Minnesota Sports Forum

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:Banchero is a very smooth operator. Really love the poise he plays with as a freshman.

So many of these guys nowadays come in to college incredibly poised on the court. Pretty incredible.

Speaking of poise, I was a little surprised at Gonzaga's lack of it. It felt like they were over-reliant on Timme on offense. I have never watched Gonzaga this season until the tourney, but for the #1 seed to be so one-dimensional in their halfcourt sets seemed a bit odd. Are their guards really that limited?

I really dig/dug Nembhard. But Arkansas completely cut him off last night and exposed his limitations. As for poise, he's a senior with 120+ starts in his career! Everything went downhill from there. I think two of the wings combined to shoot 2 - 22 for the tourney on threes. And Gonzaga also struggled from the line.

Eric Musselman is a really good coach. I always thought he got screwed a bit in the pros, too. And the worst part... didn't he want to come to Minnesota?!?!? I think there was a chance he would have stuck around awhile, too with the legacy connection to the school and basketball in the area.


[Note: I know it's a tired topic today... but that officiating was atrocious. Although it might have actually helped Holmgren in the eyes of pro scouts... since he seems to know how to defend and use his size while going with the verticality thing.]

That one call where he went straight up, he did have his arms lowered a bit, so I can kinda give the officials a bit of a pass on that one. He wasn't totally vertical. The call before that where the guy put his shoulder into his chest and blatantly initiated contact was definitely a bad call. If Holmgren had flopped instead of trying to hold his ground, they absolutely would have called a charge.

As for Musselman, that guy just wins at every level as a head coach. Man, talk about a lifer. He's like one of the all-time winningest coaches in the old CBA and he was super young back then. He's been an NBA assistant. He put Nevada on the map and now he's having success at Arkansas.

Musselman was "solid" as an NBA head coach, too.

Took over a 61-loss Warriors team and won 38 games with them... coming in 2nd for COY. Lost the team's two best players... and still finished 37 - 45 the second season. But then a new regime arrived and he was fired.

The new coach, Mike Montgomery, never won more than 34 games.

He got only one year in Sacramento as a head coach. Never understood why he sorta just slipped quietly away after that until finally becoming a head coach again at Nevada when he was 50.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Musselman was "solid" as an NBA head coach, too.

Took over a 61-loss Warriors team and won 38 games with them... coming in 2nd for COY. Lost the team's two best players... and still finished 37 - 45 the second season. But then a new regime arrived and he was fired.

The new coach, Mike Montgomery, never won more than 34 games.

He got only one year in Sacramento as a head coach. Never understood why he sorta just slipped quietly away after that until finally becoming a head coach again at Nevada when he was 50.

The DUI he had when he was in Sacramento a problem and I think that issue was why he went away from the NBA game. It seems he has overcome that. I hope so I agree he has always been a pretty good coach.

Q-was-here wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:Banchero is a very smooth operator. Really love the poise he plays with as a freshman.

So many of these guys nowadays come in to college incredibly poised on the court. Pretty incredible.

Speaking of poise, I was a little surprised at Gonzaga's lack of it. It felt like they were over-reliant on Timme on offense. I have never watched Gonzaga this season until the tourney, but for the #1 seed to be so one-dimensional in their halfcourt sets seemed a bit odd. Are their guards really that limited?

I really dig/dug Nembhard. But Arkansas completely cut him off last night and exposed his limitations. As for poise, he's a senior with 120+ starts in his career! Everything went downhill from there. I think two of the wings combined to shoot 2 - 22 for the tourney on threes. And Gonzaga also struggled from the line.

Eric Musselman is a really good coach. I always thought he got screwed a bit in the pros, too. And the worst part... didn't he want to come to Minnesota?!?!? I think there was a chance he would have stuck around awhile, too with the legacy connection to the school and basketball in the area.


