. It is also partly gutted due to Kermit’s philosophy and the multiple grad transfers. His risks paid off right up till this year - his leaving was perfect for him. But he left one crappy roster. So some of the posts I see seem to not acknowledge what went down. If I came on to strong or misunderstood your points I apologize.

I didn't even see anything to apologize for. Just good discussion.

I absolutely agree with you regarding Kermit and the roster disaster. It sure put CNM in a tough spot. It was another factor that also made the timing of Kermit's departure perfect for Kermit. I'm sure it's not the only time a college coach took another position upon the completion of key players' eligibility, and just before the rebuild job starts in earnest. Most people understand his motives for that big fat $EC contract and the preferred status come March selection. I know I also understood the appeal of the opportunity to return so close to home. The whole timing of the thing in regards to the roster stunk for the rest of us.

I'm glad to know that CNM seems to prefer recruiting players out of HS who will likely be here for 4 years so that there is not such the large turnover every year or two. I'm not against a transfer or JUCO recruit; I just hope that transfers and JUCOs would be more of the exception rather than the rule. It is heartening to know that Sims still has 2 more years and Johnson is a Freshman with another 3 years to play.

 

[dukewayne]

hey hey hey, what is this? It seems there may have been some assumptions regarding my suggesting size in the frontcourt having something to do with rebounding. I don't think I said that particularly since I don't even believe that. Rebounding, in my view, is about attitude and effort. I even mentioned in one of these same posts before the game how impressed I've been with CNM getting the team to rebound. Further, I mentioned how rebounding helps when the shots aren't falling. Which is exactly what was happening vs WKU.

Again, a main part of my argument has been about the details that affect shooting percentage. I think an argument could be made that those details include difficulty shooting high percentages when faced with 6-11 7-0 frontcourt defenders of which WKU had 2 of on the court at the same time. Note: Scurry who typically hits at nearly 60% was short of even 50% vs WKU. Matter of fact, at one of key points in the closing mins of the game, Bassey blocked 2 of Scurry's shots from the paint or near the paint. Scurry then gave up on trying to shot over Bassey when he then unsuccessfully tried to pass around Bassey. Bassey ended up taking the ball with WKU going the other way. It was a critical series of events when MT was still battling to keep chances for a win alive. At that point, Bassey's height and length were just stifling to MT's forwards.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the size or lack of size overall effects rebounding. I am suggesting that height or even length are a factor in shooting percentage. Whether it be a defender towering over a shooter making the shot even more difficult, or a tall player posting up with a good height advantage it all can all be a factor in shot success.

While I have not necessarily been arguing for only shooting percentage, it does bring up a good question for discussion. What game stats are most highly correlated with winning? Many stats must factor largely. I gather asst/turnover is a key stat, but I have no idea which are most key. Randall, where are you?

 

[JohnDavidBlue]

I don't think a center would have helped us as much against Syracuse. That Princeton style combined with coming off the mountain did more to derail our sweet sixteen 16 hopes than anything. We have never had a Popye Jones type come to the Boro.....Lee Nosse was better chucking the 3 than playing post. I'll take the CNM philosophy any day over relying on a big man because I haven't seen the post type that comes to MT and break out.

While MT had that great season and the huge win vs Mich St, I've long maintained that MT was one true Center away that year from the Sweet 16 or possibly even further. Against the style of play of Mich St, the athletic stretch 4s for both starters for MT in the frontcourt worked out. Then in the next round, Syracuse brought big size with that sticky zone they play. It seemed to have the effect of forcing you to score over them. That is where MT's frontcourt struggled most of the game. Upshaw and Harris at 6-8 and 6-7 were being forced to have to shoot over 6-11 athletes and good defenders in the low post or high post. Raymond was like the third option at PG due to injuries, but he worked out well vs Cuse at 6-4 vs their backcourt size. MT was able to stay in the game with a chance to win until Raymond fouled out. Of course once he fouled out, Syracuse ran away it. It always seemed that if MT had a quality Center in the 6-11 range who could post up with that similar size to have a reasonable chance of scoring in the face of that Syracuse zone, then maybe MT would have been able to get a good shot at winning that game.

Over the years in the Big East, many rivals such as Georgetown were able to compete each year vs Syracuse with plenty of size and depth at Center. I could be wrong, but it seems those type of high quality big Centers are what separates good NCAA tournament teams from Final Four teams.

 

[crposton]

 

[Danielhammaker]

https://247sports.com/college/michi...earing-interest-from-Michigan-State-51925712/

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

I don't think a center would have helped us as much against Syracuse. That Princeton style combined with coming off the mountain did more to derail our sweet sixteen 16 hopes than anything. We have never had a Popye Jones type come to the Boro.....Lee Nosse was better chucking the 3 than playing post. I'll take the CNM philosophy any day over relying on a big man because I haven't seen the post type that comes to MT and break out.

If we recall, we were even with Cuse early in the 2nd half because we were hitting outside shots...the only way to beat them is to make them defend the entire court (means hitting a higher % of outside shots) this and only this will give us room to operate in the post. Then we went cold and they dominated us.

Guard play will always determine how good we are. Post players definitely help, but the one's that dominate the game don't go to MT.