Multidimensional players = depth

[88clone]

I know there has been talk about our depth in the national media as a weakness and I simply don't agree. We have 7 guys that play significant minutes, which I admit seems like a lack of depth on the surface. However, we certainly don't seem to fade down the stretch and we haven't had a lot foul trouble this year, so where's this "weakness"?

What we have more of than anyone I've watched play this year is multidimensional players. To me, that IS depth, because we have multiple guys that can do every skill (rebounding, shooting, scoring, passing, etc.) instead of needing to put in different guys when different things are needed. Our guys simply are not 1-trick ponies. Of the 7 guys we have that play every one of them show up in the top 10 of individual stats in at least 3 different categories. If you compare that to Iowa who has this "incredible depth", they have 1 guy that shows up in more than 3 categories (White).

I don't know which kind of depth you'd rather have, but I'd rather have 7 guys that can actually do multiple things which makes them tougher to defend, than I would have 11 guys play that can only do one thing.

 

[CyTwins]

Talent > Depth

ISU could play 11 guys and be considered deep but there is no point unless there is foul trouble

 

[MNCyGuy]

I had a similar thought yesterday when I caught a bit of Miller and Brinson's Monday basketball show on my way home. Brinson was going on and on about how worried he was about the lack of production, numbers-wise from our bench in the tourney. This team, even without going deep down the bench, has a lot of flexibility to absorb off-nights from one of it's Big 3. It was just driving me nuts because if you've watched any of this run, unless we have another WVU game where NOTHING is working, it's just not a huge issue for this team.

 

[ISUTex]

True. Also, Thomas and Long have scored double digits several times this year. Naz against Mich, Iowa, and Tech off the top of my head. Plus the Okie St game (big plays). Thomas went for double digits against OU and KSU recently. That's a pretty good bench. Even if the guy on 1460 can't grasp that concept. Heck, if Walker and Edozie actually played more, they would look the part as well. ISU has depth. 7 good players who can score is pretty good depth IMO.

 

[Cyclonepride]

I'd much rather play the best 7 or 8. I believe they get into a rhythm that way. Also, I agree with the multidimensional aspect. We can and have intermixed almost all of the guys without much drop off.

 

[Cydkar]

We aren't deep. It's that simple. I don't know why people are afraid to admit it. If Naz and Matt play well it doesn't matter. If they don't, it's a factor.

A lot of teams don't have depth and it probably is overrated but it doesn't change the fact.

 

[Psiclone]

I know there has been talk about our depth in the national media as a weakness and I simply don't agree. We have 7 guys that play significant minutes, which I admit seems like a lack of depth on the surface. However, we certainly don't seem to fade down the stretch and we haven't had a lot foul trouble this year, so where's this "weakness"?

What we have more of than anyone I've watched play this year is multidimensional players. To me, that IS depth, because we have multiple guys that can do every skill (rebounding, shooting, scoring, passing, etc.) instead of needing to put in different guys when different things are needed. Our guys simply are not 1-trick ponies. Of the 7 guys we have that play every one of them show up in the top 10 of individual stats in at least 3 different categories. If you compare that to Iowa who has this "incredible depth", they have 1 guy that shows up in more than 3 categories (White).

I don't know which kind of depth you'd rather have, but I'd rather have 7 guys that can actually do multiple things which makes them tougher to defend, than I would have 11 guys play that can only do one thing.

I disagree to an extent. I think our starters are playing too many minutes and fatigue is a factor in why we are not holding on to large leads and letting teams back in. Hilton counters that to an extent as the players get more energy from the crowd, which is true for most teams. If our bench were scoring like they were earlier in the year, our starters would get more rest. This will be more of a factor in the Big XII and NCAA tournaments.

 

[Spam]

it's been said here a couple of times by someone, and it's brilliant- 7 dimes better than 10 nickels.

 

[heitclone]

Our bench last year was basically one guy and we held our own all year. Quality > Quantity. To kind of piggie back what the OP said, who you have coming off of there is the most important thing. Talent and versatility are more valuable than bodies. I've seen really good ISU teams, that played as physical as anyone run with 6 or 7 guys and do just fine come March.

 

[88clone]

I guess I'm not as worried about fatigue. Kane and Ejim are the only 2 that are averaging more than 30 minutes per game, which I think they would/should do if we were 10 deep.

 

[Cydkar]

it's been said here a couple of times by someone, and it's brilliant- 7 dimes better than 10 nickels.

8 dimes > 7 dimes. I'd like one more dime and I'm not convinced Naz isn't a nickel right now. We will need him to step up come tourney time.

 

[cyrocksmypants]

The only real situational subs I've seen is in end of game situations when Fred is subbing Thomas and Hogue in offense/defense situations.

Also, while we all want more bench points, I think it's less important when three of your starters average over 15 a game each. Not many teams have that luxury.

 

[ribsnwhiskey]

I had a similar thought yesterday when I caught a bit of Miller and Brinson's Monday basketball show on my way home. Brinson was going on and on about how worried he was about the lack of production, numbers-wise from our bench in the tourney. This team, even without going deep down the bench, has a lot of flexibility to absorb off-nights from one of it's Big 3. It was just driving me nuts because if you've watched any of this run, unless we have another WVU game where NOTHING is working, it's just not a huge issue for this team.

Don't start about Brinson. He's a clueless loudmouth. I only listen to that show on Monday's to hear Sullivan and Settles. Some of the questions Brinson asks are cringeworthy. Some of our best teams that have been most successful only went 2 or 3 deep on the bench. It's been forced into our heads how great depth is because of EIU playing 18 guys/game. When 16 of em are average basketball players, you get what they have.

 

[CyTwins]

The only real situational subs I've seen is in end of game situations when Fred is subbing Thomas and Hogue in offense/defense situations.

Also, while we all want more bench points, I think it's less important when three of your starters average over 15 a game each. Not many teams have that luxury.

I might be the only one that doesn't care about bench points at all. If every game can play out like the Texas game I'd be thrilled. We win and our big 3 put up big points and get more and more pub.

 

[Bigman38]

Ideally there would be one more post to rotate in for a few minutes. But going 7 deep is fine, their's enough quality there that it's not a problem.

If you think fatigue is a factor I'd tell you to go take a look at the minutes played on other teams. The best players in the league play the same minutes as our best players. And you only play 2 games a week in the NCAA tourney with 1 days rest, which this team has done multiple times this year.

 

[abe2010]

True. Also, Thomas and Long have scored double digits several times this year. Naz against Mich, Iowa, and Tech off the top of my head. Plus the Okie St game (big plays). Thomas went for double digits against OU and KSU recently. That's a pretty good bench. Even if the guy on 1460 can't grasp that concept. Heck, if Walker and Edozie actually played more, they would look the part as well. ISU has depth. 7 good players who can score is pretty good depth IMO.

Texas Ranger?

 

[Cydkar]

Don't start about Brinson. He's a clueless loudmouth. I only listen to that show on Monday's to hear Sullivan and Settles. Some of the questions Brinson asks are cringeworthy. Some of our best teams that have been most successful only went 2 or 3 deep on the bench. It's been forced into our heads how great depth is because of EIU playing 18 guys/game. When 16 of em are average basketball players, you get what they have.

I listen because of the crazy.

 

[twocoach]

I know there has been talk about our depth in the national media as a weakness and I simply don't agree. We have 7 guys that play significant minutes, which I admit seems like a lack of depth on the surface. However, we certainly don't seem to fade down the stretch and we haven't had a lot foul trouble this year, so where's this "weakness"? What we have more of than anyone I've watched play this year is multidimensional players. To me, that IS depth, because we have multiple guys that can do every skill (rebounding, shooting, scoring, passing, etc.) instead of needing to put in different guys when different things are needed. Our guys simply are not 1-trick ponies. Of the 7 guys we have that play every one of them show up in the top 10 of individual stats in at least 3 different categories. If you compare that to Iowa who has this "incredible depth", they have 1 guy that shows up in more than 3 categories (White). I don't know which kind of depth you'd rather have, but I'd rather have 7 guys that can actually do multiple things which makes them tougher to defend, than I would have 11 guys play that can only do one thing.

Depth only matters when a player gets in foul trouble. A multidimensional player means nothing if he is sitting on the bench in foul trouble and his back up has barely played all year. There are so many long breaks in an ncaa tourney game that depth isn't needed for conditioning purposes.

 

[rholtgraves]

I don't think that some people know that Fred is playin those 7 guys bc he believes that gives them the best chance to win. He could play Gibson, Edozie or SDW for a few minutes a game. They aren't any worse than guys like McCabe or Clemmons for Iowa but you would rather have Niang and Ejim and Hogue out there bc they are better.
What is also stupid is that they have had most of the season to show that they can play with 7 so it's not really a weakness.

 

[mcblogerson]

We lack quality depth in the post, and it does affect the defensive pressure they can play with. It doesn't hurt us against small ball teams but Kansas killed us inside both times b/c they knew we couldn't match them physically w/o getting our only 3 bigs in foul trouble.