2024 Portal

[Lotto 273]

58 minutes ago, NCAubs said:

I kinda misunderstood the assignment.  As far as depth, I think there are 1’s and 1a’s.  

I’m thinking 

pegues/pettiford

denver/kelly

cbm/cmo&howard

chaney/turtle

broome/cardwell/scott

 

 

Can mix and match more

[Dual-Threat Rigby 9,228]

2 hours ago, AUSCalum87 said:

I appreciate the shoutout Lotto! My opinion is worth a cent and some potatoes, but here is my list if I’m going by what the depth chart will be like along with the top players on our roster.

Pegues/Denver

Denver/Pettiford/Kelly

CBM/Kelly/Howard/Cmo

Chaney/Broome/Hudson

Broome/Cardwell/Scott

Best players on our roster:

1) Broome

2) CBM

3) Pegues

4) Kelly

5) Denver

6) Pettiford

7) Cardwell

😎 Howard

9) CMo

10) Hudson

11) Scott

 

 

I would be pretty shocked if this Kelly kid doesn’t eventually usurp a heavy amount of Denver’s wing minutes, if his 3 ball really is better than shown last year. Denver played against bigger guys very admirably, but his D should be reserved for shorter guys and 2s. 
We honestly haven’t had a guy with NBA size at the 2 in a long, long while. You can count Samir with 6’4 being on the lower end there, but Kelly is seemingly more fluid. Don’t know his wingspan, but I’d imagine he’ll be a better forward defender (than Denver) if he truly buys in on that end. 
 

Him as the backup 2 also makes Pettiford or Denver at the 1 less of a problem early. He can bring the ball up and play as the lead ball handler, so they really don’t HAVE to do much in terms of playing on ball, unless they’re just good at it.

Idk what this makes them nationally, but I think they’re finally equipped to go guard for guard with Alabama, which has just been such a glaring gap for most of the 2020s. I like us more in a shootout style of game more than I have in some recent seasons (basically everyone except 2021-22) 

[JuscAUse! 1,727]

Sadly , I'm pretty sure it will make no difference. Our Achilles heal is the PF position. I have been absolutely converted to believe that BP failed us all by not having a backup PF that can start in the NBA in 2025, so I can't get excited. We are doomed. I have accepted that fact and will not be whiplashed into thinking anything other than that will make a difference.

Sigh........

[Lotto 273]

Just now, JuscAUse! said:

Sadly , I'm pretty sure it will make no difference. Our Achilles heal is the PF position. I have been absolutely converted to believe that BP failed us all by not having a backup PF that can start in the NBA in 2025, so I can't get excited. We are doomed. I have accepted that fact and will not be whiplashed into thinking anything other than that will make a difference.

Sigh........

I completely disagree. 

Honestly I think miles, Chaney and Denver take huge disgustingly good steps forward this year.  I honestly think we will be the best team in the SEC regular season and tournament.  We will be a much more well rounded team especially if the 1 guard position is better than last year.  We will be well rounded and can compete at all positions.  

 

Breath of fresh air…

[JuscAUse! 1,727]

Just now, Lotto said:

I completely disagree. 

Honestly I think miles, Chaney and Denver take huge disgustingly good steps forward this year.  I honestly think we will be the best team in the SEC regular season and tournament.  We will be a much more well rounded team especially if the 1 guard position is better than last year.  We will be well rounded and can compete at all positions.  

 

Breath of fresh air…

Oops. Forgot the yellow font......

[AUSCalum87 490]

1 hour ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I would be pretty shocked if this Kelly kid doesn’t eventually usurp a heavy amount of Denver’s wing minutes, if his 3 ball really is better than shown last year. Denver played against bigger guys very admirably, but his D should be reserved for shorter guys and 2s. 
We honestly haven’t had a guy with NBA size at the 2 in a long, long while. You can count Samir with 6’4 being on the lower end there, but Kelly is seemingly more fluid. Don’t know his wingspan, but I’d imagine he’ll be a better forward defender (than Denver) if he truly buys in on that end. 
 