[Note: I know it's a tired topic today... but that officiating was atrocious. Although it might have actually helped Holmgren in the eyes of pro scouts... since he seems to know how to defend and use his size while going with the verticality thing.]

That one call where he went straight up, he did have his arms lowered a bit, so I can kinda give the officials a bit of a pass on that one. He wasn't totally vertical. The call before that where the guy put his shoulder into his chest and blatantly initiated contact was definitely a bad call. If Holmgren had flopped instead of trying to hold his ground, they absolutely would have called a charge.

As for Musselman, that guy just wins at every level as a head coach. Man, talk about a lifer. He's like one of the all-time winningest coaches in the old CBA and he was super young back then. He's been an NBA assistant. He put Nevada on the map and now he's having success at Arkansas.

Once I realized Mussleman was the Arkansas coach I was happy whoever won that game but I was cheering for the underdog. I thought there was some horrible calls in that game that clear benefited Arkansas. A couple charge calls that went Arkansas was were borderline one I thought was a bad call seeing it slower in a replay. I think both of the last fouls on Holmgren were bad. One he was literally straight up and under the basket. How can you fouls someone when you are literally under the hoop and a guy crashes into you?

Timme saved that game from being pretty much nearly a blowout. That one guard from Arkansas helped keep the Zags in taking some really stupid shots dribbling around forever etc.

I'm curious to hear Q and Abe's take on Chet. There are a couple possessions in a row in the 2nd half where he was getting thrown around because he was so thin. The one 3 he took looked damn good and he clearly has some skill and is really damn long. He plays pretty hard too. I'm not suggesting he is gonna suck just whether he will be awesome or not.

Having watched a number of the projected lottery picks play during this tourney, none really stand out to me as potential dominant players at the next level. Banchero seems like the most NBA-ready in terms of his skills and physical profile, but even he doesn't scream "star".

Having said that, we know that the college game can sometimes obfuscate NBA-level talent because of more structured playbooks and less spacing.

monsterpile wrote:I'm curious to hear Q and Abe's take on Chet. There are a couple possessions in a row in the 2nd half where he was getting thrown around because he was so thin. The one 3 he took looked damn good and he clearly has some skill and is really damn long. He plays pretty hard too. I'm not suggesting he is gonna suck just whether he will be awesome or not.

I have no idea if he should go #1.

Of course he's going to be pushed around a bit. But there are guys in the NBA who would be pushed around in the same way and do just fine. He usually finds other ways to be impactful vs. those guys even when overpowered (see the Memphis game). So I don't see "bust who can't play" at the next level.

He's on the floor more than I'd like. I wrote off Hasheem Thabeet after seeing him in one big game his senior year because he was on the floor more than upright. But I think it's slightly different with Holmgren? Obviously, he's not supposed to be the same type of physical power presence in the post. But still... stay on your feet, man.

I don't like that he seems to back off once he gets an angle on the guy offensively, almost like he doesn't believe he has the pop to finish or the defender is able to make up space on him quickly. This was also most notable in the Memphis game vs. high level athleticism.

I did love one video I saw of a random play in the Memphis game where on a long rebound attempt, Holmgren sought out and walloped his guy. I don't think he even got the rebound on the play, but it wasn't the point. Holmgren wasn't afraid of contact, dished it out and did the dirty work for a teammate to grab the board. That kind of play from a potential #1 pick seems telling to me.

He's smart. He's got a handle. He can shoot. He can pass. He can defend. I see him being an analytics darling yet pretty polarizing.

- "Look at his on/off splits! His efficiency!"
- "Dude is supes skinny and is only averaging 11/7... he's a bust!"

It's fun to have such a unique type of guy at the top of the draft... especially since it has a legit MN connection.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

monsterpile wrote:I'm curious to hear Q and Abe's take on Chet. There are a couple possessions in a row in the 2nd half where he was getting thrown around because he was so thin. The one 3 he took looked damn good and he clearly has some skill and is really damn long. He plays pretty hard too. I'm not suggesting he is gonna suck just whether he will be awesome or not.

