Should we use a big lineup?
by IUPUI_BoilerUp on Feb 8, 2012 2:33 PM EST
Email
PrintSo I was sitting in an econ class today, and I got to thinking. If we can win the rebound battle, would we win more games? If we can out-rebound a team or even come close to keeping the battle even, I have got to think that our chances of winning the game goes up. I haven’t crunched any numbers or looked at any stats like some of you guys enjoy doing. With that said, how does the H&R community feel about playing/testing out a big lineup this last month? Here’s what I’m thinking.
C & PF- I would use a rotation of Carroll, Lawson, and Chooch.
SF- Here’s where I’d put Robbie. His height would create mismatches and give him an advantage with his height.
SG- You’ve got Ryne, AJ, TJ, DJ, and even Hart to choose from here.
PG- Lew Jack and Barlow.
Starting Lineup
C-TC
PF-Lawson
SF-Robbie
SG- TJ (Sort of a pick ‘em to me at this moment)
PG- Lew Jack (Barlow if you really want to make it a BIG lineup.)
Just a random lineup to get the conversation going. Feel free to come up with your own.Stuff in the FanPosts is entirely at the discretion of those that post them. They do not represent the views of Hammer & Rails, SBNation, or Purdue University in any way.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not sure how big this team can get...
Our frontcourt can’t really be that big simply due to the height of our tallest players. However, that doesn’t mean they can’t play big. But our backcourt can play somewhat large with the likes of Barlow and Byrd, depending on what roles they are playing. We saw yesterday that Painter is definitely still trying to find different lineups to use. I like the idea of Rob playing the 3/4 against a shorter team where he may find a mismatch in the post, which would couple nicely with his ability to stretch the defense. We’ve got NW coming up, which doesn’t play that big. Here’s what I like against NW:
5. TC
4. Rob
3. DJ
2. Barlow (we might see Ryne here, but he would need an amazing week of practice to get his starting role back IMO)
1. Lew Jack
Painter did start TJ last time, but I consider him and Barlow very similar players. Barlow simply has the edge at the moment with his height advantage and I think he is playing with the most confidence on the team. Basically, Rob is going to start every game this season. After yesterday DJ has earned a starting position. The same argument can be made for Barlow IMO. Finally Lew Jack matches up well with sobolewski. TC just seems like the obvious start to make a classic basketball lineup.
Bench scoring.
I’m not really sure how well I like Barlow and Lew in at the same time early in the game. For the final stretch of the half or game I love it, but when we start bringing bench players in I feel like we need scorers coming off the bench. I liked how Lew and Smith came off the bench to provide a spark.
by IUPUI_BoilerUp on Feb 8, 2012 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with this lineup...
DJ, Rob, and Barlow (assuming he keeps up the intensity) should be the definites. I also agree with lift26 below about LewJack coming off of the bench- in which case TJ should start. Smith needs to come off of the bench. Painter should put him in, let him take 2 shots and if he makes one or both, he may have a good night. If he misses both, he is most likely not going to produce and any shots he continues to take will be the same as a TO. Depending on the matchup, I could see a situation where starting Lawson might be better.
I like Lew coming off the bench as well.
Since he knows he’s injured it seems like when he is starting he paces himself at the beginning of the game, this is not bad but others need to realize this or Painter needs to say for the 1st half LewJack isn’t going to attack everyone else should. Or just have Barlow start, limit Lew’s 1st half min. and then just let him unleash w/ fresh legs at the end. I know this won’t always work but Barlow started slow and then finished great. I think with lewJack in there everyone is waiting to see what he and Rob are going to do or thinking, I need to screen for Ryne. Instead of thinking, “I need to attack.” We need to attack.
Agree rebounding is an issue, but disagree with your lineup
Your lineup of TC, Lawson, Rob, TJ and LewJack had two problems: 1) two offensively-challenged players and 2) only one legit 3-ball threat.
