Playing Time - Why?

[quote="Knight" post=304052]Got to get the bench involved earlier in the game. We need our starters to have some gas in the tank. Louie always said it's not who plays during the game but who is in the game at the end.[/quote]
Louie usually stuck with seven guys. Used to say, "They don't need to rest, they're 20-21 years old."
 
Recruiting needs to get significantly better. People are acting like Mullin is apprehensive about playing these kids because they are freshmen. They aren't good enough and right now the game is above them.

Recruiting, recruiting....every top 25 team I have watched has either a freshman starting or just off the bench. At least one.
 
[quote="redken" post=304180][quote="Knight" post=304052]Got to get the bench involved earlier in the game. We need our starters to have some gas in the tank. Louie always said it's not who plays during the game but who is in the game at the end.[/quote]
Louie usually stuck with seven guys. Used to say, "They don't need to rest, they're 20-21 years old."[/quote]

That is fair. But then Fran talked last night about coach that coach their players to not foul. Their players NEVER foul and never get in that danger. We should adopt that mindset.
 
As the saying goes " the best thing about freshman is they become unhappy and we recruit them to become sophomores "
 
I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.
 
[quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.
 
[quote="mjmaherjr" post=304184]As the saying goes " the best thing about freshman is they become unhappy and we recruit them to become sophomores "[/quote]

Plus they were already bought and paid for.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

If they can't get on the floor for an extended period in the next game, I'm not confident they will give us anything at all this season. And that will be a huge problem as the season goes on.
 
[quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.
 
[quote="Paul Massell" post=303474]Our current bench is:
Trimble, Dixon, Williams, Roberts, Earlington.

Why That order? Why not more time from Williams or Roberts when they seem to have some things we need?

I think Mullin's priority is what he said: Best 5 guys. What defines "best" is I suspect, for lack of a better and more comprehensive word, confidence. (I think Mullin has used the word "experience" as a superlative on several occasions to praise players) If I were to define our bench by confidence I'd go in this order:
Dixon, Trimble, Williams, Roberts, Earlington.

And while "competence" would be part of that I would not necessarily have the same order for that terms specifically, for those players.

The key to understanding Mullin Ball and why Mullin chooses players is that the prerequisite ingredient that is required in position-less basketball is understanding. Each guy has to understand what is going on, on the floor. It is not about positions, plays and sets. You have to understand what is happening and get to an instinctual level of reacting constantly. This is where a guy like Ponds can really shine if he's got players around him that are on the same page - like the rocket passes against Rutgers and the no look behind the back pass kickout to Clark for 3 against Cal. It is great that he can do that but if there aren't 4 other guys on the floor in the right spots (and with the hands to handle it) But it is also where stuff falls apart when a guy is not where he is supposed to be at any given moment or is not fully confident of what to do without thinking about it. (Why Yakwe was such a problem)

My read on Roberts, Williams and Earlington are that they are not in synch with that yet. I like the length and athleticism that Roberts has and pretty much everything I've seen from Williams in very limited time.

Why Dixon getting less PT than Trimble? My read so far on Dixon is this:
He's small even on our small team. His advantage is speed and some above average athleticism and overall fits into the Mullin Ball better than Trimble but he's not fully in synch yet either and he's an unbalanced player with some high level offensive skills and instincts but maybe a year or two away defensively. At times he looks like he is locking in on defense and moves a lot but he needs to turn this up and smarten up too. Backing off that 3 pt shooter at the end of the shot clock (Cal) was painful and the wild forced shot when we were trying to retake a lead was Bush. I haven't seen these kind of mental mistakes from Trimble and from my perspective, that is what it is all about.

