Tweet
I actually don't think this is a bad thing especially considering our 3 bigs. GU has always had 1 or 2 all conference types but we'd run into trouble when they were off. This season we have 5 talented guards that are going to get better and better all year. We don't have to rely on 1-2 this season. Somebody is off and we have 4 other guards that can step up.
-
-
Everyone talks about the big 3 down low, it takes guards to get them the ball and space the floor to keep defenses from collapsing on them... -
The jury is still out, particularly on Josh. What I saw last fall was astonishing for a true freshman. Remember too that the coach has them on a leash until they are proven and things settle down. This is still the experimental time of the season.Bonjour tristesse.Comment
-
Agree with this... Guards are the engine that make it all run. That being said, this group of guards has a high ceiling (and a lower floor than we have been accustomed to). I think there are going to be some real up and downs for this group, but I do think they will get better as the season goes on.Originally posted by hooter73 View PostComment
-
College bball is a guard's game. Without them, to,low assits amd all sort of bad things happen no matter how talentedis the front liner. Ours, right now, are average. Lots of the season left to get better though. I hope they do. I hope they have demon speed and have their track shoes on when we meet UW in a few days. Nobody gets deep in the tournament without very very good guards. They run the show. Verdict is out as of tonight. I'm not sure how they'll do against the better D1 teams........
I think they'll do better when they have some time to know each other and work together. They shot well tonight.Comment
-
we have had turnover problems early in the season many, many seasons
it is easy to forget that because of the last two years with Pangos and Bell at the helm
Few will work on protecting the ball and we will be much, much better by Dec
our guards, except Kyle D., are like 11 month old German Shepherd puppies, full of passion, strength, energy, speed, but also clumsy and inexperiencedComment
-
It might apply either way, yet pretty sure Dan was referring from previous years to present.
More due to the fact that Coach Few usually has at least 1, even 2 RETURNING All-Conference guards.
Not necessarily stating we don't have any CURRENT All-conference guards.
Too early to tell -- yet pretty certain he wasn't predicting the future, as many have assumed, rather stating all 'newbies'.
Guys like Melson, maybe even Alberts could explode in conference season. Perkins too (once he learns he can butt dribble against pressure defense and can't crossover dribble all the way down the court vs press).Comment
-
I'm already getting tired of everyone ####ting all over the guards. I agree we need to settle down on the turnovers but that's the risk you take when you have guards that can create like ours can. For every turnover these guards have they've made 2 or 3 ridiculous plays that couldn't have been made last season.
No all conference guards, GTFOH with that BS.Comment
-
Dickau - "No all conference guards on team"
Yet!
Go Zags!Comment
-
I think you have to put the comment in perspective and calm down a bit. Nobody thinks the future of our guard play is doomed (Meech isn't returning is he omg!). But the first half, which spurned that comment, contained many many "rookie mistakes" by the guards. And the comment came from an all American guard from Gonzaga, so maybe you should show respect to someone who clearly has more knowledge about this position than both of us combined. You should attempt to see the team for what it is: a work in progress that is going to get better. Seeing their faults and the Guards as the "weakest" part of the team is simply an honest statement. We can both agree that those 7+ turnovers in the first half is not what any team would want.Originally posted by ProjectMKUltra5 View PostKrozman
GU student 1996-2000
Law Student 2000-2003Comment
-
Do you see this team as one that will fix that though? Somebody like Emac will never not be turnover prone. A guy like Perkins will never be as efficient as a guy like Pangos. It's just the nature of the beast and that's okay because this group brings so much else to the table. At the end of the day that's my gripe, calling the guards a "weakness" because they're not as efficient, despite still being extremely effective. Is there work to be done? Absolutely, but all this talk is undermining how good this group has already been imo.Originally posted by krozman View PostComment
-
That's what I thought he was saying as well - no returning all conference guards.Originally posted by Therunner View PostHistory has its eyes on you.
Sage of the GU Message BoardComment
-
I believe the way he elaborated on the point made it very clear that is what he was implying. My only thought was, who were the returning all conference guards when Pangos and Bell came in as freshmen? Part of what necessitated their needing to play was a complete lack of any capable guards with which to lean on for the duration of starters minutes. Was it Carter? That would be a stretch, even though the technicality of it doesnt detract from the point Dickau was making.Originally posted by Once and Future Zag View PostComment
-
Dickau was an All American and NBA guard--plus he worked for the Blazers as a player development coach-- he knows guards.
I would concur that we do not currently have any all conf. guards at this stage of the year---but by the end of the season will they develop enough to be considered one (or two)-- I sure hope so.Comment
-
Comment