ADVERTISEMENT

Charles Matthews playing some PF.

5iveStarRecruit

5iveStarRecruit

Junior
Feb 16, 2014
2,418
466
83
Anyone else down wit this idea? I feel the 5 guards we have need to be on the floor as many times as possible. All bring something different to the table.

Im not saying giving Charles heavy PF minutes, but experimenting with him there in short spurts. See if he can parlay his athleticism into beating the heavier bigs for rebounds, loose balls and making the defense more versatile w/ switching.

He's shown flashes of some offensive skill so it'll open up the floor a bit too.
 
We'll be too loaded to ever see it, but he could pull it off. Hes basically a slightly thinner, more perimeter version of Alex.
 
I know it's not something that you would want to do at first thought, but after thinking about it some more, i think this kid could hold his own down in the post. He has the hops to grab rebounds and contest shots inside, but does he have the weight to keep bigs from posting him inside and driving him deep into the post? I don't know. It might be worth looking at for a few minutes a game. If it doesn't work, we can do away with it right away and go back to a traditional post players.
 
Depending on how productive Poy and Lee are, yes.
 
PFs like Brice Johnson, Sabonis and Nigel Hayes would crush him. This is not the Tubby era where you play Bobby Perry at PF because you can't recruit PFs.
 
nothing wrong with small ball if the matchup dictates. The Warriors just won a title with Draymond Green at C. Our speed and length would be hellacious with Skal or Lee at C, Matthews at PF, Murray, Briscoe, Ulis. We could run a team ragged for 3-4 minutes then throw in Poy and Humphries/wynyard and physically beat them up. This team is gonna be fun to watch!
 
  • Like
Reactions: UK90
What the?????????? Who's he gonna guard? No. I mean.... No. ? What? No. Good god can we get Shaq elegible at 350lbs to play some point please? Ummmm just No. I gotta take a break. I'll be back after a few beers. No. This has ruined my birthday......
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chase4UK
Deli owl said:
What the?????????? Who's he gonna guard? No. I mean.... No. ? What? No. Good god can we get Shaq elegible at 350lbs to play some point please? Ummmm just No. I gotta take a break. I'll be back after a few beers. No. This has ruined my birthday......
Click to expand...

Calm down. You've never seen a team play 4 guards before? Especially when 2 of them are 6'5"?
 
Deli owl said:
What the?????????? Who's he gonna guard? No. I mean.... No. ? What? No. Good god can we get Shaq elegible at 350lbs to play some point please? Ummmm just No. I gotta take a break. I'll be back after a few beers. No. This has ruined my birthday......
Click to expand...


giphy.gif



Yes, lets forget last yrs title winner had a 6"6 PF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: michaeluk26 and Aike
I would say yes if Charles Mathews shows really good rebounding capability. MKG could have easily played PF, since he rebounded better than most 4-5 in the nation.

I don't know how well Mathews rebound at the moment, but if he shows consistent ability to get the ball, it'll work.

Winslow also had the ability to rebound, and that workout well for Duke.

What defines position isn't so much the height, it's about ability to do the things they need to do at each of those position. If they can rebound, then you can have Chuck Hayes play Center in NBA...Charles Barkely play PF in NBA.. etc. etc.
 
You bring up a good point. During his time at Kentucky, Mgk would have been a even better player had he got to play at the 4 spot. He obviously rebounded well and had the strength to play guys in the post. He had the motor and would have been a mismatch at the 4 for Kentucky. Things worked out great that year and we won a national title, but if Mgk came at another time, a time we didn't have T Jones and Davis in our frontcourt, he would have put up even better stats as our 4 rather than sf. I like our national championship just fine so i obviously wouldn't question anything about that year.
 
Deli owl said:
What the?????????? Who's he gonna guard? No. I mean.... No. ? What? No. Good god can we get Shaq elegible at 350lbs to play some point please? Ummmm just No. I gotta take a break. I'll be back after a few beers. No. This has ruined my birthday......
Click to expand...

Calm down, fella. Have you not been watching the sport in recent years?

This small ball thing has become quite the trendy thing, lots of teams have been experimenting with these four guard type lineups, and having plenty of success with it. Hell, as someone else pointed out, the Warriors just won an NBA championship starting Draymond Green at the friggin center position and usually putting four guards/wings on the floor at the same time. And, really, Duke's national title team last year was also essentially starting four guards. If it works for the reigning NBA and NCAA champs, then I don't think it crazy to think it could be something Cal might at least consider trying.

That said, I don't think we'll ever actually start that lineup, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Cal at least experiment with it and try it in select situations--how much so will depend upon how Poy and Lee perform this year.
 
