At 6'3 210lbs, Malik seems a little "big" for PG which is why I suggested SG.Originally Posted by hokiepro
At 6'3 210lbs, Malik seems a little "big" for PG which is why I suggested SG.
Size has little to do with whether a player is a PG or SG. What matters more is their game and skill set.
I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather, not like the screaming passengers in his car.
You are correct that size has little to do with whether a player plays PG or SG. However, I looking at from what type of offense and defense JJ "wants" to run at VT. Assuming he wants to run an uptempo offense, then that suggests a PG that is quick enough to push it up the floor while not getting caught in a fullcourt trap. At 210lbs, does Malik have the same "quickness" as Adam and Devin (who are both under 190lbs)? Now if JJ doesn't want the PG to bring the ball up the court, then it is a moot issue. Assuming he wants to run a pressing defense, then the PG is generally the first defender to pick up the ball after it is inbounds. If you look at the potential opponent's PGs, then you see most PGs tend to be "smaller" (aka shorter) and "lighter" (aka not very heavy). Typically a "lighter" player is often equated to a "quicker" player. Will Malik have enough "quickness" to keep up with an opposing PG, who weighs between 170-190lbs, or will that weight difference "slow" him down? Also, I was considering from a match-up standpoint that the opposing coach will match his SG, which is typically the taller and bigger guard, on Malik and match his PG against VT's other guard.
Caleb Tanner isn't an ACC level player...neither is/was Rowsey...averaging a lot of points does not mean your skill set (and body type, defensive ability/liability, etc) translate to the next level...prime example, the kid out of Grinnell College who scores a ton of points at his level. He isn't getting calls to come play D1 just because he scores a ton...Caleb Tanner us talented, no doubt about that. But if VT (or any other program looking to compete at a high level) extends an offer, it is a reach at the very best. His best bet is to go play D3 (he is a high academic kid) and try to make the jump overseas if he performs well enough. Hargrave wont make him taller or less of a liability defensively.
Hargrave for this kid would be a waste of a year chasing a dream.
I know of many D3 schools who aren't sure he would even start for their programs.
I get it, he's a local kid who is averaging a ton of points so naturally local fans want to see local players, but I wouldn't get my hopes up for a kid who wouldn't start for half of the schools in the ODAC (D3)
The game is devoid of bball players who can put the ball in the BASKET. The only reason Tanner isn't being recruited by more teams is he hasn't sold his soul to an AAU coach. Any coach in the ODAC who thinks he wouldn't be a great player for their school is an idiot and coaching D3 for a reason.
As far as Rowsey goes...I don't see a lot of ACC guards who would go into Rupp Arena vs Kentucky and score 12 pts in his first college game.
Fact is the reason college bball games are so ugly is coaches recruit 6'4 -6'9 athletes who can run and dunk, but can't shoot, don't know how to run a back door cut, can't make a FT, etc.
Games would be a lot more fun to watch with guys who could make shots and have a clue how to move without the ball and get open (cough NOT Jarrell Eddie cough). Believe me, Caleb Tanner would've moved around and gotten more than 6 shots vs Clemson last night...and would've made more than 1.
That statement I just made is just as true as saying "Tanner is not an ACC caliber Guard". How would I or you know without seeing him in an ACC game?
ACC "experts" and coaches thought Steph Curry wasn't an ACC caliber guard either.
We're playing WILL JOHNSTON in ACC games...Caleb Tanner is WAY, WAY, WAY better than Will Johnston will ever dream of being. Aren't we in the position where "reaching" when a scholie is available should be worth a shot?
Last edited by hokiepro; Thu Jan 16 2014 at 02:55 PM.
Fact: Tanner's season LOW through 12 games is 24 pts. Also, teams are trying to double team him and he's still scoring 43ppg.
Keaton Page was 5'10 and started 4 yrs at OK St..Tanner's just as good a shooter, and he's 6'1"+
Yep, and Clemson had that short dude that could drain from 30 ft, and did so regularly against us... can't remember his name.
Terrence Oglesby, although I think he was a few inches taller than Page. He definitely had great range on his shots. Alex Dillard from Arkansas is another that stands out to me who had unlimited range, probably with a similar stature to Oglesby.
I think the whole point here is I'm not saying he'll be a bball god and sure fire All-American. I'm saying we need to occasionally take a chance on shooters who are smart and could develop into 4 year players.
He comes here, 1) he won't transfer 2) he'll get better throughout 4 years because he's a gym rat and look at our practice facility
3) we don't have anyone who can shoot like him now...especially FTs...he set a national record going 33-33 from FT line in ONE game. 4) he will get stronger and figure out how to get his shots and draw fouls...because he already has such a feel for the game.
Heck, we could have JVZ fake an injury if he's fouled late in a game and put Tanner in just to shoot FTs (that's only slightly TIC).
Even if he could play for stretches like Will Johnston did last night...he'd have to be accounted for and he would light up a team and draw the defense away from the basket if they didn't take him seriously coming in off the bench.
I mean what are we doing with Marquis Rankin's scholie anyway. Watch Tanner's JUNIOR highlights when he ONLY averaged around 33 instead of 43 he's averaging this year...I don't care who he's playing against...Rankin was NEVER that good.
Last edited by hokiepro; Thu Jan 16 2014 at 09:52 PM.
Posting Permissions
