Starting 5

 PG - Phil Greene
 SG - D'angleo Harrison
 SF - Amir Garrett
 PF - Jakaar Sampson
 C -  Gods Gift

Now if Chandler or say Obekpa come, are they better than Gift? I think we see a big improvement in Gift next year. Also come January, does Branch get the nod at PG? Is Sampson a PF?

That leaves Branch, Balamou and Sir Dom off bench without anyone else, not bad especially if we land Chandler and or Sanchez with a shooter like Marco or Max. I'll go to battle with that. PS i know Branch can't play till December.

Just based on our current roster/committs....I think Gift comes off the bench regardless of who we sign. 

I think we go with:

1) Greene
2) Harrison
3) Garrett
4) Pointer
5) Sampson

When Branch is eligible I think one of two things happens.  Greene goes to the bench or Pointer goes to the bench and Greene slide to the 3.

i think the starting 5 come BE Play is the question.

For that i'm going with:

Greene
DLo
Amir
Pointer
Sampson

No offense to Phil, but I dont see how Jamal Branch aint startin by January if not sooner.

Just based on our current roster/committs....I think Gift comes off the bench regardless of who we sign. 

I think we go with:

1) Greene
2) Harrison
3) Garrett
4) Pointer
5) Sampson

When Branch is eligible I think one of two things happens.  Greene goes to the bench or Pointer goes to the bench and Greene slide to the 3.

no way Sampson plays the 5.

Assuming this is our roster:

1 Branch Greene
2 Harrison Bourgault Balamou
3 Garrett Pointer
4 Sampson Sanchez
5 Gods Gift Chandler (or Obekpa)

I would expect Branch to immediately take over when eligible to play and Garrett and Pointer alternating starts at the 3. If Sanchez is as good as advertised he may push Sampson to the 3 and both Garrett and Pointer off the bench.

I would expect a 9-10 man rotation

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

PG Branch
SG Harrison
SG Greene
SF Pointer
PF Sampson

6th man Garrett. Then Balamou and Gift. That's all we have right now. That's a 15/16 win team as is.

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

+1

Quote from: upstate32 on April 17, 2012, 11:00:45 AM

Just based on our current roster/committs....I think Gift comes off the bench regardless of who we sign. 

I think we go with:

1) Greene
2) Harrison
3) Garrett
4) Pointer
5) Sampson

When Branch is eligible I think one of two things happens.  Greene goes to the bench or Pointer goes to the bench and Greene slide to the 3.

no way Sampson plays the 5.

Assuming this is our roster:

1 Branch Greene
2 Harrison Bourgault Balamou
3 Garrett Pointer
4 Sampson Sanchez
5 Gods Gift Chandler (or Obekpa)

I would expect Branch to immediately take over when eligible to play and Garrett and Pointer alternating starts at the 3. If Sanchez is as good as advertised he may push Sampson to the 3 and both Garrett and Pointer off the bench.

I would expect a 9-10 man rotation

My post was based soley on who we have committed to play today.  And based on our current roster....Sampson would absolutely have to play the 5 at some point during the game.  IMO he would be the starter and we would play strickly zone again.

That being said...all of this is moot as Lavin is going to bring in some bigs!

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

Was waiting for this. What else ya wanna talk about? Iona? UCLA? Gathers getting paid?

Just based on our current roster/committs....I think Gift comes off the bench regardless of who we sign. 

I think we go with:

1) Greene
2) Harrison
3) Garrett
4) Pointer
5) Sampson

When Branch is eligible I think one of two things happens.  Greene goes to the bench or Pointer goes to the bench and Greene slide to the 3.

I'd have to agree with this right here.  Lav has shown that he would rather play small and skilled lineups over big lineups.  Two things I feel very confident about:  Harrison and Garrett are starting.  I think Branch takes over in January, but Greene will be a big-time contributor. 

Moose is right, though, kind of silly doing this now before we get a full roster.  If we have a legit big man, things would obviously change.

Are any of the bigs we are recruiting better than Gift right now?

Are any of the bigs we are recruiting better than Gift right now?

Just from reading but CO and Chandler sound like they'd be an improvement on the defensive end in the center of a zone due to size and/or shot blocking ability.  But I doubt at this point if either of them are tougher.  But Gift pulled down less than 3 defensive rebounds per game.  Need more than that from the main big.  Less than one block per game can be improved as well.

Quote from: Moose on April 17, 2012, 11:12:38 AM

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

Was waiting for this. What else ya wanna talk about? Iona? UCLA? Gathers getting paid?

Thats the problem.  You stir the pot just to talk to someone.  If there isn't anything to talk about you don't have to make news.

Plenty of other college ball talk you can find as opposed to this.

Quote from: upstate32 on April 17, 2012, 11:00:45 AM

Just based on our current roster/committs....I think Gift comes off the bench regardless of who we sign. 

I think we go with:

1) Greene
2) Harrison
3) Garrett
4) Pointer
5) Sampson

When Branch is eligible I think one of two things happens.  Greene goes to the bench or Pointer goes to the bench and Greene slide to the 3.

I'd have to agree with this right here.  Lav has shown that he would rather play small and skilled lineups over big lineups.  Two things I feel very confident about:  Harrison and Garrett are starting.  I think Branch takes over in January, but Greene will be a big-time contributor. 

Moose is right, though, kind of silly doing this now before we get a full roster.  If we have a legit big man, things would obviously change.

I know its semantics but there's no way in that lineup that dom is the 4 and garrett is the 3. They would flip flop. Garrett seems to relish battling down low, I love that about him.

Stir the pot? Where? Now you're getting crazy. I asked a question about the players

Quote from: Marco Baldi on April 17, 2012, 12:17:23 PM

Quote from: Moose on April 17, 2012, 11:12:38 AM

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

Was waiting for this. What else ya wanna talk about? Iona? UCLA? Gathers getting paid?

Thats the problem.  You stir the pot just to talk to someone.  If there isn't anything to talk about you don't have to make news.

Plenty of other college ball talk you can find as opposed to this.

I personally enjoy these threads. Makes me excited for the upcoming season. It beats talking about larry brown and SMU

Stir the pot? Where? Now you're getting crazy. I asked a question about the players

Yeah and I'm just feeding into you by responding but how can you make a starting lineup with a class that isn't complete?  You wanna talk about something that bad?

Quote from: Moose on April 17, 2012, 12:59:07 PM

Quote from: Marco Baldi on April 17, 2012, 12:17:23 PM

Quote from: Moose on April 17, 2012, 11:12:38 AM

I don't see the point of starting lineups until the whole class is in place.

Was waiting for this. What else ya wanna talk about? Iona? UCLA? Gathers getting paid?

Thats the problem.  You stir the pot just to talk to someone.  If there isn't anything to talk about you don't have to make news.

Plenty of other college ball talk you can find as opposed to this.

I personally enjoy these threads. Makes me excited for the upcoming season. It beats talking about larry brown and SMU

I'll get more excited for this type of thread when the class is complete.  All it does now is show just still how thin we are.