Last edited:
If he was a solid 3 point threat, then yeah, maybe you could try it. But he's not, at least not right now. The whole point of small-ball lineups is to put so many perimeter threats on the floor that it stretches the defense to the breaking point. The more obvious candidate for 4th guard/pseudo PF would be Mulder, because he can hit 3's, and he actually did play a lot of forward (not power forward, but still) in JUCO. However, Mulder looks to be struggling on D, so that's just not going to happen.

UK's natural starting lineup should be able to stretch defenses anyway, without the need to go to 4 guards. Poythress has shown signs throughout his career of being a capable catch-and-shoot guy from 3 point range (though, like everything else with him, it's been inconsistent), and his stroke has looked really good so far this year, and Skal has about as sweet 15-18 foot jumper as you could ever hope for with a 7 footer. Neither guy can really put the ball on the floor and drive, but then, they are playing with 3 point guards who can all do that really well. And if you want to exaggerate quickness and athleticism above pure shooting, just put Lee in at center.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianpoe and UK90
Can we just cut to the chase. Let's play small ball with Ulis at center and move on from there. If you guys think Matthews will play a significant amount of minutes at PF over Lee and Poy then you are along the same mentality of ul fans and their sports evaluations. I'm begging for mercy for this thread.
 
Deli owl said:
Can we just cut to the chase. Let's play small ball with Ulis at center and move on from there. If you guys think Matthews will play a significant amount of minutes at PF over Lee and Poy then you are along the same mentality of ul fans and their sports evaluations. I'm begging for mercy for this thread.
Click to expand...
If you're too dumb to handle a conversation about a theoretical lineup (that, BTW, involves changing exactly 1 player from the actual lineup that UK will usually play) based on some trends in college and the NBA, then I suggest you give up on this whole message board thing.

That said, Matthews is a bad candidate to be the 4th guard in a 4 guard lineup. He's skinny. The small-ball lineups that have worked almost always involve guys who might not have the height, but have some bulk that allows them to bang inside when they need to. When the Warriors go super small, the usually not only have Draymond Green out there, but also Andre Iguodala, who's a very muscular guy. Duke had Justise Winslow (not to mention Okafor still in there). When Illinois did a lot of (almost) 4 guard stuff very successfully in 04-05, they had 6'6", 225 lbs Roger Powell as that 4th guy.
 
mj2k10 said:
If he was a solid 3 point threat, then yeah, maybe you could try it. But he's not, at least not right now. The whole point of small-ball lineups is to put so many perimeter threats on the floor that it stretches the defense to the breaking point. The more obvious candidate for 4th guard/pseudo PF would be Mulder, because he can hit 3's, and he actually did play a lot of forward (not power forward, but still) in JUCO. However, Mulder looks to be struggling on D, so that's just not going to happen.

UK's natural starting lineup should be able to stretch defenses anyway, without the need to go to 4 guards. Poythress has shown signs throughout his career of being a capable catch-and-shoot guy from 3 point range (though, like everything else with him, it's been inconsistent), and his stroke has looked really good so far this year, and Skal has about as sweet 15-18 foot jumper as you could ever hope for with a 7 footer. Neither guy can really put the ball on the floor and drive, but then, they are playing with 3 point guards who can all do that really well. And if you want to exaggerate quickness and athleticism above pure shooting, just put Lee in at center.
Click to expand...


While Charles isn't a polished shooter, its not broken either. Couldn't get his HS numbers but i did manage to get his Nike EYBL 3 point % the last two seasons.

13' : 40%
14' : 38%

+ Its mainly to get him some more court time. Not saying he should start there or get heavy minutes outta the gate at the 4. I just feel the 5 guards provide a lot of value and I'm looking for easy to maximize them all.
I also have a lot of question marks with Lee & Isaac. I simply don't think Lee is good.

Isaac has impressed w/ his mid-range J, but defense is a big lacking point his game right now.
 
mj2k10 said:
If you're too dumb to handle a conversation about a theoretical lineup (that, BTW, involves changing exactly 1 player from the actual lineup that UK will usually play) based on some trends in college and the NBA, then I suggest you give up on this whole message board thing.

That said, Matthews is a bad candidate to be the 4th guard in a 4 guard lineup. He's skinny. The small-ball lineups that have worked almost always involve guys who might not have the height, but have some bulk that allows them to bang inside when they need to. When the Warriors go super small, the usually not only have Draymond Green out there, but also Andre Iguodala, who's a very muscular guy. Duke had Justise Winslow (not to mention Okafor still in there). When Illinois did a lot of (almost) 4 guard stuff very successfully in 04-05, they had 6'6", 225 lbs Roger Powell as that 4th guy.
Click to expand...

