2017-18 Mins distribution

[n.ogdencat]

Well...we all know we have 1 scholarship left. The hope is that someone is signed this Spring and that that individual has the potential of being a contributor. Nonetheless, even if we don't get someone to sign then so be it. Nonetheless, with what we have now (and this is subject to change depending on who signs and when) the below is my opinion and next seasons average mins distribution:

PG: Harding 20 - 25, Turner 10, Doc/John 5 -10 (Court)
SG: Turner 15, Richardson 15, Harding 5, Baker 5 (Court)
SF: Chapman 15, Baker 10, John 10, Richardson 5 (Court)
PF: Chapman 15, Kozak 20, Dallas/Vialen 5
C: Braxton 25, Kozak 5, Dallas/Vialen 10

Court and possibly Vialen red shirt next season. If Court is good enough to play then either Richardson, Baker, or John will be losing mins to the freshman. But, why play him, even if he is good enough to play, if he only will get 5-10 mins per game? The same thing can be said of Doc Nelson. If the kid is good enough to play but will only get 5-10 per game, why waste his eligibility? No matter, Randy is going to have to play one of the two. I think we will need Doc playing the 1 more so than another wing (Court could play the 1 so can Dusty).

 

[oldrunner]

No arguments from me.

We could be seeing a fundamental shift in how we approach offense and defense. Instead of a three guard, two post system, we may see a three wing, one post set up. With two big wing players and one smaller wing.

Our starting lineup could go 6'1''. 6'3'', 6'9'', 6'9'', 6'9''. Two of those 6'9'' guys able to knock down 3s.

It could present some real issues for other teams trying to guard us. It would also give us a great rebounding team and a team hard to shoot over. It's the direction we need to go to do well in the post season. We could also play smaller when needed.

I'm not sure that anyone will red shirt.

I like the direction we are headed.

 

[WSUProf]

Tal, you've got 11 guys getting at least 5-10 minutes a game. I don't see that happening. Narrow this down to 8-9. Rahe never goes 10-11 deep.
A big question for me is if John and Richardson see reduced minutes next year, after being starters for all or most of this year.

 

[oldrunner]

Tal, you've got 11 guys getting at least 5-10 minutes a game. I don't see that happening. Narrow this down to 8-9. Rahe never goes 10-11 deep.
A big question for me is if John and Richardson see reduced minutes next year, after being starters for all or most of this year.

I do think that more guys will play in the rotation next year. I think 11 or 12 guys will play early on, with 10 guys playing through January. They need to avoid the late season collapse that they experienced this year. Plus the fact that we will have some experienced bench players tells me that we will not have to burn guys out. The rotation may tighten up in the late season. I'm thinking that fans are going to see a few unexpected changes next year. I'm expecting the unexpected.

 

[Ktown]

Tal, have you heard rumblings that Harding is going to be moved to PG? Or speculation? I think that is definitely a possibility but wonder why he saw no time at point last year. I would think with all the fluctuation we saw at PG last year that if Harding were a viable candidate he would have been in the mix at PG. His size and quickness definitely fits that position. Not sure how the offense would flow and how well he would distribute the ball. Will be interesting.

 

[oldrunner]

Tal, have you heard rumblings that Harding is going to be moved to PG? Or speculation? I think that is definitely a possibility but wonder why he saw no time at point last year. I would think with all the fluctuation we saw at PG last year that if Harding were a viable candidate he would have been in the mix at PG. His size and quickness definitely fits that position. Not sure how the offense would flow and how well he would distribute the ball. Will be interesting.

I'm not trying to answer for Tal, but I think that Harding is such a great scorer that they wanted him doing that and not having to think about initiating plays and getting things set up. In short, they wanted him on the other end of the pass. He is an excellent ball handler and will probably see action at point and on the wing in the coming season. They will have all summer to work on it. In the end, it is always a competition for minutes at all of the positions. The coaches will always consider every option.

 

[brett_hein]

I've heard previous attempts by media members to join conversations on this board weren't well received by you old-timers, but I'm going to try anyway. Hey guys!

Question: Baker was one of the best 3-point shooters in the country last year and was vital to the resurgence in the Big Sky tournament, all while playing out of position. I'm curious why you're cutting his minutes.

 

[Back2WSU]

I've heard previous attempts by media members to join conversations on this board weren't well received by you old-timers, but I'm going to try anyway. Hey guys!

Question: Baker was one of the best 3-point shooters in the country last year and was vital to the resurgence in the Big Sky tournament, all while playing out of position. I'm curious why you're cutting his minutes.

Some of the people on this board tend to go all-in on new players, and quite frankly I feel like Baker never gets much love on this board anyway.

