Article on Xavier Talton, and the upcoming PG battle

[Squeegee]

That's my mistake. I forgot in the first post you specified P12 tourney. In the second one you just said "in the tourney", so I put both to cover my bases.

I like XT. He's a good player for us. But he's not our second best player. And never will be. That's not an insult on him, but more of praise for the talent we have here.

You're right, he's not the second best player on the team but at the pac 12 tourney I thought he was. Because of that, I think he is a solid player will be our starting PG next year. Hopefully I'm wrong and either Dom comes in and dominates (no pun intended) or Hopkins figures out what he's doing and becomes the player we envisioned he would be. Either way I think PF will be more of a concern than PG, maybe another topic for discussion.

 

[MtnBuff]

I don't think I would go to calling XT the second best player on the team at any point.

He does illustrate though what Tad is building. In the absence of a "star" type player Tad is building a team of guys who can all on individual nights step up and be the difference in a game. The have certain commonalities like what he expects on the defensive end but at the same time each with some specific things they can contribute.

 

[BuffG]

You're right, he's not the second best player on the team but at the pac 12 tourney I thought he was. Because of that, I think he is a solid player will be our starting PG next year. Hopefully I'm wrong and either Dom comes in and dominates (no pun intended) or Hopkins figures out what he's doing and becomes the player we envisioned he would be. Either way I think PF will be more of a concern than PG, maybe another topic for discussion.

I could see your point in the quarterfinal against Cal, but he didn't do much against USC and the UofA game was a blowout in which no one played all that well.

Some people still envision J-Hop as the future PG l which I don't understand considering Dom is so much more natural as the 1 and J-Hop is a more natural off-guard. If XT is the starting PG for the majority of next season then I don't think we're doing better than .500. Ceiling is just too low.

 

[Buffnik]

I don't think I would go to calling XT the second best player on the team at any point.

He does illustrate though what Tad is building. In the absence of a "star" type player Tad is building a team of guys who can all on individual nights step up and be the difference in a game. The have certain commonalities like what he expects on the defensive end but at the same time each with some specific things they can contribute.

3 NBA 1st Round Picks in 4 years, it looks like. Plus some other guys like Carlon, Ski and Higgins who probably fit the "college star" label even if they're not necessarily destined for NBA fame.

I get what you're saying. It's important to have a roster where everyone is capable of contributing toward a win and brings something to the table. In other words, no one on the roster who sucks.

The 6-time champion Chicago Bulls had that. It served them well. But without the stars, they're not making the playoffs.

 

[MtnBuff]

3 NBA 1st Round Picks in 4 years, it looks like. Plus some other guys like Carlon, Ski and Higgins who probably fit the "college star" label even if they're not necessarily destined for NBA fame.

I get what you're saying. It's important to have a roster where everyone is capable of contributing toward a win and brings something to the table. In other words, no one on the roster who sucks.

The 6-time champion Chicago Bulls had that. It served them well. But without the stars, they're not making the playoffs.

Agree with you 100%, we have had college star type guys.

What we haven't had though is the we go as far as he carries us guy. We haven't had the one and done or two and done lottery pick(s.) Even with the Mayor he was clearly our best and most important player but we didn't live or die on him scoring 20 points a game. One of the things that made him more effective is when somebody else had an advantage on the floor Spencer would focus on setting that guy up, even at the expense of his own stats. Spencer could have a 12 point game and we still won effectively.

It wasn't like it was in the Chauncey days when shutting down Billup's meant that CU had no chance.

 

[rolandftw]

We haven't had the one and done or two and done lottery pick(s.)

Well, we had Alec, even if he wasn't seen as that type of talent when he was recruited. Not a Tad recruit tho, unless you want to give him credit for convincing him to stay.

We really haven't seen a Tad team with mostly upperclassmen yet, that he and his staff recruited. We have had a couple very talented Buffs teams the last couple seasons, but they were also very young overall. The 2015-16 might be one of the most important season in CU basketball history.

 

[CitizenKane]

OK, I just can't take it so I have to say it. We need to stop calling the Buffs young. Are they young by traditional college basketball standards? Yes. Are they young by current standards? NO!!! Good teams win with freshman. Bad teams lose with seniors. The Buffs have and have had plenty of leadership. The real issue is whether or not this is as good as the Buffs will become. More and more signs point to exactly that, but hey this is still so much better than what it was!

 

[Buffnik]

OK, I just can't take it so I have to say it. We need to stop calling the Buffs young. Are they young by traditional college basketball standards? Yes. Are they young by current standards? NO!!! Good teams win with freshman. Bad teams lose with seniors. The Buffs have and have had plenty of leadership. The real issue is whether or not this is as good as the Buffs will become. More and more signs point to exactly that, but hey this is still so much better than what it was!

I disagree.

Tad proved what he could do with a veteran team when the Buffs won the Pac-12 tourney, made the Dance and advanced with a veteran team. That team wasn't as talented as last year's team, so Tad made the Dance again despite extreme youth. Something like #310 in the nation in roster age before Spencer got hurt. And we've only had 1 Top 25 recruiting class.

Experience matters. Talent matters.

Both are on the upswing as the roster finally starts to balance. Only 1 senior this coming season, but a large group of experienced juniors and also a big group of sophomores who saw a lot of court time.

 

[Quattro]

We were among the 10 youngest teams in D1 last year with Spencer healthy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rolandftw]

OK, I just can't take it so I have to say it. We need to stop calling the Buffs young. Are they young by traditional college basketball standards? Yes. Are they young by current standards? NO!!! Good teams win with freshman. Bad teams lose with seniors. The Buffs have and have had plenty of leadership. The real issue is whether or not this is as good as the Buffs will become. More and more signs point to exactly that, but hey this is still so much better than what it was!

They're not young anymore, or at least I wouldn't classify them as that. They were last year tho, other then the Mayor and Askia. You can win with young players, but if good players stay with the team through their junior and senior year, you would like to think that they improve and play better. Plenty of teams have veteran laden teams and are dangerous come March.

 

[sackman]

I wouldn't call this team "young" at this point. Senior "2" guard, Juniors at center and small forward, and a redshirt sophomore at power forward. PG will be one of three guys, one of which is a junior. It's entirely possible that we'll have a starting five consisting of guys who have all been in the program for a minimum of three years. That's not "young".