If size is a concern, I’d rather go with TC, Rob, Byrd, TJ and Barlow. This way, only one player is under 6’3 (TJ), and you get at least two 3-ball threat (Rob and Byrd) to stretch the floor for TJ and Barlow to slash inside.
But Painter obviously does not agree size is the problem for the rebounding woes. He says, “I will argue that. I can show you film where we’ve got guys on the perimeter that refuse to get their man when a shot goes up. It just takes discipline and effort to go box out and get the ball.”
Rebounding is an issue, but
I don’t know if putting our 5s into the game is the solution. I mean, they just combined for more fouls than rebounds the other day. I see that moving Carroll to the 4 might help him get more rebounds, but he is not a 4 to begin with. That and TC, Lawson and Sandi are all quite limited in what they can do, and having two of them in the game at the same time would perhaps hurt us even more.
And as much as I don’t want to see Rob at the 5, at this point he’s perhaps better at defending the post than the 3.
our offense will struggle
With this lineup I proposed. The sole purpose of creating this was to figure out what others may be thinking and would it help rebounding. On a side note, next year when we have a true center, Hammons, do we play one of our big 3 this year at a power forward position? We also have Hale playing next year. I’m not exactly sure of his size. Is he more of a 3 or 4?
by IUPUI_BoilerUp on Feb 10, 2012 12:35 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
More of a tweener
thin for a 4 but tall for a 3. Im excited about him though, he has a diverse skill set.
by jack'sIUdisdain on Feb 10, 2012 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
I'm excited for Hale too
After all, a 29-year-old man fighting against the teenage college kids he should have the advantage. And I hope he became a caged animal channeling two years of frustration of not getting to play into a beast on the court.
I like DJ as a starter in this scenario
He always plays bigger than he actually measures. Case in point: at OSU he wrestled rebounds away from Sully, and somehow drew no foul on the plays.
Plus as we saw at OSU – still a legit 3 ball threat
>Hoosier by birth, Boilermaker by the grace of God
>Don't cry, MSU - It's just a game...
by sea.of.white on Feb 10, 2012 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
I love DJ
And he’s been playing real well lately. The reason I chose not to put him and Barlow in the starting lineup because I’m thinking about the bench a little too. Obviously this lineup won’t happen so what the hell. Let’s start DJ in this discussion!
by IUPUI_BoilerUp on Feb 10, 2012 6:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I won't worry about the bench if DJ is in the starting lineup
Our team is deep enough and as we’ve seen in the O$U game, Ryno and LewJack coming off bench provided a spark.
in order of appearance
ideally
1 – jackson, barlow, tj
2 – smith, aj, tj
3 – byrd, tj, barlow, aj
4- hummel, lawson, byrd
5 – carrol, chooch, lawson
when cmp is seriously pissed
1 – barlow, jackson, tj
2 – aj, smith, tj
3 – byrd, tj, barlow, aj
4 – hummel, lawson, byrd
5 – lawson, carrol, chooch
jackson and barlow are both capable at the 1. tj can fill in when barlow moves to the 3 and jackson needs a break.
2 is pretty flexible. smith may be the best shooter but his motion is spotty. j&j provide better motion and attack the hoop better but give up some shooting percentage.
byrd provides good scoring at the three, but gives up some rebounding. aj, tj & barlow provide good motion and can attack the hoop.
hummel seems pretty obvious at the 4. rebounds well, draws some defense, can hit free throws when fouled on his way to the hoop. lawson has good athleticism, fouls too much, questionable free throws. capable of good defense. byrd can play the 4 in a pinch.
carrol screens well, somewhat foul prone, busts ass up and down the court. streaky shooter. lawson can block shots, chooch can draw the defense away from the hoop, decent rebounder. the biggest problem with the 5 spot is that they rarely touch the ball in the offense; certainly not when close to the hoop.
lineups would change depending on appropriate matchup.
looking for a place to happen
making stops along the way - the tragically hip
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
