Lotto

45 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

I mean, they had a very talented team last year and had double digit losses. They literally sacrifice their defense for offense. Again, why do people forget that without the lucky draw they got in the NCAA tournament they were an overrated team?
Also, there’s no way to keep everyone happy on that team. We have 2 players that probably know that they won’t be contributing much in CMo and Hudson while they have 13 players who think they are going to contribute significantly and it’s not going to end well at all. I’ve seen it too many times. 

CMO and Hudson will be contributing 

Love yall but too much to read with the last two posts.  Oats likes to play his best players a lot of minutes and how tf do you keep mark sears off the court?  Will Aden be decent at the 2 spot?  They have so many mouths to feed I’m interested to see how that plays out culturally 

Could just be feedback.

74…. Mannnnn he gave us a 7/10 for vibes he must’ve been tuned into our transfer message board ☠️

On 4/9/2024 at 9:39 PM, AUpreacherman22 said:

PG: Tre Donaldson, JP Pegues

SG: Denver Jones, Tahaad Pettiford

SF: CBM, Jakhi Howard

PF: Chaney Johnson, Transfer

😄Johni Broome, Dylan Cardwell

If our 10 looks like this next year, I will be really happy!!!!!

That would require Tre to remove himself from the portal, and 🧹 and Cardwell deciding to stay!   And of course the portal to gift us a couple of solid players.  Not likely all those chips fall in our favor, but it would be AUsome!!!

👀 turned out even better than you though, huh?

2 hours ago, haleycenter said:

It's not overly sensitive. You can look and see I was indeed the one who called into question Pettiford playing the 2. I also used terms like lead, combo etc.  

Then out of nowhere, Skip decides to come and make a post saying don't worry about what he plays and all this stuff. That's one heck of a coincidence. I just called it out. 

Now, he's saying he's going to leave and someone is talking about who is ruining the boards. It doesn't seem like any opinion that is not rah rah is too accepted here.  

I don't think Skip needs to go anywhere but I can call it straight it down the middle. 

Dude everyone’s entitled to their opinion and if he disagrees with you that’s fine, you can counter and disagree but you don’t have to make it so serious, you know? This is auburn family not Auburn fatality 😂

One reason I feel that auburn is much better than the rest of the landscape is because aside from the new players, our old players are going to keep getting better especially the new guys from last year playing in the same system.  It’s so exciting to see each of these guys develop as people and a family.  I’m going to have to go to as many games as possible and hopefully see some of y’all there!

15 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

Kelly was a great addition and gives us amazing flexibility with the lineup:

Pegues-mostly pg

Pettiford, Denver 1 or 2

Kelly 1, 2, or 3

All 4 should get good minutes.

3 CBM, Howard, Kelly,CMo   

4 Chaney/Broome/Turtle/CMo

5 Broome/Card

Pearl will have a lot of options to be able to match up defensively.  I really would like to see Broome and Card in at the same time more. We will see.  I don't think PF is a liability at all. Chaney's going to show up.  I think we would have landed a portal PF if Pearl thought it was a priority.  

 

 

Interesting.  I know nothing.  So Kelly at the 1?  Was this what he played at GT or was he a scoring guard?

Moving along. (Anyone can correct me whenever I say something wrong). Does addarin Scott get any playing time?  And if not was he just a miss?  Why did we bring him in if he doesn’t offer anything?  Not trying to disrespect him but I thought he would have played some last year, was it just because of cardwell and broome being such a force?

I want yall both on here yall know 10000% more than me and both have obviously a lot of knowledge.  Let’s all be friends!

4 minutes ago, Skip Jansen said:

Look....I had no intentions of upsetting anyone here. I was just making an observation and giving my perspective on it. This obviously is not a place where I'm welcome, so I'll move on. I apologize that you feel like I took shots at you. Honestly...I have no idea who you are or familiar with any of your comment history. I also apologize if anyone else was offended. Take care. War Eagle!

You don’t gotta leave just because one person got upset.  We appreciate your perspective!

21 minutes ago, haleycenter said:

 

Really Skip??

I remember you from the scout forums boards. I'm not sure if that is what you mean by ITAT. And, it's good to see you around and know you're well. 

But, I'm gonna be up front. There was a lot of veiled shots at me in this post rather you admit it or not. And,  you used to do that over there too. So, let me get a couple of things straight. 

You've seen him play in person and that's fine, but we can all look at tape as well sir and there is plenty of that out there.  Now we can go around in circles all we want but here's the bottom line. A 5'10" man is not playing the 2 guard in the SEC. I don't know what hopium you guys are smoking but just use your brains. There's never been a 5'10 2 play in the SEC in 10 years. Why would that happen now

Now. Like I said Pearl was talking in circles and being unclear. And, that's exactly what you did up there as well.  I think it was you that someone said had an inside track to the basketball program. If so, that's fine. If Pearl had to claim Pettiford would be a 2 to get Pegues here, that's something going on with him or yall. 

But, don't come on here taking shots at me for simply understanding basketball and paying close attention.  

Now, also. As far as who or what Pettiford is. Let's not get carried away. Yes, he's number one for pgs but he was about 30th overall. That means it was a weak class for point guards.  If he was mythical like you're hyping him up to be he would be top 5-10. 

I just speak reality. I don't want to come across as a negative person. And, all you guys throwing names like Stoudamire and A.I. and even Brandon Jennings. Please understand those elite level NBA guards like Marbury, Stoudamire, Tim Hardaway, Iverson etc. They are fast enough and elusive enough not just forward and backwards but left to right to put you 3 feet to the right while they go 3 feet to the left, then they have a j lethal enough to pull it and stick it. 

You can just keep giving the ball to a guy like that and get out the way and let them go. That is not what Pettiford is and if he was he'd be top 5 in his class. And, as someone who's actually stepped on a D-1 court I can tell you he's too frail  to dominate a major d1 game or above consistently. And, he doen't have the body type that can bulk up to that either. Which is probably part of the reason he's not ranked higher amongst others. He's not an elite passers. He's a good one though.

The designation between lead guard, combo guard, scoring guard and point guard is important because for those of us who know the game well, we know they are different things. That's why the designations exist in the first place. A combo guard who can move to the 2 starts at 6'1." Pettiford is a scoring guard. He's too small to be a two guard.  

Like I said earlier, a good comparison is an undersized Jeff Teague or maybe even an undersized John Wall. And, he's not a first round lock. I wouldn't be surprised if some mock drafts did have him going first round just based on name. But, he'll be lucky to play a back up point roll in the league for 5 years and it's a coin flip if that happens. He may go overseas. And, that's ok.  

But, what he can do for us is alot by opening up the game and getting penetration, knocking down 3s, and being able to  create his own shot. That's something that has been badly missing from Auburn basketball for a while now.  But, as someone else here who was using their brain said, how  can he be first round draft pick for us if he's playing 2? Because, he can't be a 2 in the NBA. There's your answer. 

If you see Pettiford at the 2 that's a bad spot for us and won't work. And, I'm confident in saying that. And, if  you see Denver at point that's a disaster waiting to happen.  I hope Pearl is not promising these guys playing time and putting them in wrong spots to do that. Because that wouldn't be good. Like Jabari Smith spent WAY too much time on the perimeter and should have been operating inside more. But, even ESPN announcers pointed that out as well.  

But, I'm just a dude watching the game and on a message board. If the program sent you here to change the thought process about the program or parts of it, that's all well and good. But, don't come taking shots at me in the process. 

I don't appreciate that.  

Dude this is overly sensitive you seem to be smart and have a great grasp but let’s not have unnecessary drama!

Also if pettiford is a one and done shouldn’t he play the 1 here?  I am asking because I don’t know much but wouldn’t he not be able to make it as a 2 guard in the nba because of his size?

Just now, Skip Jansen said:

Here's what I think it will be-

-Pegues

-Pettiford

-Baker-Mazzera

-Johnson

-Broome

I think BP will spend a lot of the preseason practices experimenting with lineups and find out who plays best together. It's like I mentioned in my previous post (Jones needing a penetrator to break down the defense). For example...I could see BP wanting our three best perimeter shooters (and Broome) in the game when TP is the primary ball handler. He could play 4 out-I in with Broome in ball screen action. Or...he could play 5 out and completely spread the floor. There are styles of play that matchup better with other complimentary styles. We have a lot of flexibility and an unusually large amount of players who can mix and match. This year's roster is much better constructed than last year. 