Him as the backup 2 also makes Pettiford or Denver at the 1 less of a problem early. He can bring the ball up and play as the lead ball handler, so they really don’t HAVE to do much in terms of playing on ball, unless they’re just good at it.

Idk what this makes them nationally, but I think they’re finally equipped to go guard for guard with Alabama, which has just been such a glaring gap for most of the 2020s. I like us more in a shootout style of game more than I have in some recent seasons (basically everyone except 2021-22) 

See, this is where I think Pearl could have different lineups depending on matchups. Denver came along the last two months of the season. If he continues to progress, how do you keep him off the court? Honestly, I only think Broome and Pegues are guaranteed starters. 

And I agree with you about our backcourt finally being able to match UAT’s. I’m telling you, this is the most versatile and athletic team Pearl has had since he has been here. 

What would your starting 5 look like? I’ve posted mine earlier, but it really is difficult to decide. 

[Auburn93 845]

3 hours ago, AUSCalum87 said:

As I stated above, if you look at his overall numbers and efficiency, last year was an anomaly. He was asked to do a lot and was put in a system that didn’t match his skill level. He STILL had 8 games over 20 points and around 20 games with at least 10 points. If that is him struggling, I will take anyone with those numbers.

Allen Flanigan had eight games over 20 points last year and averaged 14.8. Flanigan was terrible at the three with 27%. Miles looks a little lighter on his feet than Flanigan, but he is a similar three, not super fast, not super long. I see this as a good pick up but nothing that just shoots us up to the top 10 easily. 

 

 

[Lotto 273]

2 minutes ago, Auburn93 said:

Allen Flanigan had eight games over 20 points last year and averaged 14.8. Flanigan was terrible at the three with 27%. Miles looks a little lighter on his feet than Flanigan, but he is a similar three, not super fast, not super long. I see this as a good pick up but nothing that just shoots us up to the top 10 easily. 

 

 

Flanagan’s issue has always been between his ears.  If Kelly was not in a good environment and fighting an injury I don’t really think the comparison holds 

[AUSCalum87 490]

Just now, Auburn93 said:

Allen Flanigan had eight games over 20 points last year and averaged 14.8. Flanigan was terrible at the three with 27%. Miles looks a little lighter on his feet than Flanigan, but he is a similar three, not super fast, not super long. I see this as a good pick up but nothing that just shoots us up to the top 10 easily. 

 

 

I think Kelly is more athletic and more fluid than Flanigan. Also, Kelly was injured as well with a back injury. If you look at his 2 previous seasons he was very efficient at the three, around 38%, and much higher FT%. I think Kelly allows us to go 4  guard or put CBM and Kelly on the court at the same time. I mean, who in the nation could matchup with us if we have Pegues, Denver, CBM, Kelly and Broome? That literally is a pick your poison. The best thing is teams are going to more than likely have to double Broome, leaving one of those sharp shooters wide open. Again, the possibilities with this roster are many.

[Lotto 273]

21 minutes ago, JuscAUse! said:

Oops. Forgot the yellow font......

Oh does that mean you were being sarcastic?  My fault if you were 

[AUSCalum87 490]

3 minutes ago, Lotto said:

Flanagan’s issue has always been between his ears.  If Kelly was not in a good environment and fighting an injury I don’t really think the comparison holds 

I just posted this, but if you look at both of their highlights, you can just tell how much for fluid and athletic Kelly is on top of a much better defender. Also, the system Kelly was in did not showcase his talents and he was asked to be their primary ball handler, which is not a strength for him.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 9,228]

16 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

See, this is where I think Pearl could have different lineups depending on matchups. Denver came along the last two months of the season. If he continues to progress, how do you keep him off the court? Honestly, I only think Broome and Pegues are guaranteed starters. 

And I agree with you about our backcourt finally being able to match UAT’s. I’m telling you, this is the most versatile and athletic team Pearl has had since he has been here. 

What would your starting 5 look like? I’ve posted mine earlier, but it really is difficult to decide. 

