this is the year to win w/out a center.
- Thread starter jojohn
- Start date
If he gets to play, I think Diallo for Kansas could be a dominant force defensively. Stone will be good for Maryland. Best center in the country might end up being that kid at Utah.
The true "center" in college doesn't exist anymore. Okafor is the exception. Towns and Kaminsky are guys who can easily play the 4 at the next level, but could also play the 5. It's very rare that you have to match-up with a guy who is a true back to the basket, space hog center with post moves.
In most years, you could win with Terrence Jones/Patrick Patterson at center and not lose much.
In most years, you could win with Terrence Jones/Patrick Patterson at center and not lose much.
I'm not convinced Diallo will be able to create his own offense enough to be dominant. Most of his points came off of garbage and great passes from elite point guards in the all-star games. Points will be harder to come by in Self's high-low offense with no elite point guard on the roster. Cliff Alexander looked like a better offensive player than Diallo coming out of high school and he struggled in that system.
With Skal and Humphries were in pretty good shape, ones quick and athletic and the other is a space eating monster down low, I think we're good to go, ready to watch it unfold
Okafor wasn't a center, He was a bull in a china shop that the officials thought would be funny to let him do what he wants without consequence.
Wrong. A lot of teams don't have the luxury of being able to recruit a true center. But teams that have great bigs and know how to use them still have the advantage. Kentucky, Duke, and Wisconsin got to the FF last year because of great play by true 5s, whether you see that or not. Kaminski is a true 5 all the way. Kentucky would not have been a top 5 team without Towns, another true 5 as his NBA career will show.
Are you talking about the Aussie bif man being the brute? We have the most talented big, not sure I would call him a brute.
No, sorry, yeah I meant brute like "really damn good and talented" but sure, brute usually means big physically monster. So you guys have an incredibly talented center coming in, AND a big physical brute coming in, and don't you have at least one big old talented seven footer still there?
The idea of this being a year of not having a center is a bit strange for you guys at least, considering you have some great centers
No, sorry, yeah I meant brute like "really damn good and talented" but sure, brute usually means big physically monster. So you guys have an incredibly talented center coming in, AND a big physical brute coming in, and don't you have at least one big old talented seven footer still there?
The idea of this being a year of not having a center is a bit strange for you guys at least, considering you have some great centers
We have two seven footers (Labissiere and Humphries) and both are Freshmen. One is a more mobile 5 and not a traditional Center. More like a Camby/Garnett/Davis than a Shaq/Chamberlain/Ewing. The other is a big bruiser, but reportedly has a very good face up game as well. He has a nice looking jumper.
The veteran big we have is Lee and he is 6'9 and lean.
Wrong?
There are over 350 D-1 teams. How many have a true, back to the basket, classic center and use them as such? I'll venture to say it's about 5%. To me, that percentage doesn't make it prevalent. I can name you dozens of teams who have made the Final Four using guys at 6'9 or under at the center position. Last year was an exception...
What's a "true center?" A guy who sucks scoring-wise outside of five feet from the rim? So the worse you are from an offensive standpoint, the better you are in terms of earning "true center" status? That doesn't make much sense.
Karl was a true center. Just because he's versatile from the perimeter doesn't negate the fact that his best position is the 5. Some of these assessments are bizarre.
Karl was a true center. Just because he's versatile from the perimeter doesn't negate the fact that his best position is the 5. Some of these assessments are bizarre.
especially in the modern game. i think the concept of a true center is pretty much nonexistent nowadays. all players are now stronger, taller (excuse me tyler), faster and all around more athletic than ever. they've evolved into hybrid players who can do more than play just one position, at least in college. jmo
You are missing the point. If you believe this is the year to win without a real 5, which is what the thread is about, it is highly likely based on all available evidence that you will be proven wrong. There are a lot of teams without true 5s, but that is because they can't recruit good true 5s. They are generally not the top teams. When the men get separated from the boys in March, teams that dominate in the Elite Eight will mostly have dominant 5s. Based on history, reality, and everything else, it is highly likely that the championship team will have an excellent 5. There are exceptions, but not often. For now, I will leave it at that.
I'm not missing the point, I just don't think we're really disagreeing here. I never said you can definitely win with without one, just that you can get by without one because there aren't many, and if you happen to have guys who are 6'8/6'9 and as talented as Patterson, Jones, Lyles, etc...you're not screwed by any means.
I totally disagree with the premise of the original post, insinuating that UK doesn't have a true 5. Of course UK has a true 5, and just because he's not in the mold of a 1970's or 1980's center, Skal is arguably going to be the best big man in the nation. I don't care if he shoots 3's or operates outside of the paint, he'll be a "center" and I wouldn't take anyone else.
I totally disagree with the premise of the original post, insinuating that UK doesn't have a true 5. Of course UK has a true 5, and just because he's not in the mold of a 1970's or 1980's center, Skal is arguably going to be the best big man in the nation. I don't care if he shoots 3's or operates outside of the paint, he'll be a "center" and I wouldn't take anyone else.
I would label KAT as a true center. Yeah, the dude can shoot the ball, but being able to shoot shouldn't go against you when talking true centers. He might play some 4 in the Nba, but he will log a lot of minutes at the 5 as well. When you look at a guy like Scal, i could see why you would think he's not a true center. He's not beefy. In today's game, he's exactly the type of center you want to go with if you wanna win a lot of games. Regardless what spot on the floor you want to label Scal, pf or c, he will be the best player at that spot in every game we play.