So with that assessment say pearl does a mass substitution (just humor me because he may not this year)

so coming off the bench

1. Denver

2. kelly

3. Jakhi (if he gets his skills to aid his athleticism) cmo

4. cmo/turtle 

5. cardwell 

obviously a bit of a step off but still not a bad lineup imo 

Kelly>KD

denver> Aden/tre (hopefully)

if Jakhi>cmo watch out

We should be better than last year.  
 

but to be honest if pettiford is that fast, that good at passing and is going to require that much attention on him I don’t see why he isn’t the backup pg and gets lots of minutes there.   He could then find Kelly (who I believe will be a great scorer in our system, and is slept on as a shooter) Denver or anyone else for that matter.  I honestly think that opens our whole offense up ie letting cmo or Chaney get open for an easy if broome or is being doubled or cardwell is taking away their post player

32 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

Yea, I believe it really will depend on matchups on how Pearl uses this roster. He can create so many mismatches with most teams who have nowhere near our depth and talent.

Yeah the athleticism alone is freaky.  I honestly think Kelly is still a sleeper.  I think he will start over Denver unfortunately maybe even Chad baker.  He will flourish in auburns style.  Also Jahki has a crazy high ceiling.  How are you going to keep him off the court the same as tahaad.  It’s a good thing we missed on the 4 because it wouldn’t be fair to the rest of the college landscape if we had that stacked of a lineup 😂😂 all jokes aside I don’t see broome playing any 4 this year even though it would be good for his NBA career.  I don’t think he has what it takes to be an nba center in terms of size.  But maybe I’m wrong I see him as an nba 4.  We will see but unless Scott takes a leap forward I see him and cardwell sharing at the 5 unless pearl promised cardwell more minutes and then maybe broome plays some 4 

1 hour ago, Skip Jansen said:

Although I've been a long time reader of this site, this is my first time commenting. I used to be a regular participant on ITAT, and still follow AU basketball.....I just don't comment on social media very often anymore. That being said...I feel compelled to address the recent Tahaad Pettiford position distinction, as I believe a lot of people are taking what BP has said far too literally and may be missing a method/agenda to his rhetoric. 

 

First of all...does anyone really think that it's a coincidence that BP made the public comment that TP is "not a PG" just a couple of days ahead of a visit from a transfer PG (Pegues)? Or...that he is now hedging that statement by saying that TP will play some point just days before a transfer 2G (Kelly) commits? One thing I know for sure is that BP never says anything without a reason. And...there is definitely a method in his most recent ones. 

 

The hardest thing to do in today's climate (transfer portal/NIL) is to develop quality depth. That makes it virtually impossible to recruit over the top of a current player or bring in a high level transfer and freshman in the same year. One of them is gonna be unhappy and leave. BP learned that the hard way with the Trey Alexander situation. Believe me...BP knows how good we would have been the last couple of years with Alexander. So....does anyone really think he's gonna risk that again? He's just trying to build the best roster possible under the rules that have been set. What BP says publicly is what he wants out there and he's earned that right. Whether it's semantically filled is irrelevant. Who cares what verbiage BP uses to distinguish TP's position? This is the age of position less basketball anyway, right? It's obvious that BP wants TP and Pegues on the floor at the same time, so...he can call TP whatever he wants.. Transfers want to come in and play and they know if a school has signed the number one recruit, in the country, at their position. So...does it sound like BP is contradicting himself occasionally or sending mixed signals? Sure, he says things like....TP is "not a PG" and is gonna play "off the ball", but then says that he wants the "ball in his hands"  because he's a "great scorer and shooter". When did those skills become a detriment to playing PG?  Mark Sears, Wade Taylor, and Josh Hubbard share those same skills and they are called PGs. Again, the terminology is not what's important....it's an intended message not normal discourse after all. Getting them both to AU is what's important. 

 

I've been fortunate to have seen TP play several times, but there's no reason for me to state my opinion about his natural position. I'll leave that to BP and everyone will get to see for themselves in November. I will say this....he is not a 2G in the traditional sense. He is not a guy that will be coming off a pin down or curling off a staggered screen hunting three point shots. Does that mean he can't play "off the ball"? Well...how is he gonna be "off the ball" if the ball is in his hands a good portion of the time? Nevermind. 😁 Whatever he's labeled...he's incredible off the bounce. His first step is off the charts (his speed is the first thing you notice). He is great at getting to the rim in ball screen action (but he's not a PG? 😂)  or not. I'll be interested in seeing how teams defend him and how BP utilizes him. In ball screens....most teams will likely try and go under forcing him to make perimeter and mid range shots. If he makes those consistently...he's basically unstoppable because he will turn the corner and get downhill against any other coverage. He and Broome should be lethal in ball screens because when he turns the corner because the weak side post defender will have to step up, so expect a lot of lobs for dunks. Did I mention that his passing (particularly in the paint) is elite? He also has a jab step that will be a crowd favorite. I think BP will overload a side a lot as well to keep the help side defense occupied in other action. Probably see more dribble hand off stuff in order to get a switch and attack it (although he doesn't really need a mismatch because he can get by anyone). 