I think it would be pretty simple/safe to start out with. Pegues, Denver, Chad, Chaney, Broome. The 5 with the highest ceiling would likely be inserting Kelly instead of Denver. Gives you league average height at almost all positions, plus athleticism across the board except for Broome, and three (!!!!) legit ball handlers in at the same time. 

They'd like to switch everything to such a high degree, and I think with that 2-5, it'd be pretty hard to find a positional weakness to exploit. There's obv the 1-5 pick, but we're at a point where the 5 has been reduced to largely lobs. Unless you're a truly great center, they're not running post ups for you

[AUSCalum87 490]

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think it would be pretty simple/safe to start out with. Pegues, Denver, Chad, Chaney, Broome. The 5 with the highest ceiling would likely be inserting Kelly instead of Denver. Gives you league average height at almost all positions, plus athleticism across the board except for Broome, and three (!!!!) legit ball handlers in at the same time. 

They'd like to switch everything to such a high degree, and I think with that 2-5, it'd be pretty hard to find a positional weakness to exploit. There's obv the 1-5 pick, but we're at a point where the 5 has been reduced to largely lobs. Unless you're a truly great center, they're not running post ups for you

Yea, I agree with that lineup as well. However, I think Pearl could play some 4 guard plus Broome depending on matchups. And yes, the “typical center” is not present anymore and they need to be more versatile, it’s why Broome will be such a mismatch as well. The “weakest” part of our team is the PF position, but now I think that gets compensated for getting Kelly and we can mask that weakness into a strength.

[Lotto 273]

13 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

I just posted this, but if you look at both of their highlights, you can just tell how much for fluid and athletic Kelly is on top of a much better defender. Also, the system Kelly was in did not showcase his talents and he was asked to be their primary ball handler, which is not a strength for him.

Plus Kelly has a lot of finesse from The one reverse layup I saw 😂

[Dual-Threat Rigby 9,228]

23 minutes ago, Auburn93 said:

Allen Flanigan had eight games over 20 points last year and averaged 14.8. Flanigan was terrible at the three with 27%. Miles looks a little lighter on his feet than Flanigan, but he is a similar three, not super fast, not super long. I see this as a good pick up but nothing that just shoots us up to the top 10 easily. 

 

 

Not a worthwhile contribution to the convo by me, but the Flanigan from last year probably gets us at least 3 more wins bare minimum. Having a secondary play maker, a consistent downhill threat, a stellar 6'5-6'7 wing defender and an elite rebounder would've shored up alot of problems. 

I don't think that guy will ever be properly appreciated, but there was definitely a Flanigan sized hole that was felt in the Miss St matchup, the Tenn game, and the Yale ones namely. I'd probably say Baylor too, just to have a body on that kid that scorched us for 30+ 

[Lotto 273]

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Not a worthwhile contribution to the convo by me, but the Flanigan from last year probably gets us at least 3 more wins bare minimum. Having a secondary play maker, a consistent downhill threat, a stellar 6'5-6'7 wing defender and an elite rebounder would've shored up alot of problems. 

I don't think that guy will ever be properly appreciated, but there was definitely a Flanigan sized hole that was felt in the Miss St matchup, the Tenn game, and the Yale ones namely. I'd probably say Baylor too, just to have a body on that kid that scorched us for 30+ 

Absolutely.  We would have 100% beaten Tennessee because he could have covered knecht 

[AUSCalum87 490]

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Not a worthwhile contribution to the convo by me, but the Flanigan from last year probably gets us at least 3 more wins bare minimum. Having a secondary play maker, a consistent downhill threat, a stellar 6'5-6'7 wing defender and an elite rebounder would've shored up alot of problems. 

I don't think that guy will ever be properly appreciated, but there was definitely a Flanigan sized hole that was felt in the Miss St matchup, the Tenn game, and the Yale ones namely. I'd probably say Baylor too, just to have a body on that kid that scorched us for 30+ 

Yea, I would agree with that. We just didn’t have enough scorers last year. If Broome, CBM or JWill had an off night, we more than likely lost. Our guards were average to below average and the main reasons why we lost to better teams for the most part.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 9,228]

2 minutes ago, Lotto said:

Absolutely.  We would have 100% beaten Tennessee because he could have covered knecht 

I think Chad was a capable-good defender most nights, but I don't think he was always the most fundamentally sound (reached for steals alot) and he just didn't have the body for guys like Knecht. 