There were also stretches in several games where he was playing decent defense but the opponent was just shooting over him and hitting with ease. At his size he's needs to figure out that his game is about being smart and consistent, otherwise he's a liability. Smart on defense for him means getting up on his man without fouling but he is too small to have much cushion. Maintaining that small gap is where the sweet spot is for him and that is where the work needs to be done. The good news for hims is that in Mullin Ball he doesn't need to be a traditional PG. There is a place for him with his scorer mentality but he can't be a liability on defense as he has been. I think Dixon has to decide that he is going to be an in-your-joc defender. That is where he could define himself as a legitimate high major player.[/quote]
Great post. Agree re: Mullin’s approach. Unfortunately, at college level, I think it is difficult to implement given the youth and constantly changing rosters.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=303485]Everyone likes to see freshmen play hoping that they can get experience before league play. Mullin ball notwithstanding, the starters have yet to be able to put these much weaker OOC teams away so that the freshmen can play. Rutgers was the exception and even there they were relegated to garbage time.
The Cal freshmen played a total of 56 combined minutes. Of course much of the reason was because it was out of necessity and the rest of the team is mostly sophomores but Jones apparently had a lot more confidence that his freshmen were prepared for the game than Mullin had in his freshmen. I also think Mullin uses the seniority system his mentor coach Carnesecca used throughout his career.
The bottom line is I also agree with Jack Williams that the first 5 will be a little worn out by February if these freshmen are not going to see at least 5 minutes in key rest breaks. Of the freshmen the one that should be getting those minutes is Josh Roberts because Clark has been pushed to his limit in every game thus far. I'd hate to see Mullin lose another big to coaching indifference the way he has managed to do with Sima, Owens, Williams, Yakwe and Boubacar. Granted none of those were world beaters but they were all his players. We shouldn't have the unenviable reputation of leading the country in transfers in and out of the program.[/quote]
And, we can’t afford to have multiple starters with 4 fouls on a regular basis.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=304206][quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.[/quote]

How do we know that he is not good enough? You are assuming that Trimble, at 6'3, is more effective than a kid 6'9, 220 inside. One was a 3 star guard while the other was a 3 star forward? Trimble guarding an opposing 6'8 player, Kelly of Cal, who is also a freshman, looked ridiculous. Both Earlington and Roberts were ranked the same as Andre Kelly. Earlington 269, Roberts 271 and Kelly 272. Obviously the Cal coach is getting more out his freshmen on scholarship who are good enough to play while we claim ours stink. I guess we should be happy Mullin realized he had Greg Williams on the bench. Too bad it was in the last 50 seconds of the game when even Camus would have run around for 50 seconds without touching the ball.
 
Except for the Ruthers game, we haven’t played well.
Games have been in doubt until the buzzer—not cinched.
I agree that Mullin should give Williams and Roberts some PT early in the year.
Hopefully, a couple of ‘easy’ games in December will alllow that.
But with Keita, we go 7 deep and then garbage time begins.
I think it’s critical for the regular season we find out if Roberts can help at all under the boards.
And I’d like to see Williams split some time with Trimble.
It’s a long season.
Happy Thanksgiving.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=304206][quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.[/quote]

How the heck are we writing off freshman as not good enough only 5 games into their first season. Wow...
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=304226][quote="fordham96" post=304206][quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.[/quote]

How do we know that he is not good enough? You are assuming that Trimble, at 6'3, is more effective than a kid 6'9, 220 inside. One was a 3 star guard while the other was a 3 star forward? Trimble guarding an opposing 6'8 player, Kelly of Cal, who is also a freshman, looked ridiculous. Both Earlington and Roberts were ranked the same as Andre Kelly. Earlington 269, Roberts 271 and Kelly 272. Obviously the Cal coach is getting more out his freshmen on scholarship who are good enough to play while we claim ours stink. I guess we should be happy Mullin realized he had Greg Williams on the bench. Too bad it was in the last 50 seconds of the game when even Camus would have run around for 50 seconds without touching the ball.[/quote]

3 reasons we know he isn't good enough...
1) He doesn't play so the staff clearly thinks he is not good enough. They dont play him so you can give your opinion...so this is how I know, I don't need to have you see him nor does the staff either since our opinion doesn't matter

2) Neither of us are privy to practice but Mullin is and he still does not play him therefore we can infer what he thinks of him

3) Again why do YOU need to see anyone play? I don't need to see walk on X play to know that clearly by not playing him in live games Mullin doesn't think player X can play at this level now. I fail to see the point in your question, "How do WE know?" We do know by Mullin"'s actions.
 
Last edited:
[quote="fordham96" post=304250][quote="Class of 72" post=304226][quote="fordham96" post=304206][quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.[/quote]

How do we know that he is not good enough? You are assuming that Trimble, at 6'3, is more effective than a kid 6'9, 220 inside. One was a 3 star guard while the other was a 3 star forward? Trimble guarding an opposing 6'8 player, Kelly of Cal, who is also a freshman, looked ridiculous. Both Earlington and Roberts were ranked the same as Andre Kelly. Earlington 269, Roberts 271 and Kelly 272. Obviously the Cal coach is getting more out his freshmen on scholarship who are good enough to play while we claim ours stink. I guess we should be happy Mullin realized he had Greg Williams on the bench. Too bad it was in the last 50 seconds of the game when even Camus would have run around for 50 seconds without touching the ball.[/quote]