 

Something else to consider....the way the block/charge rule is being called now is a much bigger change than most realize. Officials will not allow a help side defender to just "stand at the alter" in the lane and draw a charge anymore. That's gonna be a block call every time going forward. We didn't see it much last year because we didn't have a guard that could penetrate. Pettiford is gonna have a field day with it. He is a great finisher at the rim as well. He plays much bigger than he is and will go to the FT line a lot. As a matter of fact...I expect us to be a high quantity FTA team overall. He's also really good at recognition, decision making and 

controlling tempo and pace (I know, I know...he's not a PG 😜). Those skills obviously make him dangerous in transition as well. 

 

So, In summation....it doesn't matter what TP's position designation is. He can be called a lead guard, combo guard, or "bucket getter" (or whatever), so....everyone can pick their favorite. What does matter is his production level. IMO...he will be one of our top 3 in minutes played, usage, and scoring. FWIW...I don't  typically use hyperbole when discussing incoming freshmen because 99% of them are already overhyped. That's not the case with TP....he's the real deal. I'll be interested to see social media comments in January/February. I'm guessing the rhetoric will consist of a lot of...."He shouldn't go unless he's guaranteed being a first rounder" and..."The latest NBA Mock Draft has him going at number 26 in the first round".  Oh wait....that's what they have him now. 

 

Sorry for being so long winded and thank you for allowing me to interject on this matter. I hope it didn't come off as me dissing others because that's not the case. I like Pegues, Kelly, and Jones...they are all good players, but...Pettiford is a legit difference maker. War Eagle!

Dude…. Please comment more you literally know so much and just taught me so much!  It really seems like we’re about to surprise some people next year.  You earned this dude  🏆 

I’m buying tickets again to the bama @auburn game cause **** Aden, labaron, grant, and masturbate oats 

And this isn’t bashing Chaney or cmo I think both of them are really good with Chaney potentially being a monster and turtle giving meaningful minutes.  So excited to see this team gel, play and celebrate together in person and on tv!

1 minute ago, Lotto said:

I’m updating mine:

1: peg/pet

2: den/pet

3: kelly/jahki/cmo

4:cbm/chaney/turt

5:broome/card/scott

With the ability to bump every starter up a wrung if need be and bring in backups as needed per gamely basis 

I’m updating mine:

1: peg/pet

2: den/pet

3: kelly/jahki/cmo

4:cbm/chaney/turt

5:broome/card/scott

Dang where’d you come up with this idea? 😂

All jokes aside,

pegues/pettiford

denver/kelly (even minutes)

CBM/howard&cmo

Johnson/cmo&turtle

broome/cardwell/scott

8 minutes ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think Chad was a capable-good defender most nights, but I don't think he was always the most fundamentally sound (reached for steals alot) and he just didn't have the body for guys like Knecht. 

I don't want him to put on a TON of weight bc that slinky build he had worked. It let him squeeze in to some lanes that didn't seem like they were there. But maybe 5 extra pounds? 10? something that just makes it to where dudes his height or even smaller arent taking him to pound town in the post

I think cbm was the closest we had but he just didn’t have the frame to be physical enough 

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Not a worthwhile contribution to the convo by me, but the Flanigan from last year probably gets us at least 3 more wins bare minimum. Having a secondary play maker, a consistent downhill threat, a stellar 6'5-6'7 wing defender and an elite rebounder would've shored up alot of problems. 

I don't think that guy will ever be properly appreciated, but there was definitely a Flanigan sized hole that was felt in the Miss St matchup, the Tenn game, and the Yale ones namely. I'd probably say Baylor too, just to have a body on that kid that scorched us for 30+ 

Absolutely.  We would have 100% beaten Tennessee because he could have covered knecht 

13 minutes ago, AUSCalum87 said:

I just posted this, but if you look at both of their highlights, you can just tell how much for fluid and athletic Kelly is on top of a much better defender. Also, the system Kelly was in did not showcase his talents and he was asked to be their primary ball handler, which is not a strength for him.

Plus Kelly has a lot of finesse from The one reverse layup I saw 😂

21 minutes ago, JuscAUse! said:

Oops. Forgot the yellow font......

Oh does that mean you were being sarcastic?  My fault if you were