 

[oldrunner]

I like Dusty a lot. He is a skilled player who doesn't make many mistakes. The only problem he has is his lack of athleticism. When the matchups are right he can be quite effective. However, he sometimes has problems staying in front of other teams guards and exposes us on the defensive side. IMO, his minutes will depend on the situation and matchups. I don't see him getting any minutes at PF this coming year, we now have depth at that position. Dusty will get his minutes at the wing positions. No matter if he gets starters minutes or something less, he is still a fun player to watch and a big part of our team going forward.

 

[wsucatfan]

I've heard previous attempts by media members to join conversations on this board weren't well received by you old-timers, but I'm going to try anyway. Hey guys!

Welcome Brett, some of the posters have been fairly critical of local journalists lately. They jumped all over Garside for using the forum to promote his articles, which I thought was pretty lame. The same forum members haven't complained when Skyline Sports writer Colter Nuanez posted links to his site (unless he duplicated the same link in multiple topics).

If you want to post links to relevant WSU news articles I would suggest you start a specific topic in basketball/football so you don't get the same treatment as Brandon.

Good luck and have a thick skin, you could write an WSU article a day and some wouldn't be happy about the lack of coverage. :rofl:

 

[Webergrad02]

I've heard previous attempts by media members to join conversations on this board weren't well received by you old-timers, but I'm going to try anyway. Hey guys!

Come on Brett, we all know it was just Garside.

1. He is MUCH better doing video work and podcasts than as a journalist. Weber State written promoter is probably a better description than journalist since his stories were all one sided. (Prime example is the more fans should be watching Joel BoIomboy guilt trip story) I have been reading Wildcat stories in the Standard for over 30 years and Brandon is by far the worst beat reporter we have had.

2. Brandon most of the time just posted a link and didn't add to the conversation. You guys get way better access than most of us. It would be awesome to get insight into some of the behind the scenes stuff. I know there is some stuff that can't go on the board. I like to read the insights of the ISU play by play guy. He seems to know how to walk the line but also provide pretty informative content.

3. Just be real. I have always felt that Garside was trying way too hard to be something that he wasn't. Plus does he really have to touch every cupcake in the box before he picks one.

 

[Webergrad02]

Question: Baker was one of the best 3-point shooters in the country last year and was vital to the resurgence in the Big Sky tournament, all while playing out of position. I'm curious why you're cutting his minutes.

I really like Dusty as well. He is the type of blue collar, get the job done guy that we were sorely missing in 2014-2015. The main question this season and it seems to be almost every season under Rahe. Is how do we get the team to gel more quickly. I think Dusty should start at 3 to provide continuity and to be a leader. But he also makes an amazing 6th man. Senglin was a great player but severely lacked as a team guy and leader. I think Dusty can be a guy to unite the team and get the chemistry on track early. It is hard to do that from the bench. It is also hard to make 3's from the bench.

 

[Back2WSU]

Responses like WeberGrad02's are exactly why I remained anonymous on here when I was still covering Weber State sports.

 

[brett_hein]

I know we'll never make everyone happy with the work we do, but I could do without the character critiques of my colleague sent from anonymous usernames. Hit me up at [email protected] if you'd like to put your real name on feedback you have about our work and I'd love to read it.

The problem with Baker/Richardson is they both occupy the same position and have a similar skill set. I don't think Chapman will pay much 3, he'll be at 4 -- though I'll have to see what changes with a new group of guys -- so you have Baker/Richardson both as 3-point shooters. Richardson may give you a little more on D, Baker's the better shooter. So what do you do? That's a tough one.

That might depend on how you handle primary ball-handling duties. If you start John at the 1 and bring Harding off the bench as a spark, then you could play Baker and Richardson in the starting lineup. But if you start John and Harding, then you probably have both seniors at the 3 spot.

I also don't think Kozak plays the 5. I'm thinking he's Chapman's backup at the 4 and they're counting on Jordan Dallas to take bigger strides and get 15 minutes a night at the 5 (assuming Braxton plays around 25)

 

[oldrunner]

Honestly Brett; I think it is going to be heavy competition for almost every position on the floor. I don't think that anyone has a lock on anything. There are six, and possibly seven, new players joining the team this fall. None of those guys were recruited to sit around. Two or three of those guys may start and four or five of them may see significant time on the floor. None of us can be sure about how it will all shake out. We may have a better feel for it in June, when 90% of the team will be here and working out together. There are always surprises.

 

[oldrunner]

Question: Baker was one of the best 3-point shooters in the country last year and was vital to the resurgence in the Big Sky tournament, all while playing out of position. I'm curious why you're cutting his minutes.

I really like Dusty as well. He is the type of blue collar, get the job done guy that we were sorely missing in 2014-2015. The main question this season and it seems to be almost every season under Rahe. Is how do we get the team to gel more quickly. I think Dusty should start at 3 to provide continuity and to be a leader. But he also makes an amazing 6th man. Senglin was a great player but severely lacked as a team guy and leader. I think Dusty can be a guy to unite the team and get the chemistry on track early. It is hard to do that from the bench. It is also hard to make 3's from the bench.

