2024 Portal

[AuburnNTexas 7,300]

6 minutes ago, Skip Jansen said:

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!

I like your take and hope you are right. If you are right then we have the Alpha Cole is always talking about.

[Skip Jansen 33]

18 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

I like your take and hope you are right. If you are right then we have the Alpha Cole is always talking about.

There is one thing that I am positive about is.....BP is just as good or better at public relations as he is as a college basketball coach. And...he's a pretty damn good coach. 
 

Convincing the top PG transfer to come compete with the top HS PG in the nation is next to impossible, but that's what he did. Well...that's not exactly what he did, but you know what I mean. 😂 

[Skip Jansen 33]

Just now, Skip Jansen said:

The one thing that I am positive about is.....BP is just as good or better at public relations as he is as a college coach. And...he's a pretty damn good coach. 
 

Convincing the top PG transfer to come compete with the top HS PG in the nation is next to impossible, but that's what he did. Well...that's not exactly what he did, but you know what I mean. 😂 

 

[Auburn93 732]

12 hours ago, AUSCalum87 said:

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.

Okay, I'm convinced. 

[akillshot 301]

50 minutes ago, Skip Jansen said:

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!

Great first post and welcome. 

[Skip Jansen 33]

2 minutes ago, akillshot said:

Great first post and welcome. 

Thank you!

[Auburn93 732]

3 minutes ago, Auburn93 said:

 

 

TP SOUNDS LIKE Jared Harper with speed to the bucket. If he plays like the soph or junior version of JH, I wish we could keep him beyond nine months.

And I know who you are. 

Edited May 27 by Auburn93

[Lotto 265]

1 hour ago, Skip Jansen said:

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!

Dude…. Please comment more you literally know so much and just taught me so much!  It really seems like we’re about to surprise some people next year.  You earned this dude  🏆 

[AUSCalum87 453]

1 hour ago, Skip Jansen said:

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!

Great post, you need to post more often here! And I agree, Pearl usually knows how to navigate and use subtle hints on what his roster looks like. Pettiford is special, and I’ve said if he was 3 inches taller he would be a lottery pick without a doubt. 
I also think Pearl doesn’t want to make the same mistake he had with Aden, putting too much pressure and having him too involved in the beginning. It’s why Pegues is ideal for us to have at PG and let Pettiford come along slowly. I think Pettiford will go back and forth from PG and SG. There are so many ways to get him on the floor without making him be THE GUY and allow him to just play basketball. Look at Stephon Castle at UCONN last year. He wasn’t the focal point of their team but was clearly the most talented and took over when he needed. I think that’s how Pearl is going to use Pettiford instead of what he did with Aden.

[AUSCalum87 453]

1 hour ago, Skip Jansen said:

There is one thing that I am positive about is.....BP is just as good or better at public relations as he is as a college basketball coach. And...he's a pretty damn good coach. 
 

Convincing the top PG transfer to come compete with the top HS PG in the nation is next to impossible, but that's what he did. Well...that's not exactly what he did, but you know what I mean. 😂 

What would your starting 5 look like in the beginning of the year?

[Skip Jansen 33]

1 hour ago, Auburn93 said:

 

TP SOUNDS LIKE Jared Harper with speed to the bucket. If he plays like the soph or junior version of JH, I wish we could keep him beyond nine months.

And I know who you are. 

"And I know who you are."

Well...don't tell everyone I'm full of it. 😂

"Speed" is definitely the key word with TP. It's so apparent when you see it. It's really what separates him from others. I've also seen several comps and Brandon Jennings is probably the closest because of the speed (and being left handed). 

 

[Skip Jansen 33]

1 hour ago, Lotto said:

Dude…. Please comment more you literally know so much and just taught me so much!  It really seems like we’re about to surprise some people next year.  You earned this dude  🏆 

Thank you. I really appreciate the kind words. And...the trophy. 