I don't want him to put on a TON of weight bc that slinky build he had worked. It let him squeeze in to some lanes that didn't seem like they were there. But maybe 5 extra pounds? 10? something that just makes it to where dudes his height or even smaller arent taking him to pound town in the post

[Lotto 273]

8 minutes ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think Chad was a capable-good defender most nights, but I don't think he was always the most fundamentally sound (reached for steals alot) and he just didn't have the body for guys like Knecht. 

I don't want him to put on a TON of weight bc that slinky build he had worked. It let him squeeze in to some lanes that didn't seem like they were there. But maybe 5 extra pounds? 10? something that just makes it to where dudes his height or even smaller arent taking him to pound town in the post

I think cbm was the closest we had but he just didn’t have the frame to be physical enough 

[AUSCalum87 490]

1 hour ago, Lotto said:

I think cbm was the closest we had but he just didn’t have the frame to be physical enough 

I think that’s why Pearl has stated he wants CBM to gain another 10-15 pounds, to be able to handle the physicality without losing his agility.

[arktiger1975 732]

1 hour ago, AUSCalum87 said:

Yea, I agree with that lineup as well. However, I think Pearl could play some 4 guard plus Broome depending on matchups. And yes, the “typical center” is not present anymore and they need to be more versatile, it’s why Broome will be such a mismatch as well. The “weakest” part of our team is the PF position, but now I think that gets compensated for getting Kelly and we can mask that weakness into a strength.

4 guard lineups are pretty common nowadays.

[autigeremt 7,262]

On 5/25/2024 at 3:51 PM, AUSCalum87 said:

Apparently Kelly did not visit Miami this weekend but he was offered. A University of Miami reporter stated that he is “welcome to come whenever”. So maybe, as Lee Corso says, not so fast. Hopefully this is good news for us. The portal is a roller coaster, 🤣 

We suck 

[AUSCalum87 490]

18 minutes ago, arktiger1975 said:

4 guard lineups are pretty common nowadays.

They’re more common now but very few teams can run 4 guards effectively. There have been a handful of teams in the past few years that have had enough quality guards and depth at the guard/wing position to run a 4 guard offense. Auburn has never had this many quality guards. It’s why getting Kelly completely changes the way Pearl usually has his traditional lineups and allows him to mask his weakness at the PF position. We now don’t have to ask much of Chaney. He will be more of an added perk than a liability since we won’t be relying on him as much as we would have if we didn’t get someone like Kelly.

[CCTAU 3,658]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

We suck 

Right! 
I can’t keep up.

Is it OK to wear my little orange shirt with the flaming basketball again? 
This thread has so many ups and downs. It’s tough knowing what to wear from day to day.

I do like the Kelly add. We should be more versatile this season.

Unless we still suck. I’m just not sure…

[Skip Jansen 41]

Although I've been a long time reader of this site, this is my first time commenting. I used to be a regular participant on ITAT, and still follow AU basketball.....I just don't comment on social media very often anymore. That being said...I feel compelled to address the recent Tahaad Pettiford position distinction, as I believe a lot of people are taking what BP has said far too literally and may be missing a method/agenda to his rhetoric. 

 

First of all...does anyone really think that it's a coincidence that BP made the public comment that TP is "not a PG" just a couple of days ahead of a visit from a transfer PG (Pegues)? Or...that he is now hedging that statement by saying that TP will play some point just days before a transfer 2G (Kelly) commits? One thing I know for sure is that BP never says anything without a reason. And...there is definitely a method in his most recent ones. 

 

The hardest thing to do in today's climate (transfer portal/NIL) is to develop quality depth. That makes it virtually impossible to recruit over the top of a current player or bring in a high level transfer and freshman in the same year. One of them is gonna be unhappy and leave. BP learned that the hard way with the Trey Alexander situation. Believe me...BP knows how good we would have been the last couple of years with Alexander. So....does anyone really think he's gonna risk that again? He's just trying to build the best roster possible under the rules that have been set. What BP says publicly is what he wants out there and he's earned that right. Whether it's semantically filled is irrelevant. Who cares what verbiage BP uses to distinguish TP's position? This is the age of position less basketball anyway, right? It's obvious that BP wants TP and Pegues on the floor at the same time, so...he can call TP whatever he wants.. Transfers want to come in and play and they know if a school has signed the number one recruit, in the country, at their position. So...does it sound like BP is contradicting himself occasionally or sending mixed signals? Sure, he says things like....TP is "not a PG" and is gonna play "off the ball", but then says that he wants the "ball in his hands"  because he's a "great scorer and shooter". When did those skills become a detriment to playing PG?  Mark Sears, Wade Taylor, and Josh Hubbard share those same skills and they are called PGs. Again, the terminology is not what's important....it's an intended message not normal discourse after all. Getting them both to AU is what's important. 

 

I've been fortunate to have seen TP play several times, but there's no reason for me to state my opinion about his natural position. I'll leave that to BP and everyone will get to see for themselves in November. I will say this....he is not a 2G in the traditional sense. He is not a guy that will be coming off a pin down or curling off a staggered screen hunting three point shots. Does that mean he can't play "off the ball"? Well...how is he gonna be "off the ball" if the ball is in his hands a good portion of the time? Nevermind. 😁 Whatever he's labeled...he's incredible off the bounce. His first step is off the charts (his speed is the first thing you notice). He is great at getting to the rim in ball screen action (but he's not a PG? 😂)  or not. I'll be interested in seeing how teams defend him and how BP utilizes him. In ball screens....most teams will likely try and go under forcing him to make perimeter and mid range shots. If he makes those consistently...he's basically unstoppable because he will turn the corner and get downhill against any other coverage. He and Broome should be lethal in ball screens because when he turns the corner because the weak side post defender will have to step up, so expect a lot of lobs for dunks. Did I mention that his passing (particularly in the paint) is elite? He also has a jab step that will be a crowd favorite. I think BP will overload a side a lot as well to keep the help side defense occupied in other action. Probably see more dribble hand off stuff in order to get a switch and attack it (although he doesn't really need a mismatch because he can get by anyone). 

 

Something else to consider....the way the block/charge rule is being called now is a much bigger change than most realize. Officials will not allow a help side defender to just "stand at the alter" in the lane and draw a charge anymore. That's gonna be a block call every time going forward. We didn't see it much last year because we didn't have a guard that could penetrate. Pettiford is gonna have a field day with it. He is a great finisher at the rim as well. He plays much bigger than he is and will go to the FT line a lot. As a matter of fact...I expect us to be a high quantity FTA team overall. He's also really good at recognition, decision making and 

controlling tempo and pace (I know, I know...he's not a PG 😜). Those skills obviously make him dangerous in transition as well. 

 

So, In summation....it doesn't matter what TP's position designation is. He can be called a lead guard, combo guard, or "bucket getter" (or whatever), so....everyone can pick their favorite. What does matter is his production level. IMO...he will be one of our top 3 in minutes played, usage, and scoring. FWIW...I don't  typically use hyperbole when discussing incoming freshmen because 99% of them are already overhyped. That's not the case with TP....he's the real deal. I'll be interested to see social media comments in January/February. I'm guessing the rhetoric will consist of a lot of...."He shouldn't go unless he's guaranteed being a first rounder" and..."The latest NBA Mock Draft has him going at number 26 in the first round".  Oh wait....that's what they have him now. 

 

Sorry for being so long winded and thank you for allowing me to interject on this matter. I hope it didn't come off as me dissing others because that's not the case. I like Pegues, Kelly, and Jones...they are all good players, but...Pettiford is a legit difference maker. War Eagle!