So if I read this right I'm dumb for making fun of basketball idiots but you agree with me anyway. Got it.
 
Deli owl said:
So if I read this right I'm dumb for making fun of basketball idiots but you agree with me anyway. Got it.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify...

If at any time this year Cal trots out Ulis, Briscoe, Murray, and Matthews at the same time, will that make him a basketball idiot?
 
Deli owl said:
So if I read this right I'm dumb for making fun of basketball idiots but you agree with me anyway. Got it.
Click to expand...

No, you're dumb because you're posting like a dumb person. And, no, your take is really not the same as MJ's.

You never put together a single cogent thought or argument in this thread. Instead, you just lobbed insults and seemed to scoff at the very idea of anyone playing such a small lineup, when in reality such lineups have been working quite well for plenty of teams in recent years.

Conversely, what MJ did was give an intelligent and fact-based analysis of why he did not think it would work for this team, and why Matthews was not the right kind of guard to play that role in a 4 guard lineup. However, he did not discount the notion of such a small ball lineup working under different circumstances.

2 different approaches to the same question. The first sounding dumb and narrow minded, the second sounding knowledgeable and intelligent. Makes all the difference.
 
He may have fun with it but no way no how will he do this as a common line up. I wouldn't be surprised if we never see it. We didn't use it against a small team this week. I would even bet we don't see that line up one time in the NCAA tourney. If it's a great idea, I'm guessing he uses it every game. Oh yeah he won't. There's a reason. I'll revisit it when SEC games begin.

You want to say I'm wrong so tell me what percentage of each game we use it? Or are you just arguing to argue. I'm throwing it out there that we barely if ever see it.
 
UK90 said:
No, you're dumb because you're posting like a dumb person. And, no, your take is really not the same as MJ's.

You never put together a single cogent thought or argument in this thread. Instead, you just lobbed insults and seemed to scoff at the very idea of anyone playing such a small lineup, when in reality such lineups have been working quite well for plenty of teams in recent years.

Conversely, what MJ did was give an intelligent and fact-based analysis of why he did not think it would work for this team, and why Matthews was not the right kind of guard to play that role in a 4 guard lineup. However, he did not discount the notion of such a small ball lineup working under different circumstances.

2 different approaches to the same question. The first sounding dumb and narrow minded, the second sounding knowledgeable and intelligent. Makes all the difference.
Click to expand...

Out side of name calling like a very young poster this doesn't say anything. I didn't try to give a reason why this lineup is rediculous. I simply stated it was. I wasn't trying to prove it. The season will and I'll revisit as it come to fruition.
 
I've read all the sarcastic posts and will say I've wondered the same. It's not a smart play, traditionally, but could be an ace against certain teams/matchups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deli owl
mj2k10 said:
If he was a solid 3 point threat, then yeah, maybe you could try it. But he's not, at least not right now. The whole point of small-ball lineups is to put so many perimeter threats on the floor that it stretches the defense to the breaking point. The more obvious candidate for 4th guard/pseudo PF would be Mulder, because he can hit 3's, and he actually did play a lot of forward (not power forward, but still) in JUCO. However, Mulder looks to be struggling on D, so that's just not going to happen.

UK's natural starting lineup should be able to stretch defenses anyway, without the need to go to 4 guards. Poythress has shown signs throughout his career of being a capable catch-and-shoot guy from 3 point range (though, like everything else with him, it's been inconsistent), and his stroke has looked really good so far this year, and Skal has about as sweet 15-18 foot jumper as you could ever hope for with a 7 footer. Neither guy can really put the ball on the floor and drive, but then, they are playing with 3 point guards who can all do that really well. And if you want to exaggerate quickness and athleticism above pure shooting, just put Lee in at center.
Click to expand...


I was going to say the same thing, Winslow could pull the other 4 out to the perimeter and hit 42% from 3.
 
My first reaction would be that I'm not in favor of Matthews at the 4. He's a 3, in my opinion, a true slashing wing. His shooting will come around.

My second answer would be, "it depends on the opponent." Tomorrow night, for example, Matthews could play the 4 and be taller than any Kentucky State player aside from their 6-8 center. But the trouble is, there are very few teams we play that would be a good match up for Matthews at the 4. Most SEC teams have a power forward in the 6-7 to 6-10 range and about 225 or more. Matthews has great length but the problem he'd have would be in defending their strength and rebounding with those guys. He's 6-6 but he's only 189lbs. That's the issue.

My final thought is that I could go along with this if we didn't have better options available. But the fact is Lee, Poythress, and Labissiere are all better options at the 4. In order to put Matthews at that spot, two of those guys would have to be on the bench. So that seals it for me. I'd give him lots of minutes at the 3 in the early season games and hope for him to really step it up. I love his potential, his athleticism, his quickness and his ability to finish. Leave him at the 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianpoe
I don't think three is all that necessary to play small ball.

Ulis, Murray, Briscoe, Mathews, and Skal line up would be fun to see.

Again this all assumes Mathews can rebound like a beast and Skal too. guards also have to rebound, and soon as they do they take off.
 
5iveStarRecruit said:
Anyone else down wit this idea? I feel the 5 guards we have need to be on the floor as many times as possible. All bring something different to the table.

Im not saying giving Charles heavy PF minutes, but experimenting with him there in short spurts. See if he can parlay his athleticism into beating the heavier bigs for rebounds, loose balls and making the defense more versatile w/ switching.

He's shown flashes of some offensive skill so it'll open up the floor a bit too.
Click to expand...

Charles needs to improve his shooting to get much playing time IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianpoe
Deli owl said:
He may have fun with it but no way no how will he do this as a common line up. I wouldn't be surprised if we never see it. We didn't use it against a small team this week. I would even bet we don't see that line up one time in the NCAA tourney. If it's a great idea, I'm guessing he uses it every game. Oh yeah he won't. There's a reason. I'll revisit it when SEC games begin.

You want to say I'm wrong so tell me what percentage of each game we use it? Or are you just arguing to argue. I'm throwing it out there that we barely if ever see it.
Click to expand...

Original poster said "short spurts."

I said depending on how productive Poy and Lee are. In other words, if Poy never returns to form and Lee struggles, this could be one way to get creative at times.

Will Poy return to form? Hope so.

Will Lee struggle? Hope not.

In which case the discussion is mostly moot.

Anyway, we are just talking here. You are the one who went nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UK90 and brianpoe
Winslow was 220 lbs. and a great rebounder for his size.

Not sure Matthews at 190 lbs. could defend and rebound from the 4 like Winslow did.

Not saying it's impossible, but it's unlikely we see this much.

Just my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianpoe
NO. He's a true SF. 6'6. 6'7, freak athleticism, above the rim finisher, true slashing wing, and elite defender. He's a SF. Lets hope he ends up being a decent 3pt shooter too btw.
 
With three PGs, the backcourt actually becomes less crowded for a guy like Matthews. He's essentially the first sub for three positions, because you can sub him for any of the three and move one of the others to point.

I think he's exactly the type of kid Cal loves, and it says a lot that he went out and grabbed Matthews so early in the process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doneitall
Remember Notre Dame last year? We will full-court press sometimes, then we can use Four guards.
 
OSOK said:
Remember Notre Dame last year?
Click to expand...

Yep, in addition to Duke, Notre Dame's another team that had a great season last year by going with the 4 guard lineup, with 6'5" Pat Connaughton as the starting 4. Another example that comes to mind of a team that did it well last year was Wichita State, that essentially started Ron Baker (who's no taller than 6'3") at the power forward spot.

It's an approach that's been working well for quite a few teams in recent years. But I think mj's post is right that Matthews ain't right for the role, at least not yet. The common denominators with the 4s in those other small ball lineups (Baker, Connaughton, Winslow, etc.) is they're all 1) excellent 3 pt shooters who can force the other teams bigs to come outside defensively, and 2) well built guys who rebound unusually well for their size. Whereas Mathews is still too skinny and his outside shot too undeveloped for the role.
 
Last edited:
It wouldn't shock me to see that lineup - and it wouldn't shock me if we didn't. Cal has been pushing "positionless" basketball; so saying Matthews cannot play the 4 really doesn't matter. It's how they look and work together on the court (and oh yeah, if it wins games). I guess, technically, he'd be the PF - since we have to label everything; but....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jeff Drummond

Basketball Coach Cal Show News & Notes - Feb. 7

Replies
50
Views
3K
The House of Blue
bamacat2014
bamacat2014
J

What J Givony has to say about our recruits

Replies
153
Views
8K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
Sawnee Cat
Sawnee Cat
J

Top 5 Recruiting Classes per ESPN

Replies
7
Views
2K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
shaudyshaud
shaudyshaud
JonathanW

22-23 Cats, ceiling/floor for each player

Replies
15
Views
1K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
BigKari
BigKari
IL Wildcat

Scouting Kentucky

Replies
36
Views
4K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
jauk11
J
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back