[Skip Jansen 33]

54 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

Great post, you need to post more often here! And I agree, Pearl usually knows how to navigate and use subtle hints on what his roster looks like. Pettiford is special, and I’ve said if he was 3 inches taller he would be a lottery pick without a doubt. 
I also think Pearl doesn’t want to make the same mistake he had with Aden, putting too much pressure and having him too involved in the beginning. It’s why Pegues is ideal for us to have at PG and let Pettiford come along slowly. I think Pettiford will go back and forth from PG and SG. There are so many ways to get him on the floor without making him be THE GUY and allow him to just play basketball. Look at Stephon Castle at UCONN last year. He wasn’t the focal point of their team but was clearly the most talented and took over when he needed. I think that’s how Pearl is going to use Pettiford instead of what he did with Aden.

Thank you AUSCalum87. Great post....I agree with everything you said. I particularly like your assessment of how Hurley handled Castle. I also agree that TP will give us minutes at both the 1 and 2. The one thing he is going to give us immediately is a "late in the shot clock" scorer. With the 30 second clock....every team is gonna have several possessions each game where they get into single digits on the shot clock and have to go into scramble mode. Having  a guy who can get wherever he wants on the floor and make a shot or get fouled, in those situations, is like having gold. He also will make others better, especially our shooters. That was the problem with Jones last year. Being a "catch and shoot" guy....he needs to play with a PG who can get in the lane, draw the defense and kick it out to for a step in 3. We didn't have a PG like that last year. Obviously BP was aware of that and ran a lot of stuff to get him shots, but he needed to play "inside out". He will benefit greatly from having someone who can penetrate. Thanks again for the response. 

[Skip Jansen 33]

1 hour ago, AUSCalum87 said:

What would your starting 5 look like in the beginning of the year?

Here's what I think it will be-

-Pegues

-Pettiford

-Baker-Mazzera

-Johnson

-Broome

I think BP will spend a lot of the preseason practices experimenting with lineups and find out who plays best together. It's like I mentioned in my previous post (Jones needing a penetrator to break down the defense). For example...I could see BP wanting our three best perimeter shooters (and Broome) in the game when TP is the primary ball handler. He could play 4 out-I in with Broome in ball screen action. Or...he could play 5 out and completely spread the floor. There are styles of play that matchup better with other complimentary styles. We have a lot of flexibility and a unusually large amount of players who can mix and match. This year's roster is much better constructed than last year. 

[Lotto 265]

Just now, Skip Jansen said:

Here's what I think it will be-

-Pegues

-Pettiford

-Baker-Mazzera

-Johnson

-Broome

I think BP will spend a lot of the preseason practices experimenting with lineups and find out who plays best together. It's like I mentioned in my previous post (Jones needing a penetrator to break down the defense). For example...I could see BP wanting our three best perimeter shooters (and Broome) in the game when TP is the primary ball handler. He could play 4 out-I in with Broome in ball screen action. Or...he could play 5 out and completely spread the floor. There are styles of play that matchup better with other complimentary styles. We have a lot of flexibility and an unusually large amount of players who can mix and match. This year's roster is much better constructed than last year. 

So with that assessment say pearl does a mass substitution (just humor me because he may not this year)

so coming off the bench

1. Denver

2. kelly

3. Jakhi (if he gets his skills to aid his athleticism) cmo

4. cmo/turtle 

5. cardwell 

 

obviously a bit of a step off but still not a bad lineup imo 

Kelly>KD

denver> Aden/tre (hopefully)

if Jakhi>cmo watch out

We should be better than last year.  
 

but to be honest if pettiford is that fast, that good at passing and is going to require that much attention on him I don’t see why he isn’t the backup pg and gets lots of minutes there.   He could then find Kelly (who I believe will be a great scorer in our system, and is slept on as a shooter) Denver or anyone else for that matter.  I honestly think that opens our whole offense up ie letting cmo or Chaney get open for an easy if broome or is being doubled or cardwell is taking away their post player

 

[Lotto 265]

Also if pettiford is a one and done shouldn’t he play the 1 here?  I am asking because I don’t know much but wouldn’t he not be able to make it as a 2 guard in the nba because of his size?

[Skip Jansen 33]

5 minutes ago, Lotto said:

So with that assessment say pearl does a mass substitution (just humor me because he may not this year)

so coming off the bench

1. Denver

2. kelly

3. Jakhi (if he gets his skills to aid his athleticism) cmo

4. cmo/turtle 

5. cardwell 

 

obviously a bit of a step off but still not a bad lineup imo 

Kelly>KD

denver> Aden/tre (hopefully)

if Jakhi>cmo watch out

We should be better than last year.  
 

but to be honest if pettiford is that fast, that good at passing and is going to require that much attention on him I don’t see why he isn’t the backup pg and gets lots of minutes there.   He could then find Kelly (who I believe will be a great scorer in our system, and is slept on as a shooter) Denver or anyone else for that matter.  I honestly think that opens our whole offense up ie letting cmo or Chaney get open for an easy if broome or is being doubled or cardwell is taking away their post player

 

TBH....I expect to see a lot of different lineups early in the year. And...it wouldn't surprise me to see him substitute a complete unit on occasion. I could even see BP, at times, spreading the floor with Jones and Kelly at the 2/3 and CBM getting some minutes at the 4. He would be a nightmare for most 4s to cover: That's the things about having depth...it's only beneficial if you play a style (uptempo w/ defensive pressure) that gives you an advantage. Having fresh legs against tired legs gives you that advantage so you have to commit to it and play a lot of people. I think that's what we'll see. 

[Skip Jansen 33]

13 minutes ago, Lotto said:

Also if pettiford is a one and done shouldn’t he play the 1 here?  I am asking because I don’t know much but wouldn’t he not be able to make it as a 2 guard in the nba because of his size?

Even though there are a couple of mock drafts that have him in the first round....I don't see him being ready for the NBA after next year. And, you're right....TP can't play the 2 at that level because he wouldn't be able to guard an NBA 2 guard. But....NBA scouts look for different attributes than college coaches do. They look for players who have an elite skill set(s), and that's why TP projects to that level. It's a very observant and good question you ask though. 

[GwillMac6 20,849]

4 hours ago, Skip Jansen said:

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!

 

[GwillMac6 20,849]

Ahhhhhhhhhh this place is muuuuuuuuuch better and much more the good vibes I prefer on the basketball forum! I absolutely love it!!!! Please let this last the rest of the offseason please and thank you! Carrrrry on!!

 

[arktiger1975 643]

Pettiford- an undersized combo guard with great athleticism. Would Allen Iverson be a good comparison as far as his game?

[Cardin Drake 2,074]

20 minutes ago, arktiger1975 said:

Pettiford- an undersized combo guard with great athleticism. Would Allen Iverson be a good comparison as far as his game?

I hope so.

[Skip Jansen 33]

45 minutes ago, arktiger1975 said:

Pettiford- an undersized combo guard with great athleticism. Would Allen Iverson be a good comparison as far as his game?

As much as I hate to compare anyone to Alllen Iverson...it's actually a good comp because of the suddenness. The first step is very similar. 

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,992]

5 hours ago, Skip Jansen said:

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

I also called upon the Hubbard example, bc someone earlier said that you don't really have short guys play 2 guard. Nominally, Hubbard is a PG, but Miss St ran another guy as the actual playmaker, while Hubbard was allowed to just be a bucket and be what would usually be considered a shooting guard. THAT is what Pettiford should be, at least until he shows that he can be more of the floor general type of guy. And if he never does, he can still be a high level scorer, and that'd be perfectly fine. 

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,992]

Really good post overall. The part about projecting how Pettiford can be as the scorer off of screens was very well done. It made me think back to J'Von as the backup in 2018-19. When Auburn realized that his best value was just his first step and they let him bring value by simply telling him to run screens to get himself going, it gave us a really steady stream of O in those non-Harper or Bryce minutes. 

In terms of guys that came after J'Von, I think Tre was solid at managing the floor coming off of a PnR, but he just didn't have the feel for looking to score himself most nights. Wendell was a good "Is he going to drive or is he going to throw the oop" guy initially, but once teams started icing and trapping off of screens, running that action was almost a complete waste of time. Sharife was obv Sharife and good at what he did there. So it'd be really nice to get back to having a guy who's a real scoring threat coming downhill off of screens