friar82
Administrator
BCC Member
Posts: 8,150
|
Post by friar82 on Sept 16, 2014 10:35:14 GMT -5
I'm no expert, but I agree with your opinion and assessment, Lax.
|
|
|
Post by friarj on Sept 16, 2014 11:17:11 GMT -5
Cooley has no problem having multiple ball handlers on the floor i.e. he wanted to play Dunn, Ledo and Austin at the same time....once again...name me a coach that wouldn't?.....the three players you mentioned are the three highest ranked recruits in 20 years...so no PT for mr cotton?...Cooley has played his best (eligible) players as many mninutes as possible...prior to this year figuring out the 6 best has been pretty easy.... I agree, we will know a lot more about what Cooley wants after this year hopefully. I don't think we can even begin to guess what it may be after the last 3 years. Does he want to press and run? Does he want to play man? Does he want to play a full court game? Does he want to go 11 deep?
|
|
|
Post by pembroke04 on Sept 16, 2014 12:08:55 GMT -5
Due to various situations, it has been tough to get a feel for the system that Cooley is looking to implement. Based off of what I hear/read/interpret, it seems like Cooley prefers players with the ability to handle the basketball. Maybe this is due to the way that I have interpreted things, but even with a true PG on the floor, it seems like Cooley wants to rely on multiple people to handle the ball. IMO, the primary PG will still be the primary ball handler, but it sounds like there will be a wide range of players handling the ball and creating plays. Thinking out loud to myself, I wonder if "true" PGs want to pursue programs that place a heavier emphasis on PGs (from a recruiting/system standpoint). I could be wrong, but with some of the big men signing up to play for our team, I would have thought that guards would have been jumping for the opportunity to play for this team.
Overall, it's tough to do anything more than speculate, because under Cooley, we haven't had a full roster in place.
|
|
friar82
Administrator
BCC Member
Posts: 8,150
|
Post by friar82 on Sept 16, 2014 13:26:38 GMT -5
Interesting perspective from The Call, based upon the system that Cooley had in place a Fairfield... "...his Friar personnel did not meet the criteria to play the type of harassing, man-to-man defense that suits him. As much as it probably pained him, the coach had to gear his scheme around zone principles that would place the players in a more comfortable position..." “It all starts with ball pressure with help defense and rebounding also serving as the keys,” summarized Cooley about the high notes his zone-adhering Friars must hit. “If we do all those things, we’ll have success as far as our transition offense.” www.woonsocketcall.com/node/6673So, perhaps Ed's orientation is more heavily weighted towards having players with the size and tenacity on the defensive end than anything else (?)
|
|
|
Post by friara on Sept 16, 2014 17:59:52 GMT -5
This team has much more length than quickness. I would rather see zone. I thought the zone against Creighton was awesome.
|
|
|
Post by friarbrown on Sept 16, 2014 20:00:36 GMT -5
This team has much more length than quickness. I would rather see zone. I thought the zone against Creighton was awesome. I think our matchups and personnel at the time may determine what we play. Regardless I expect us to be a much better defensive team this year and a better rebounding team.
|
|