I have no idea if he should go #1.

Of course he's going to be pushed around a bit. But there are guys in the NBA who would be pushed around in the same way and do just fine. He usually finds other ways to be impactful vs. those guys even when overpowered (see the Memphis game). So I don't see "bust who can't play" at the next level.

He's on the floor more than I'd like. I wrote off Hasheem Thabeet after seeing him in one big game his senior year because he was on the floor more than upright. But I think it's slightly different with Holmgren? Obviously, he's not supposed to be the same type of physical power presence in the post. But still... stay on your feet, man.

I don't like that he seems to back off once he gets an angle on the guy offensively, almost like he doesn't believe he has the pop to finish or the defender is able to make up space on him quickly. This was also most notable in the Memphis game vs. high level athleticism.

I did love one video I saw of a random play in the Memphis game where on a long rebound attempt, Holmgren sought out and walloped his guy. I don't think he even got the rebound on the play, but it wasn't the point. Holmgren wasn't afraid of contact, dished it out and did the dirty work for a teammate to grab the board. That kind of play from a potential #1 pick seems telling to me.

He's smart. He's got a handle. He can shoot. He can pass. He can defend. I see him being an analytics darling yet pretty polarizing.

- "Look at his on/off splits! His efficiency!"
- "Dude is supes skinny and is only averaging 11/7... he's a bust!"

It's fun to have such a unique type of guy at the top of the draft... especially since it has a legit MN connection.

Thanks for the response. What makes him different than Thabeet was that supposedly had all this offensive upside he could shoot in practice! and hadn't been paying the game for long. Holmgren has actually showed a diverse skillet and I don't think he woke up a couple years ago and decided to play basketball. He is also much younger.

From the game I watched I agree he isn't afraid of contact. That's partly why he ends up on the floor. He is putting his body into guys trying to box out. There will be times if he goes flying he will get a call.

It will be interesting to see how the draft lottery shakes out. What if Orlando ends up with the first pick? Their bigs aren't franchise guys but they are good. Maybe they pick another guy or maybe they are open to dealing someone. I don't think they can deal Mo Bamba before or during the draft since he is a FA. Anyways like I said it will be interesting to see how things shake out.

I do think Holmgren could be a major disruptor defensively, but it will probably have to be at the PF position, otherwise he's just going to get pushed around too much. And so if he plays PF, then the question is how well does he move his feet defensively? Obviously he's going to bother some shots in help situations, but when he has to guard a face-up PF or switch onto a wing, how well does he move? I don't know.

One thing I am sure about. He'll be a tall, skinny, somewhat awkward looking white guy next season as a rookie. He will get absolutely ZERO respect from the refs. I expect to see him in a lot of foul trouble early in his career.

Q-was-here wrote:I do think Holmgren could be a major disruptor defensively, but it will probably have to be at the PF position, otherwise he's just going to get pushed around too much. And so if he plays PF, then the question is how well does he move his feet defensively? Obviously he's going to bother some shots in help situations, but when he has to guard a face-up PF or switch onto a wing, how well does he move? I don't know.

One thing I am sure about. He'll be a tall, skinny, somewhat awkward looking white guy next season as a rookie. He will get absolutely ZERO respect from the refs. I expect to see him in a lot of foul trouble early in his career.

I think we could take a peek at Boston to see a best-case scenario for Holmgren.

Once they moved Robert Williams to the 4... that team has taken off defensively. He's so good at being a disruptor. I've seen Holmgren marketed similarly.

And a lot of NBA teams simply don't have the people to push the skinny Holmgren around anyway. Post-ups are all but dead in today's game. I think a lot of teams would invite that opportunity, even with a skinny Holmgren. So maybe the team that drafts Holmgren has a contingency plan/lineup when they're playing Embiid, Jokic, Valuniciaofaiicious...