With Buckles Out of the Picture, How Does Our Lineup Look?

Donate To GopherHole
Golden_Sloth

Golden_Sloth

Active member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
938
Reaction score
88
Points
28
For better or (almost certainly) worse, Buckles won't be playing here and our 2013-2014 roster is likely set. The season is still a long ways off and things can change, but what do you guys think our team will look like in terms of rotation? I'm guessing something like this:

Dre Hollins / Dre Mathieu / Maverick Ahanmisi
Austin Hollins / Malik Smith / Maverick Ahanmisi
Malik Smith / Wally Ellenson
Joey King / Charles Buggs / Oto Osenieks
Elliott Eliason / Mo Walker

Reserves:
Kendall Shell, Daquein McNeil (RS)

Obviously the 4 spot is the biggest question mark. I could easily see any of the three starting or hardly playing at all. It will also be interesting to see if Malik Smith can start at the 3, or if he'll come off the bench as the 6th man and play his natural position of 2 guard. That would leave the 3 spot open for Wally or maybe Joey King to step into, unless Austin slides down (unlikely IMO).
 

Talked about it some here:

Who Plays if Buckles Doesn’t?

Before getting into Rakeem Buckles and his situation, let’s quickly consider who else is on the roster.

The Gophers have two redshirt junior centers in Elliott Eliason and Maurice Walker. Neither have logged many minutes during their years at Minnesota, but if they both stay healthy and produce then the situation at center seems relatively set.

Experienced guards Andre Hollins, Austin Hollins and Malik Smith all figure to see a ton of floor time. However, none of these players rebound well.

The need for a power forward to rebound and defend inside is significant. Redshirt junior Oto Osenieks, redshirt freshman Charles Buggs and – if he receives a waiver to play immediately – sophomore Joey King, all are possibilities to help Minnesota rebound the ball this season from the “4″ position.

Gopher sophomore Wally Ellenson, a 6’4″ wing, may be a better offensive rebounder than any of the power forward candidates. With great leaping ability and fearlessness, Ellenson can make an impact crashing the offensive glass if given the green light.
Click to expand...

But, never say never on the roster being set. Still some time left... even with school starting today.
 

Austin would play the 3 I would imagine if anyone of those three guards. But I'm not sure it really matters a whole lot, I think those three are your starting guards/wings when we tip off the first game. That 4 spot tho....man we needed that extra body there.
 


Really needed someone that could physically pound inside, out of the three forward spots I would think Oto is the most physical with Buggs developing as the season progresses, i think if you combine King with Ellenson at the 3 that would be an okay rebounding lineup also, not sure King, Dre Hollins, Austin Hollins, and Smith on the court at the same time will be physical enough underneath.

Losing Coleman could hurt a little now.
 


jovs said:
Really needed someone that could physically pound inside, out of the three forward spots I would think Oto is the most physical with Buggs developing as the season progresses, i think if you combine King with Ellenson at the 3 that would be an okay rebounding lineup also, not sure King, Dre Hollins, Austin Hollins, and Smith on the court at the same time will be physical enough underneath.

Losing Coleman could hurt a little now.
Click to expand...

Why? :confused:
 


MadtownGopher said:
Why? :confused:
Click to expand...

Coleman is athletic and physical at the three but not much of a scorer, Austin is decently athletic but has nothing as far being physical on the boards, Smith, Dre, and Austin provides little in the way of rebounding, the centers just aren't athletic enough, they'll be fine if a rebound comes there way, they won't be able to go get many, they just aren't quick enough. Coleman, though undersized, would provide a little of that if he was still on the team.
 

jovs said:
Really needed someone that could physically pound inside, out of the three forward spots I would think Oto is the most physical with Buggs developing as the season progresses, i think if you combine King with Ellenson at the 3 that would be an okay rebounding lineup also, not sure King, Dre Hollins, Austin Hollins, and Smith on the court at the same time will be physical enough underneath.

Losing Coleman could hurt a little now.
Click to expand...

We did not lose Coleman. He chose to leave.
 



GophersOnTheRise said:
He was physical and a good offensive rebounder.
Click to expand...

He's 6'4, he wasn't going to help us at the 4 position. Whether we had him or not we'd still have a big question mark in our lineup. Also, his poor ball handling, shooting, and boneheaded decisions hurt us far more than his above average rebounding helped us.
 

MadtownGopher said:
He's 6'4, he wasn't going to help us at the 4 position. Whether we had him or not we'd still have a big question mark in our lineup. Also, his poor ball handling, shooting, and boneheaded decisions hurt us far more than his above average rebounding helped us.
Click to expand...

Didn't say he would help us at the 4. He would have helped us with offensive rebounding. Guards/wings are allowed to rebound too. Buckles not coming here makes rebounding more of an issue. Without him, Coleman would have been a little more valuable.
 

Keep in mind, Joey King's waiver is yet to be approved either.

There is still a chance our PF's are only Buggs and Oto.

I think it is likely his waiver is approved, however you never know with the NCAA.
 




jovs said:
Coleman is athletic and physical at the three but not much of a scorer, Austin is decently athletic but has nothing as far being physical on the boards, Smith, Dre, and Austin provides little in the way of rebounding, the centers just aren't athletic enough, they'll be fine if a rebound comes there way, they won't be able to go get many, they just aren't quick enough. Coleman, though undersized, would provide a little of that if he was still on the team.
Click to expand...

When you are 7-1, 260lbs you would be surprised how many rebounds come your way. EE is a fine offensive rebounder at the 5.

If Coleman had stayed we would have had 3 returning starting guards. No doubt in my mind we needed improved guard play, but it is very difficult to do if you trot out the same 3 guys. Joe saw the writing on the wall, and did the right thing.

Also, I posted recently I thought Coach P. might bring in a big time transfer. If there is a player out there who isn't going to play for some reason this season or maybe even leaves mid-season, looks like we have a scholarship available. I'd be very surprised if it went to Shell.
 


scher215 said:
Keep in mind, Joey King's waiver is yet to be approved either.

There is still a chance our PF's are only Buggs and Oto.

I think it is likely his waiver is approved, however you never know with the NCAA.
Click to expand...

Yep. Have to feel at least a little bit shaky on that one (King). Might get down to making a difficult but persuasive argument... tough call as to the outcome. Hopefully word comes soon one way or the other.

PhillyGopher said:
Please elucidate
Click to expand...

Not many specifics in mind; just saying it wouldn't be a big surprise if the Gophers had another option(s) they were thinking/working on in case Buckles didn't work out. Timing is obviously tough right now, but might be doable.
 

The-Real-Truth said:
How about Alex Foster Doc?
Click to expand...

We do not know the whole story here. Besides, Coleman was here, and chose to leave. Foster wasn't here, and still isn't. I don't know, I just don't know. And that's my story and I am sticking to it.

As a Norwegian, it is easy to claim ignorance.
 


Gopher Warrior said:
Yep. Have to feel at least a little bit shaky on that one (King). Might get down to making a difficult but persuasive argument... tough call as to the outcome.
Click to expand...

Difficult how? His brother has a serious illness. Apparently in the eyes of the NCAA, it's fine if your relative is merely sick, it's when they're dead that you're not eligible. :rolleyes:
 


How does our lineup look? In a word, frail.

We don't have a single player that I would describe as physical, much less nasty. Even if Buckles was not nearly the same guy coming off his injury and layoff (a distinct possibility), he would have at least added a guy that would play with some power and grab some boards. It's absolutely ridiculous that we go in to this year without a true PF given Trevor's situation, but what is done (or rather, what wasn't done) is done.

As for Joey King, I cannot imagine the staff giving him a scholarship if they thought there was any chance he wouldn't be eligible this year. Of course, I didn't think they would give him a scholarship to begin with, so I certainly could be wrong again.