I don't see that as the question at all. I feel that the more appropriate question is: How do we get the team to peak in March and move on to the NCAA playoffs?

These OOC games might have more meaning if the BSC were to ever get more than one team into the dance.

Play well in league and win in the post season. That is a better plan. Early on, play to win, but play to develop.

 

[SWWeatherCat]

Question: Baker was one of the best 3-point shooters in the country last year and was vital to the resurgence in the Big Sky tournament, all while playing out of position. I'm curious why you're cutting his minutes.

I really like Dusty as well. He is the type of blue collar, get the job done guy that we were sorely missing in 2014-2015. The main question this season and it seems to be almost every season under Rahe. Is how do we get the team to gel more quickly. I think Dusty should start at 3 to provide continuity and to be a leader. But he also makes an amazing 6th man. Senglin was a great player but severely lacked as a team guy and leader. I think Dusty can be a guy to unite the team and get the chemistry on track early. It is hard to do that from the bench. It is also hard to make 3's from the bench.

I don't see that as the question at all. I feel that the more appropriate question is: How do we get the team to peak in March and move on to the NCAA playoffs?

These OOC games might have more meaning if the BSC were to ever get more than one team into the dance.

Play well in league and win in the post season. That is a better plan. Early on, play to win, but play to develop.

I'm with '02, it would be nice if Rahe could figure out how to get his teams to gel more quickly. Why do you talk like it's either/or? Why can't Rahe's teams be ready to compete sooner and peak in time to compete for a BSC bid? Whether or not they peak early or "at the right time" I really don't get the difference. Sure, you hope your team continues to improve as the season goes but at the same if they peak early, so what. That doesn't mean they have to regress just because they've hit their peak. If that's all they're capable of, well, then I guess we hope that's enough and better than the rest of the league. Gelling sooner and being ready to have more success in-state and OOC does not take anything away BSC play or playoff time.

You continually trivialize the importance of winning in-state and other OOC games, or even the quality of OOC teams. At the same time you hope support for the program strengthens and that the DEC will be filled with rabid fans. Well, give 'em something more exiting to get behind, the same-'ol, same'ol doesn't do it. Strengthen the schedule-- especially at home-- and then I'll agree OOC losses don't mean as much. Again, just because the main goal is to snag the only BSC bid to the Dance, that doesn't take away from what should be a desire to be competitive and win as many OOC games as possible , not to mention kicking a little in-state tail along the way. Being ready to compete sooner and compiling a decent OOC record will help generate more excitement and support.

 

[oldrunner]

I don't think I ever said that we should go out and try to lose games. That is freaking crazy. And, yes it does have something to do with when you want to peak, as a team. Early on, your goal is to find out who you have and how they play together. You want to develop depth by playing more guys in a variety of configurations. You may be less efficient while doing that, but it may help you later in the season. Also, there is a certain amount of burn out that can happen with players. It happened to us this past year. We seemed to peak in early February and fell a little flat just prior to Reno. You can avoid some of that by having key players play a bit less early on. Are you going to be less efficient? Of course you are. You may lose some games that you shouldn't. It hurts you more if that happens in league play.

You don't want to lose any games, but you need to be realistic and keep a bigger picture in mind.

Last year we beat USU at USU and some of us are still whining.

 

[baller]

First off, virtually everyone beat USU last year. That was no great feat! I am personally in favor of playing (in whatever manner you must) to win every game whether it is the first one, in the middle or near the end. All games are important and we must do all in our power to win all games. If it takes playing the main players longer early in the season it should be done. It makes no sense to play guys who can't win for you when you have people who can win if they play. So if your second tier guys aren't good enough then they shouldn't be played (or played at an absolute minimum) if their playing virtually guarantees a loss.

 

[oldrunner]

First off, virtually everyone beat USU last year. That was no great feat! I am personally in favor of playing (in whatever manner you must) to win every game whether it is the first one, in the middle or near the end. All games are important and we must do all in our power to win all games. If it takes playing the main players longer early in the season it should be done. It makes no sense to play guys who can't win for you when you have people who can win if they play. So if your second tier guys aren't good enough then they shouldn't be played (or played at an absolute minimum) if their playing virtually guarantees a loss.

It was a down year for USU. We went 3-1 against instate competition. We lost at YBU.

Of course you try to win every game. That is the nature of competition. You also want to put a little pressure on some of the new guys to find out what they have to offer the team later in the season.

Yes, all games matter. Some matter a little more than others.

1. post season games
2. league games
3. instate games
4. other OOC games
5. exhibition games
6. scrimmages

I would like to see us limit starter's PT to 25 minutes in November, 30 minutes in December. 35 minutes in January, and no limits after that. Not a hard and fast rule, but a general guideline.