3 reasons we know he isn't good enough...
1) He doesn't play so the staff clearly thinks he is not good enough. They dont play him so you can give your opinion...so this is how I know, I don't need to have you see him nor does the staff either since our opinion doesn't matter

2) Neither of us are privy to practice but Mullin is and he still does not play him therefore we can infer what he thinks of him

3) Again why do YOU need to see anyone play? I don't need to see walk on X play to know that clearly by not playing him in live games Mullin doesn't think player X can play at this level now. I fail to see the point in your question, "How do WE know?" We do know by Mullin"'s actions.[/quote]

I'm sorry but you have to be trolling the board at this point. If a player can't immediately contribute then they are worthless? There is no development? Heck, those in the know including Paultzman told us not to expect much from Roberts this year because he's so raw. You readily admit you don't know anything about this situation, but that hasnt stopped you from just passing off wild assumptions.as fact!
 
[quote="fordham96" post=304250][quote="Class of 72" post=304226][quote="fordham96" post=304206][quote="rawdognyc" post=304192][quote="fordham96" post=304189][quote="rawdognyc" post=304186]I'm sorry... But putting in Josh Roberts at about the 9:30 mark until the under 8 TO is not going to hurt the team too much, plus it gets his feet wet. Even if he gets a couple of fouls, a block and a board in those 2 minutes while Clark or whoever gets some rest. Plus you do that throughout the season and maybe increase the minutes slowly.[/quote]

It doesn't work that way. Simply playing a kid does not automatically make them better or set them up for rest of year. By that logic you can play a walk on in the first few games and then hopefully he is a big contributor late in season no?

Or the player is not good enough to play even limited minutes and they need to see more in practice before they can be trusted on the court. You are giving these freshmen too much credit.[/quote]

He's not a walk on though. Plus he has size. His been on the court before during a game and didn't look out of his element. The guy is a bit raw, but in no way comparative to a walk on. I'm saying a minute or 2 here or there. Not crunch time.[/quote]

He's not good enough the fact he's on scholarship doesn't change that, that is the ultimate point.[/quote]

How do we know that he is not good enough? You are assuming that Trimble, at 6'3, is more effective than a kid 6'9, 220 inside. One was a 3 star guard while the other was a 3 star forward? Trimble guarding an opposing 6'8 player, Kelly of Cal, who is also a freshman, looked ridiculous. Both Earlington and Roberts were ranked the same as Andre Kelly. Earlington 269, Roberts 271 and Kelly 272. Obviously the Cal coach is getting more out his freshmen on scholarship who are good enough to play while we claim ours stink. I guess we should be happy Mullin realized he had Greg Williams on the bench. Too bad it was in the last 50 seconds of the game when even Camus would have run around for 50 seconds without touching the ball.[/quote]

3 reasons we know he isn't good enough...
1) He doesn't play so the staff clearly thinks he is not good enough. They dont play him so you can give your opinion...so this is how I know, I don't need to have you see him nor does the staff either since our opinion doesn't matter

2) Neither of us are privy to practice but Mullin is and he still does not play him therefore we can infer what he thinks of him

3) Again why do YOU need to see anyone play? I don't need to see walk on X play to know that clearly by not playing him in live games Mullin doesn't think player X can play at this level now. I fail to see the point in your question, "How do WE know?" We do know by Mullin"'s actions.[/quote]

Curtis Johnson could barely walk, much less run or jump, however he even saw minutes on a 21 win team that won the NIT that year (yes I know it eventually was vacated). So you can't convince me that although very raw, Roberts can't give 2-3 minutes of serviceable court time. Like I said, I don't care if he commits a couple of fouls, grab a rebound and block a shot. It gives him experience and also gives a player a break on the inside. I'm not saying he's going to be a game changer. Honestly, tell me, what is the worst that can happen by putting him in at the 9 minute mark of the first half of a game for a couple of minutes?
 
forget the nailbiters of the last 2 games but in my opinion it's not even just giving a player a couple of minutes of playing time to make them better ( which I think it would modestly ) but it's giving the guy they are replacing a couple minutes of a breather which will most definitely make them more effective ( specifically talking about Roberts and to smaller extent Williams )
 
Last edited:
Also I wonder if Clark spending more time on bigger guys has any affect on shooting lately ? I have no clue. But just wondering down the road if that could be a long term thing and thus putting Roberts down low a little would help
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top