I don't think it's any indictment on Chip that he didn't get as many minutes yesterday. I think it's one of those things where if we're not starving for buckets, then Chip is not as essential to the cause at this point. Defensively, we were pretty much shutting them down. Chip's value is when we need an offensive spark specifically, IMO, and really we didn't need that yesterday. He'll be called upon very soon, probably this Thursday, so hopefully he stays ready when we need him.
No Armelin
- Thread starter bga1
- Start date
GopherJake
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 23,800
- Reaction score
- 7,133
- Points
- 113
centerofmn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 426
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I didn't mean to say that I have any idea what kind of players they will be over the next 3 years. I just meant we know what both are capable of now. And honestly, what I see out of Chip looks a lot better than what Maverick has shown.
Bayfieldgopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 9,033
- Reaction score
- 1,541
- Points
- 113
I was surprised we didn't see Chip with the large second half lead. Frosh can always benefit from PT and this would have been a good time to get some.
GopherJake
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 23,800
- Reaction score
- 7,133
- Points
- 113
I hear what you are saying, but I disagree also. If you quadrupled either one's minutes, then you would know, but given 5 minutes a game, do we really know? Guys *can* improve/come out of their shells mid-season.
Right now -Chip has the potential to be a great player, even a star who can create some offense. That is potential right now, not reality. Reality, when on he can give us some good minutes.
Mav has little star potential, but great work horse potential. That is a reality right now.
While I agree that Chip looks like a better player, Mav's particular skills are more needed right now. Having the players with the highest skill levels on the floor isn't the only consideration. Count me as a believer that a true PG is essential for success. Note that as Hoffarber adjusted his game yesterday, his scoring went down and Trevor and Rodney's went up, which helped us win. We were perfectly capable of losing to Iowa. They didn't look that bad all on their own.
I agree with you Moonlight. Making Mav a point guard and getting good minutes out of him - as we did last night is a big deal. I was very happy with yesterday's win and Mav was very good. My concern is for the big picture. Not seeing Chip at all in the second half rang wrong. The first 10 minutes of the second half we were seriously struggling to put the ball in the bucket while Iowa was helping our cause by not hitting any shots at all. Chip not playing - even in the last few minutes of junk time - continues my worry that Tubby has a very hard time working with agressive, scoring guards. Westbrook (understandable) Joseph, Bostick all are possible (note the word possible ) examples.
Yes I understand defense and team play but you have to be able to play and recruit guys that can score and have the mentality to make plays when the game is on the line. I think we agree that Chip could be one of those guys. I DON'T want to see him gone after this year.
Mulligan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2009
- Messages
- 3,953
- Reaction score
- 1,846
- Points
- 113
Like many of your observations (sports-not politics) but you're being a little too paranoid here. Didn't see us struggle that much second half. IMO we had it under control. It's easier not to micro-analyze what Tubby does. He knows basketball and his team a hell of a lot better than any of us here.
Whether Tubby was ticked at Chip or he didn't play because of the flow of the game, who knows? I think anyone who doesn't follow Tubby's expectations is going to have a hard time; has nothing to do with being an aggressive scoring guard. It has everything to do with breaking team rules, being selfish, not committing to defense, etc. I don't see Chip like that. IMO Tubby knows what he has and appreciates it even if Chip didn't get his minutes. Doesn't make sense for Tubby to get on Rodney for not being aggressive enough after Illinois and then be on Chip for his style.
Mav still scares me. It looked to me like he came close to a couple of 5 second calls after crossing mid-court last night, and that was with so-so pressure from the opposition. Definitely a step in the right direction, however.
centerofmn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 426
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I agree that we need Mav to play PG right now. He is the only person other than Hoff that is even close to capable of handling the ball.
BUT, I would argue that those 5 hard drives to the basket that Chip gives us in his limited play time are just as valuable. Without Nolen, the only place we get our scoring is a bunch of post players and Hoffarber. Hypothetically, Rodney should be the slasher in our starting 5, but that just is not working out. In the last few games (before Iowa), I cannot remember him driving from the wing or anywhere on the court. Chip gives us a dynamic that is sorely lacking, almost as much as a real PG.
Long story short: Mav needs to play PG now, but I don't see why Chip is not getting more play-time.
mulligan- I hope you are right that it's just paranoia on my part. Could be. I like that Tubby has us in the discussion for the tournament. That's good. The next step is to move up a notch in guard talent. We need aggressive players like Chip. Tubby can get the big men, not worried there.