Dre Mathieu and others ability to pressure the ball is now going to be even more important. The Gophers are not going to win the battle of the boards much, so a pressure defense is going to be the only way to get out in transition.
 

The NCAA has made the decision, nothing we can do. So now it is up to Coach Pitino on what to do.
 

If we had a 3rd center, I'd be hoping for EE and Mo playing together at times if the match-up warrants. There may be games where we have to do that anyway. I see poor Oto getting mauled in some B1G games, and my perception is that King and Buggs won't be much better off.
 

I think you can play offense without a true power forward. It's not the best way to play offensive basketball, but you can do it. I think the question is how to hide the physical deficiency on defense and on the boards. Fortunately one answer to that question is proactive defense and stealing the basketball, including denying entry passes, and that's the type of defense they want to run. When you see teams in the NCAA tournament upset bigger and more athletic teams, it's usually with quick hands on defense, never letting the favored team settle into their preferred offensive rhythm or receive the ball in the paint without the pass being challenged.

In a bigger-picture sense, what you're trying to do is avoid playing the other team's game or playing to their strengths. Yes, Buggs and/or King will get mauled if you let it become Rugby. Don't let it become Rugby. Make them play you in basketball.
 

howeda7 said:
If we had a 3rd center, I'd be hoping for EE and Mo playing together at times if the match-up warrants. There may be games where we have to do that anyway. I see poor Oto getting mauled in some B1G games, and my perception is that King and Buggs won't be much better off.
Click to expand...

Tubby is that you? The possibility that EE and "Not So Big" Mo play together bring back flashbacks of EE and Sampson playing together when Mbakwe went down.
 

Regarding the lack to bigs, if you look at last years FIU team, they had only 2 players over 6'6", this is not something that will be new to coach Pitino. It's going to be all about pushing the pace, running, shooting 3's, I imagine this will create some match up problems for opponents too. It's going to be interesting.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida-international/2013.html
 

mkAz said:
Regarding the lack to bigs, if you look at last years FIU team, they had only 2 players over 6'6", this is not something that will be new to coach Pitino. It's going to be all about pushing the pace, running, shooting 3's, I imagine this will create some match up problems for opponents too. It's going to be interesting.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/florida-international/2013.html
Click to expand...

I agree it will be interesting, but MTSU went 19-1 in FIU's conference with nobody over 6'8 making much of a contribution. At that level, it's rare to see talented tall guys.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/middle-tennessee/2013.html

I am more concerned with bulk than height next year. If the Gophers had a J'Son Stamper type to play some minutes at the 4 (even at 6'6 or so), that would be a significant addition. I think next year has the potential to be a lot of fun, but finding a way to push the pace will be critical.
 

EG#9 said:
I agree it will be interesting, but MTSU went 19-1 in FIU's conference with nobody over 6'8 making much of a contribution. At that level, it's rare to see talented tall guys.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/middle-tennessee/2013.html

I am more concerned with bulk than height next year. If the Gophers had a J'Son Stamper type to play some minutes at the 4 (even at 6'6 or so), that would be a significant addition. I think next year has the potential to be a lot of fun, but finding a way to push the pace will be critical.
Click to expand...

I'm less concerned about the lack of height than an overall lack of talent. After Dre and Austin we have an average B1G center (at best), a couple of late transfers from small schools, a couple of late recruits, a redshirt, a guy who lost sixty pounds in order to play, and a three point specialist who couldn't make one under the old regime. It doesn't seem like a lot.
 

FWIW the Gophers played last year without a "Nasty, physical PF" just need a C to bring that element. Either Mo or EE need to be determined on the boards.
 

scher215 said:
FWIW the Gophers played last year without a "Nasty, physical PF" just need a C to bring that element. Either Mo or EE need to be determined on the boards.
Click to expand...

You don't consider Trevor Mbakwe a nasty physical PF?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom