Jaden Henley committed!

Donate To GopherHole
Gophs24 said:
i mean he was recruited to be a wing and they arent trying to make him a PF just because hes 6'9".....he was moved to the PF spot simply because thats his best position...it was night and day for him 2 years ago when he finally started playing longer minutes there....

but yes Henley seems like a perfect player to groom into the replacement for battle on the wing....or the more tradition SF or 3 spot....but i certainly see him being able to bring the ball up off a rebound or whatever and get them into the offense as well
Click to expand...

I disagree on Ihnen. He held his own there on D out of necessity, but was an offensive liability. Henley, Ihnen, Battle, and Garcia are all perimeter oriented wings. Fox and Payne are interior oriented wings.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I disagree on Ihnen. He held his own there on D out of necessity, but was an offensive liability. Henley, Ihnen, Battle, and Garcia are all perimeter oriented wings. Fox and Payne are interior oriented wings.
Click to expand...

Ihnen was not playing more because of his defensive deficiencies. Much of it was lack of instincts, so hopefully that part of his game grows fast.

Henly will be a guard. It will be great having some length to guard on the perimeter. Length makes a difference in today's game. Just watch any NBA game, length is what they like because it works on both ends. Luckily, Ihnen has some length too.
 


tjgopher said:
Ihnen was not playing more because of his defensive deficiencies. Much of it was lack of instincts, so hopefully that part of his game grows fast.

Henly will be a guard. It will be great having some length to guard on the perimeter. Length makes a difference in today's game. Just watch any NBA game, length is what they like because it works on both ends. Luckily, Ihnen has some length too.
Click to expand...

Length is great, but Henley isn't a guard. There are very few 6'8" guards in the NBA, let alone in college basketball.

Henley is a wing with a lot of potential. I think he has the highest ceiling in this class after Payne. I'm just not sure why some are trying to make him what he's not, and that is a guard.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Length is great, but Henley isn't a guard. There are very few 6'8" guards in the NBA, let alone in college basketball.

Henley is a wing with a lot of potential. I think he has the highest ceiling in this class after Payne. I'm just not sure why some are trying to make him what he's not, and that is a guard.
Click to expand...
I think we need to quit trying to put labels on players. In today's game, you might have select and talented bigs bring the ball up on occasion. The difference between a wing and a guard is slim to none.

Henley has proven to be a very capable ball handler so will very likely have the ball in his hands at times. His length and quick reactions will be an asset on the defensive end in the press and he will be asked to guard multiple players.
 


ecoperson said:
I think we need to quit trying to put labels on players. In today's game, you might have select and talented bigs bring the ball up on occasion. The difference between a wing and a guard is slim to none.

Henley has proven to be a very capable ball handler so will very likely have the ball in his hands at times. His length and quick reactions will be an asset on the defensive end in the press and he will be asked to guard multiple players.
Click to expand...

He has? He wasn't bringing the ball up in high school. He's a shooter, a slasher, and a rebounder, and most of his highlights show that. That's what wings do.

There are two main positions in basketball today. Guards and wings, and yes there is a difference between the two. There are a lot of fast, smaller guards in college basketball in the 6'0"- 6'4" range. You don't want a slower, 6'8" player guarding them.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He has? He wasn't bringing the ball up in high school. He's a shooter, a slasher, and a rebounder, and most of his highlights show that. That's what wings do.

There are two main positions in basketball today. Guards and wings, and yes there is a difference between the two. There are a lot of fast, smaller guards in college basketball in the 6'0"- 6'4" range. You don't want a slower, 6'8" player guarding them.
Click to expand...
I have seen highlights with him bringing the ball up as well. Also, you are overthinking this. Most think he will bring it up at times which Jamison did at times this year. That doesn't mean he will be the primary ball-handler. Paolo from Duke did the same thing as well. Teams are more focused on whoever gets the rebound will push the ball up the court. Playing 3-4 guys who can handle the ball allows you to play faster and keep teams off balance.
 

GopherPlaya said:
I have seen highlights with him bringing the ball up as well. Also, you are overthinking this. Most think he will bring it up at times which Jamison did at times this year. That doesn't mean he will be the primary ball-handler. Paolo from Duke did the same thing as well. Teams are more focused on whoever gets the rebound will push the ball up the court. Playing 3-4 guys who can handle the ball allows you to play faster and keep teams off balance.
Click to expand...

Draymond is an excellent wing who controls the break/pace of play many times, as a prototype.

Love this style of play and Nova has used it well.
 

GopherPlaya said:
I have seen highlights with him bringing the ball up as well. Also, you are overthinking this. Most think he will bring it up at times which Jamison did at times this year. That doesn't mean he will be the primary ball-handler. Paolo from Duke did the same thing as well. Teams are more focused on whoever gets the rebound will push the ball up the court. Playing 3-4 guys who can handle the ball allows you to play faster and keep teams off balance.
Click to expand...

That's fine and I'm not arguing against that. Jamison never started at guard and won't. Neither did Banchero, and neither will Henley.
 




PeterMac05 said:
Ihnen showed a lot of flashes of star potential, both on the offensive, and defensive ends. He was going to be our best player this year had he not gotten injured.
Click to expand...
I would have been inclined to think this might be true after his freshman year but last year he took 2 steps back. I would like him to do a restart see how everything shakes out.
 

PeterMac05 said:
Ihnen showed a lot of flashes of star potential, both on the offensive, and defensive ends. He was going to be our best player this year had he not gotten injured.
Click to expand...
Ihnen made a few nice plays, but he mostly floated out on the perimeter. He probably would have been a solid contributor this year but there wasn't anything in his playing history that indicated that he would have done more for the team than Battle, Willis, Loewe and, possibly, Stephens.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Length is great, but Henley isn't a guard. There are very few 6'8" guards in the NBA, let alone in college basketball.

Henley is a wing with a lot of potential. I think he has the highest ceiling in this class after Payne. I'm just not sure why some are trying to make him what he's not, and that is a guard.
Click to expand...
Yes, but historically it is not 0. The puzzling part to me is why some people on this board need to post opinions with such certainty. Boards are good because of many perspectives, ideas etc. It doesn't add anything, in my opinion, to say things with such certainty unless the goal is to get some people's ire up. I do agree though, that I don't think it is very likely he will be a PG. I think for him to be a PG he would have to be hands down be the best at PG and there are other people on the team that are just as capable in defending scoring against the bigger players on the opposing team. Can we agree that if Gonzaga had 5 players like Chet on the team all 5 would start and one of them would be the point guard? If Not, what would the starting lineup look like if there were 5 Chets on a team that are able to play?
 



PeterMac05 said:
Ihnen showed a lot of flashes of star potential, both on the offensive, and defensive ends. He was going to be our best player this year had he not gotten injured.
Click to expand...
Hold up - been told right here on GH Fox will be great. Similar results to Battle and Willis from this past season.
 


Ragnor said:
Yes, but historically it is not 0. The puzzling part to me is why some people on this board need to post opinions with such certainty. Boards are good because of many perspectives, ideas etc. It doesn't add anything, in my opinion, to say things with such certainty unless the goal is to get some people's ire up. I do agree though, that I don't think it is very likely he will be a PG. I think for him to be a PG he would have to be hands down be the best at PG and there are other people on the team that are just as capable in defending scoring against the bigger players on the opposing team. Can we agree that if Gonzaga had 5 players like Chet on the team all 5 would start and one of them would be the point guard? If Not, what would the starting lineup look like if there were 5 Chets on a team that are able to play?
Click to expand...
Good God, yes. And to not only state it that way, but state it over and over and over that way.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Length is great, but Henley isn't a guard. There are very few 6'8" guards in the NBA, let alone in college basketball.

Henley is a wing with a lot of potential. I think he has the highest ceiling in this class after Payne. I'm just not sure why some are trying to make him what he's not, and that is a guard.
Click to expand...
He's been a guard his whole life.....he grew like 4 inches in the past year......I don't think all of his guard skills/instincts disappear with a growth spurt. Just my 2 cents.
 

If he's a good player, they will find a place for him to play.

I go back to Twins' manager Tom Kelly, who gave IMHO the best-ever description of the role of a coach or manager:

"my job is to put players in a position where they have the highest possible chance of success and the lowest possible chance of failure."

I think Ben Johnson has - at least - some of that perspective.

and - to be bluntly honest - the U of MN is not in a position to say "no" to good players. given the current state of the program, if the guy can play, you take him and then figure out how to give that player the best chance of success.
 





Ragnor said:
Yes, but historically it is not 0. The puzzling part to me is why some people on this board need to post opinions with such certainty. Boards are good because of many perspectives, ideas etc. It doesn't add anything, in my opinion, to say things with such certainty unless the goal is to get some people's ire up. I do agree though, that I don't think it is very likely he will be a PG. I think for him to be a PG he would have to be hands down be the best at PG and there are other people on the team that are just as capable in defending scoring against the bigger players on the opposing team. Can we agree that if Gonzaga had 5 players like Chet on the team all 5 would start and one of them would be the point guard? If Not, what would the starting lineup look like if there were 5 Chets on a team that are able to play?
Click to expand...

Facts are a certainty and they are not opinions.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Length is great, but Henley isn't a guard. There are very few 6'8" guards in the NBA, let alone in college basketball.

Henley is a wing with a lot of potential.
Click to expand...

I think we're getting caught up in labels. I call the backcourt guys either a guard or a wing. I would call the frontcourt guys either a power forward or center. And, honestly, in today's game wings and guards are somewhat interchangeable, although their duties may differ. Most teams now have four guys who can bring the ball up the court and play the perimeter and fire up long range shots. Those are wings/guards. Henley will 100% be one of those four guys, so I called him a guard. He's a perimeter player who will shoot and drive. Call it a wing, call it a guard. Whatever. But, he isn't going to be a frontcourt player who is posting up and big time bodying for rebounds just because he is 6-7 now. He might crash the glass, but that doesn't make him a power forward.
 
Last edited:

tjgopher said:
I think you're caught up in labels. You said there are wings and guards and that's it. And, that is not quite right, in my opinion. I would say it is more like there are backcourt guys and frontcourt guys.

I call the backcourt guys a guard or a wing. I would call the frontcourt guys a power forward or center.

Wings and guards are interchangeable. Most teams now have four guys who can bring the ball up the court and play the perimeter, who may also crash some glass. Henley will 100% be one of those four guys, so I called him a guard. But, Henley isn't going to be some sort of a power forward, who posts up and tries to body for rebounds. He's a perimeter player who will shoot and drive. Call it a wing, call it a guard. Whatever. But, he isn't going to be a frontcourt player just because he is 6-7 now. He might crash the glass, but that doesn't make him a power forward.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree, but I still think every lineup needs a guard that can diffuse pressure defense, otherwise that weakness will be exploited all season long.

My best working definition of a “wing” may be… a backcourt player who I wouldn’t let handle the ball when matched up against a Brad underwood team that is allowed to arm bar, hand check, and violate the cylinder all game long.
 

bc2211 said:
I tend to agree, but I still think every lineup needs a guard that can diffuse pressure defense, otherwise that weakness will be exploited all season long.

My best working definition of a “wing” may be… a backcourt player who I wouldn’t let handle the ball when matched up against a Brad underwood team that is allowed to arm bar, hand check, and violate the cylinder all game long.
Click to expand...
Game has changed a lot over the years. It isn't positionless but there is much more versatility in players these days that guys aren't pigeoned holed into the traditional PG, SG, SF, PF, C setup anymore. Today it is more of guard, wing, post and you will often have a couple guys that bounce between a couple of those categories.

Henley definitely seems like he will be a combo guard/wing, very interested to see what he can do when he gets here.
 

bc2211 said:
I tend to agree, but I still think every lineup needs a guard that can diffuse pressure defense, otherwise that weakness will be exploited all season long.

My best working definition of a “wing” may be… a backcourt player who I wouldn’t let handle the ball when matched up against a Brad underwood team that is allowed to arm bar, hand check, and violate the cylinder all game long.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with what you or anyone are really saying about this. My whole point is that some thought Henley could come in and compete for a guard position.

Henley averaged 6 rebounds and only 2 assists per game in high school. He can grab a rebound and push the ball up court, like most wings can do in today's game. But he'll never start here at either guard position.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I don't disagree with what you or anyone are really saying about this. My whole point is that some thought Henley could come in and compete for a guard position.

Henley averaged 6 rebounds and only 2 assists per game in high school. He can grab a rebound and push the ball up court, like most wings can do in today's game. But he'll never start here at either guard position
Click to expand...

Again, we are probably getting caught up in labels. But, the Gophers started 3 guards every single game last year. I could see Henley playing the exact position that EJ Stephens did last all of last year. Henley would just be four inches taller. And, he'd be a guard in a three-guard lineup, likely on the floor with four total perimeter players.
 
Last edited:

tjgopher said:
The Gophers started 3 guards every single game last year. I could see Henley play exactly what EJ Stephens did last year. He'd just be four inches taller. And, he'd be a guard in a three-guard lineup.
Click to expand...
I wonder how often we'll be running a 3 guard lineup with Battle/ Ihnen/ Garcia (hopefully)/ Thompson/ Fox/ Payne. Could have some nice versatility if Carrington and Henley can step in and play minutes right away.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom