Johnson says Isaiah Ihnen would've likely started at the 2

Donate To GopherHole
GopherWeatherGuy said:
So an assistant coach had some success in high school and that’s what we’re hanging our hat on? I’m the idiot for questioning the entire staff when that’s the biggest accomplishment the staff has??
Click to expand...
Yes, we did not hire people with winning track records at the collegiate level.
 

Spaulding!No! said:
Yes, we did not hire people with winning track records at the collegiate level.
Click to expand...
Monson, Smith, and Pitino all had winning track records at the collegiate level... how'd they work out?

Sometimes the flavor of the day works for you and sometimes you gotta go with plain ol' vanilla.
 

I think the whole problem is numbers for positions.

Basketball was better when the positions were referred to by names or letters.

Shoot, I'm old enough to remember a time when guards were guards and forwards were forwards.

yes, they may have played different roles on the floor, but the titles were not in vogue yet.

and the old Celtics looked great on a black-&-white TV. ("Sam Jones with the bank shot.......")
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think the whole problem is numbers for positions.

Basketball was better when the positions were referred to by names or letters.

Shoot, I'm old enough to remember a time when guards were guards and forwards were forwards.

yes, they may have played different roles on the floor, but the titles were not in vogue yet.

and the old Celtics looked great on a black-&-white TV. ("Sam Jones with the bank shot.......")
Click to expand...
This more of what it is now. I’d say it’s more Wings, Stretch 4s, and posts. Pretty much all fit in those categories in todays modern offenses. PG is so broad in their usage I don’t think you can just call them that anymore. You have high usage scoring ones (Mason), Distributors (Cooper), PT Forawrds (Coffee), etc…
 

Gopherfan84 said:
This more of what it is now. I’d say it’s more Wings, Stretch 4s, and posts. Pretty much all fit in those categories in todays modern offenses. PG is so broad in their usage I don’t think you can just call them that anymore. You have high usage scoring ones (Mason), Distributors (Cooper), PT Forawrds (Coffee), etc…
Click to expand...

Which successful teams play without guards? I'll agree that many other positions are interchangeable, however, that does not apply to guards. Mason is a PG, so is Cooper, so was Carr. Coffee was not, although he played there out of necessity, but that was one of the reasons that team struggled for big stretches of that season.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Which successful teams play without guards? I'll agree that many other positions are interchangeable, however, that does not apply to guards. Mason is a PG, so is Cooper, so was Carr. Coffee was not, although he played there out of necessity, but that was one of the reasons that team struggled for big stretches of that season.
Click to expand...
what’s the true difference between a guard and a wing? With modern offenses I’d argue they are all the same just have different usages. Battle brought the ball up last year plenty and he was our “4”. I think when you build a team, it’s nice to find guys who can bring the ball up, but it doesn’t need to be a traditional point guard. Leaders are leaders and you put the ball in the hand of whomever is your best player at the end of the game anyways.
 

Gopherfan84 said:
what’s the true difference between a guard and a wing? With modern offenses I’d argue they are all the same just have different usages. Battle brought the ball up last year plenty and he was our “4”. I think when you build a team, it’s nice to find guys who can bring the ball up, but it doesn’t need to be a traditional point guard. Leaders are leaders and you put the ball in the hand of whomever is your best player at the end of the game anyways.
Click to expand...

How'd that work out for us last year? I'll ask again, what successful teams don't have a traditional PG, or multiple traditional guards who can handle the ball and score? What good teams have a 6'10" player who can't handle the ball or score playing 2 guard?
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
How'd that work out for us last year? I'll ask again, what successful teams don't have a traditional PG, or multiple traditional guards who can handle the ball and score? What good teams have a 6'10" player who can't handle the ball or score playing 2 guard?
Click to expand...
We had 3 guards who could all handle plus Battle as well. What about last years line up didn’t scream traditional? Willis played PG at Vandy and in HS and was recruited as such. The fact he didn’t with Pitino had to do with Carr coming aboard. Scoring from the perimeter is required in todays games. Doesn’t matter how you get it, but it happens mostly with shorter players because that is what their is an abundance of.
As far as teams who won last year without traditional PG play, Kansas was one. UNC had multiple guards. 6’10 wings are rare, but LeBron and KD do it as do many 3 and D wings that are 6’7 and above. My point is I don’t find a different between Guards and Wings anymore as the idea is position versatility.
 

Ihnen at the 2 is Ben Johnson's version of the Statue of Liberty football play.
 




Costa Rican Gopher said:
The 6'10"+ Ihnen who's played almost exclusively at PF, & is coming off a knee reconstruction surgery was going to start at SG? Hard to believe, regardless of what CBJ said.
Click to expand...
Frankly it sounds ridiculous Think that one might have been taken out of context. He’s no guard and if you want to say wing he’s no wing at least at this point.
 

GFBfan said:
When is the last time you saw him play? Two years ago? Back then he didn't show any of those skills in games because he wasn't asked to do any of those things. For the past two years, he has been asked to do those things more and the people asking seem to think he can do them and do them well enough to play that position.
He looked lost on defense most of the first year and was pretty much a non-factor. Played much better in his second year. Not a stretch to think he couldn't improve his skills enough to play the 2 in a positionless system.
Click to expand...
Its an incredible stretch to think Ihnen would start at the 2. How is he a 2 anyhow, if it's "positionless"?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom