Who needs 3?

It's just so hard for a lot of our fans to grasp that. They see two pretty good 3-ball shooters, and think that's the way to go. Lutz has the same mindset, hence the reason Sager started over Mitch. That is a coaching mistake, you don't start Chris Sager over Mitch Baldwin.

 

Such interesting debate over here, had to chime in. PB, there's two camps for Mitchell. The one that loves him and the one who thinks he is a very nice role player at the D-1 level. Obviously, I'm in the second. Not sure what your question at the end means, but I do think Mitch is a weapon.

As far as three point shooting goes, Lutz preaches the necessity for a strong inside-outside combination on a regular basis. Not sure why everyone thinks all he wants to do is fire threes. The problem last year is that no one inside could score. Demon could. In the past, we have had some solid inside guys to go with the bombers and that's how we won. I'm all in favor of a nice mix.

 

Powerbait, you hit the nail on the head when you wrote "defense wins championships, and we play for offense".

Lutz is obsessed with playing a Florida or Kentucky (Pitino's teams) style of play where you sprint down the floor and chuck up 3 pointers at will. He tries to mimick these teams defensively with his full, 3/4 and half cout traps. The problem is that we dont have the talent that these teams have.

Pitiono's Kentucky teams could afford to fire up three pointers because they were so much more talented than everyone else that they dominated on defense. We dont have the kind of players that can dominate defensively so we need to be more selective on offense.

Our guys have to work so hard defensively to get a stop and a defensive board and that is why it is so frustrating to watch Plavich whip up a 25 footer five seconds into the shot clock. I know it is not just me because Picassos was packed with Niner fans for the Depaul game and every time Plavich took one of the above described shots there was a cumulative moan from the crowd on hand. It was a similar noise to the one you hear at Halton every time Butter takes a 3 pointer.

 

Well, I keep hearing he isn't a PG and he isn't a 2G, what is he? A center? You said yourself that he's not the answer at PG. I disagree. However, Lots of people say he doesn't have the handle of a PG, if that's not what he is, then what position is Mitch?

 

I'll try to remember all that the next time a gimpy Plavich makes it out onto the court, gets smothered by a defense deisgned to prevent him from shooting, and so instead dishes 4 assists since he's not being allowed to shoot (see Depaul game, plus he drilled all of his FTs).

Your logic kills me PB. If I had the time, I'd debunk all that stuff you posted that suggested Mitch > Plav. Just pull up their game by game comparisons on ESPN's site. Plav gets more minutes than Mitch (not a ton), but Mitch has played 1 more game this season, yet they are virtually tied for assists (21 to 19). Plav scores a ton more than Mitch and forces the defense to respect him even when he "isnt hot" as you say. Mitch doesn't. Your entire premise is unfounded. Furthermore, if Mitch was the answer you think he is, we wouldnt have recruited two more PGs for next season. He is a good defender simply because he's so fast and tries very hard (we have few lazy players this year, thank goodness). He is a nice tempo change on offense off the bench, he's the first guard option off the bench, & he's good for team chemistry, but nothing more. Our offensive team needs to eventually look like Withers-Brown-Iti in that order (of options), and Brendan is important to that because his presence ensures that Brown's perimeter game isnt removed as an option by the other team. 'Cause if they do Plav will burn them with the open looks he'll get as a result. Mitch has nowhere near that ability to force a defense to respect him in his current stage of development. Maybe one day he will be.

But at least you argue points instead of dismissively saying that everyone else's knowledge "embarasses you" cause you have nothing to say in counterpoint, like certain self-important jackasses. I'll give you that much.

 

Curtis Nash couldnt even dribble with his left hand and he played 30 minutes a game as out PG. Baldwin is capable of running this team just fine. Lutz plays favorites.

 

It's all about balance. If all you can do is shoot, the defense extends and denies the perimeter. If all you have are a couple good post scorers, the defense packs it in and denies those guys position and the ball. IMO the 3 ball is to hoops what a deep (not west coast or possession) passing game is to a football offense. it serves the same purpose and gives you an opportunity to get back in any game or turn the momentum quickly.

We have a nice balance emerging as soon as Iti gets on track. As Real said before, we'd hoped it would be Clemmons/WIthers, but Calvin isnt producing. One thing none of us wants to see is a return to last year's 1 dimensional offense. Depaul forced us to, even if Demon rose to the occassion. I hope no one else is able to. We need to work on that.

 

Yeah.. He picks guys who can actually make jaw dropping passes to guys in a position to score rather than a tentative kid still learning the position who is prone to losing his dribble, or even worse, forcing bad passes that often turn into TOs.

PI, you're such a fucking genious. Why don't you just go take Lutz's job. He obviously has nothing on you.

 

Mitch has less than half the shot attempts per game of Brendan. Mitch will get pulled for a bad shot. Mitch takes higher % shots. Brendan is a better scorer. I will never argue that. I will argue that he is more of a liability when he is not scoring. That is my point. Mitch is less of a liability. He can score, but that is not his primary function. I just have to hammer is offensive capabilities because that is what a lot of people look at.

As Don Shula said, "1 point will win a game if your opponent doesn't score any." Brendan can score all day, but he doesn't keep the other team from scoring. Mitch may not create AS much offense, but he does have a better all around game.

If anyone wants to sit down and dissect the next game on TV with me, I will show you what I see as our problems. Hell I will do it at our next home game. We do not run plays for many things other than the 3-ball. We don't pass withers the ball as much as he deserves. We don't get Eddie or even Butter driving lanes. This is not just a Mitch vs Brendan debate but a team mentality argument for me. I was routinely blasted by a lot of people for saying that Butter did not deserve his starting job.

There are a lot of people in the Niner community that don't feel like we need more guys like Brendan. I understand that some of you like that style of basketball, I was just raised in a household where the run and gun means offense from steals, rebounds and forcing TOs, not from seeing who can fire up the most bad shots. If I wanted to watch guys with a score at all costs mentality, I would watch the NBA.

 

I will argue basketball with anyone but you NAHardHarrygrendolynand everyothernameyouuse. You have an aweful big mouth for a guy who is listed in a membership directory that is avalable to the public.