Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 116
  1. #16

    Default

    Kid may not have fully hit puberty yet. Give him some time. He might still be growing. Nice that we’re in early on a Minnesota kid for once.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BleedGopher View Post



    Go Gophers!!
    #RowTheBoat and misspells Pitino. Tough first look here, Chet!

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gray4heisman View Post
    #RowTheBoat and misspells Pitino. Tough first look here, Chet!
    I was going to make the same observation. Seems really locked into the Gopher basketball program.

  4. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeathClutch View Post
    Not quite as skinny as this guy....

    Just watching him run made me scared that he was going to break something.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "A lot of guys look good running around in underwear." - 414GopherFan

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Windom, MN
    Posts
    6,884

    Default

    Holmgren appears to have some skills - but I'm not sure he will ever grow into a traditional post player. I see him more as a PF or maybe even SF type of player. If you're going to play a kid like Holmgren, you would have to have another banger on the team to do the dirty work under the basket. Leave Holmgren free to roam and use his mobility, which is one of his best attributes.

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    Holmgren appears to have some skills - but I'm not sure he will ever grow into a traditional post player. I see him more as a PF or maybe even SF type of player. If you're going to play a kid like Holmgren, you would have to have another banger on the team to do the dirty work under the basket. Leave Holmgren free to roam and use his mobility, which is one of his best attributes.
    Seriously?

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Willmar, MN
    Posts
    1,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeathClutch View Post
    Not quite as skinny as this guy....

    Has to be the longest neck I've ever seen


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Windom, MN
    Posts
    6,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keyser Söze View Post
    Seriously?
    why not. If you can run the court and shoot the 3, do it. Just because a kid is 6'11", that doesn't mean he has to be a post player or power forward. Instead of making him play inside and getting knocked around by heavier, stronger players, get him out in space and let him shoot over a shorter defender. I watched this kid play in the state tournament, and I see him as a perimeter player in college.

    UNLESS he puts on a ton of bulk in the next four years. But, looking as his body type, I suspect he's never going to be really bulky or muscular. which is fine - he could create some real mismatches.

    Now, you can still use him on the inside some on defense - but I see him more as the middle guy in a 2-3 zone, or coming over from the weak side to block shots.

    Hey, I could be wrong. But that's just my reaction to what I've seen at this point. Obviously, a lot can change in 3 years.

  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    why not. If you can run the court and shoot the 3, do it. Just because a kid is 6'11", that doesn't mean he has to be a post player or power forward. Instead of making him play inside and getting knocked around by heavier, stronger players, get him out in space and let him shoot over a shorter defender. I watched this kid play in the state tournament, and I see him as a perimeter player in college.

    UNLESS he puts on a ton of bulk in the next four years. But, looking as his body type, I suspect he's never going to be really bulky or muscular. which is fine - he could create some real mismatches.

    Now, you can still use him on the inside some on defense - but I see him more as the middle guy in a 2-3 zone, or coming over from the weak side to block shots.

    Hey, I could be wrong. But that's just my reaction to what I've seen at this point. Obviously, a lot can change in 3 years.
    Your position isn't where you fit best on offense but who you can guard. He's not guarding wings on the regular basis.

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleboy41 View Post
    Your position isn't where you fit best on offense but who you can guard.
    Say what?

  11. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleboy41 View Post
    Your position isn't where you fit best on offense but who you can guard. He's not guarding wings on the regular basis.
    KD/KAT/etc all can guard wings. Is this guy KD or KAT? No, but he does have a similar body. Neither guy is ripped, both are pretty lanky


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,366
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    I can’t see him defending a SF like Coffey So defensively he will be guarding a big man. Offensively he appears to really have a nice touch and looks like he as a lot to offer with an inside and outside game. Glad we offered early.

  13. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by short ornery norwegian View Post
    why not. If you can run the court and shoot the 3, do it. Just because a kid is 6'11", that doesn't mean he has to be a post player or power forward. Instead of making him play inside and getting knocked around by heavier, stronger players, get him out in space and let him shoot over a shorter defender. I watched this kid play in the state tournament, and I see him as a perimeter player in college.

    UNLESS he puts on a ton of bulk in the next four years. But, looking as his body type, I suspect he's never going to be really bulky or muscular. which is fine - he could create some real mismatches.

    Now, you can still use him on the inside some on defense - but I see him more as the middle guy in a 2-3 zone, or coming over from the weak side to block shots.

    Hey, I could be wrong. But that's just my reaction to what I've seen at this point. Obviously, a lot can change in 3 years.
    Are you implying that you can't run the court and shoot 3s if you're playing PF? If this dude is in the lineup and you're calling him a SF, that means you have another PF and C on the court. Who guards the other team's SF? If he is better suited to defend PFs, which it looks like he is, then play him there and let him play to his strengths on offense. I don't understand some peoples' obsession with playing someone at SF simply because they can shoot. Why create a defensive liability and reduce the amount of ball handlers on the floor? Why not let a PF spot up and shoot 3s if they want?

  14. #29

    Default

    Let’s just call him a basketball player who may create mismatches on the other end. Plenty of offensively challenged players in college basketball he may be able to guard.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Windom, MN
    Posts
    6,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keyser Söze View Post
    Are you implying that you can't run the court and shoot 3s if you're playing PF? If this dude is in the lineup and you're calling him a SF, that means you have another PF and C on the court. Who guards the other team's SF? If he is better suited to defend PFs, which it looks like he is, then play him there and let him play to his strengths on offense. I don't understand some peoples' obsession with playing someone at SF simply because they can shoot. Why create a defensive liability and reduce the amount of ball handlers on the floor? Why not let a PF spot up and shoot 3s if they want?
    I'm talking offense only. defense is a separate issue. what position, or role you play on offense has no impact on what you do defensively. Or it shouldn't. when you're on offense, you put people in the best position for them to score. when you're on defense, you put people in the best position to stop the other team from scoring. There's no reason why someone can't be a SF - or fill that type of role - on offense, and play PF - or fill that type of role - on defense. It's not like there's some rule or law that says the PF on offense also has to be a PF on defense. At least not as far as I know. Especially today, when 3-point shooting has become more important at all levels of the game. If a guy like Holmgren is (theoretically) your best outside shooter, then put him outside on offense and let him shoot. On defense, if he's the best fit in the middle, then he can be a C or post on defense.

    Obviously, this only works with a versatile player who can fill different roles.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •