AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Game thread for Portland?
- Thread starter L Buff
- Start date
Buffenuf
massive tool
".... people are freaking out..." I thought that was the standard MO on AB? Well at least no one is yet calling for Tad's head.....Oh, wait.....
Obviously (wait, apparently not so obvious), I was being facetious about Tad serving a one game suspension! While I understand tinkering with lineups and allowing players more minutes during this part of the season, I believe it is a mistake to have one of your top two players come off the bench. Using that logic, then Josh Scott could come off the bench in lieu of Miller - but what good can come of that? I believe King should be logging the top minutes as a starter (along with Scott), because of what he brings to the table. It has been a stretch since the Buffs had a solid 3 point shooter (it is really a nice weapon to have), I would hate to see King lose confidence or an edge (it happens).
That being said, these are good problems to have. Tad has recruited a high volume of wings and the talent is showing.
That being said, these are good problems to have. Tad has recruited a high volume of wings and the talent is showing.
Who do you think played the best out of King, Fortune and Fletch last night? I think an argument could be made for all three of them. Hasn't King played the most minutes out of all of them?
Ha!
His name is now bubblesSolid win tonight. This was pointed out to me tonight, and I couldn't stop laughing:
Josh Fortune
looks like
Bubbles from the Wire.
Fletch had a very good game. I won't diminish that because of the opponent, he was efficient. Fletch has also had two less than mediocre games this season, while King has been a leader out the gate.
To answer your question, I would say Fortune had the best game between the three of them last night.
I really am not up in arms about this, I just (personally) do not see value in having your top scorer come off the bench. Perhaps the start, along with Fletch's game last night, will ignite him! I am more concerned about King and his confidence - it has really been fantastic to see King drop three's (in crucial moments), this team has been missing that for awhile.
Buffenuf
massive tool
This might be a correct opinion IF it was mid-January; not the third game of the season, a season-opener in Boulder, against a mid-tier(yet decent) opponent.
If you can't experiment then, when can you experiment? King is still a project until he has shown he can do it for a sustained period. Buffs need a rock, not a flash in the pan.
It wouldn't surprise me if Tad is trying to find which starting line up provides the best results from each of the three players. They are each very capable, so it comes down to team chemistry and player mentality. Maybe Tre plays better and more aggressive without the pressure of being a starter. Maybe Fortune plays better out of the gate with King starting. Maybe King is more effective when he feels like this is his team as a starter.
None of those questions can be answered without experimentation. November is the perfect time to try and figure this stuff out. Tad was way too hands off last year and he admitted it. He was going to let the guys figure it out on their own. This year Tad is figuring it out for them. He is doing the research to determine what puts his players in the best position to succeed.
Everything I have heard from king leads me to believe his personal confidence is not something we should worry about. GMFK gets it. He gets his roll. He gets his upside. He gets what he needs to work on. He will be fine.
None of those questions can be answered without experimentation. November is the perfect time to try and figure this stuff out. Tad was way too hands off last year and he admitted it. He was going to let the guys figure it out on their own. This year Tad is figuring it out for them. He is doing the research to determine what puts his players in the best position to succeed.
Everything I have heard from king leads me to believe his personal confidence is not something we should worry about. GMFK gets it. He gets his roll. He gets his upside. He gets what he needs to work on. He will be fine.
Tad always does this in November dude. Chill.
As usual, we'll get a good idea of what kind of team we have up in Moby. Really looking forward to that game.
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
- Everyone in this thread is arguing about the wrong thing.
- The guy who should be not starting is Wes Gordon. Mike Montgomery said multiple times last night all three of the wings need to be on the floor at the same time.
- Wes Gordon and Josh Scott continue to prove they can not play to their offensive potential while each other are on the court. This should be an obvious move Boyle needs to make or try, especially if he is tinkering with the lineup.
- Who plays the 4, George King. He's slightly out of position, but positions are overrated if your team can rebound. BTW hows that small Golden State team doing with a 4 out 1 in offense?
This is the opinion of someone who doesn't value defense and thinks offense is all that matters. That's not Tad, and fwiw, not me either.
scoob
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Wes is the perfect compliment to Josh (and the wings for that matter) because he plays great defense and does not demand the ball on offense.
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
I value defense but to say defense is all that matters is outrageous. What King brings on defense at the 4 isnt as good as Gordon I will concede. However, he can rebound and play smaller 4s better. However, what he brings on offense blows out any deficiency on the other side of the floor.
Tell that to the 2012 team that won a Pac-12 title and an NCAA tournament game.
Yes offensive efficiency is important. Yes we need to be more consistent on that end. Tad lives and breathes defense. His successful teams will defend and out rebound night in and night out. Wes is a better defender and rebounder than King. Therefore he will start at the 4.
scoob
Well-Known Member
I am confident that we would have lost the UNO game without Wes. Not so confident we would have lost without King. I love what King is doing and we are going to need a lot of minutes from him to have a good season, but Wes is very close to being an elite defender. King is not quite in that conversation offensively yet.
And no, King is not more effective guarding smaller 4s, or even 3s than Wes is. They are not in the same conversation defensively.
I am really starting to like this team a lot and LOVE the way Tad is handling them so far.
Lol.
I love what George King has brought to the table this year. He's been awesome. But I can't muster more of a response to this than lol.
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
The spacing and what he takes away on the offensive side is completely opposite of George King. Josh Scott would be 20+ PPG if not for teams being so easily able to collapse, because Gordon on floor. Mike Montgomery said multiple times throughout last 2 games that they need to put all 3 wings on the floor. But yes whats he know. Just an unbiased HoF coach.
jgisland
Club Member
1) thanks for the drive by to tell everybody that they are arguing incorrectly on a message board
2) Montgomery also said he respects Tad and he knows what he's doing, I know he's not bzdelik but we'll have to deal with the coach we have
3) So you'd rather have lost to UNO than have Scott/Wes play together? Interesting strategy
4) Does King have the resume over 3 games to anoint him the starter? I expect my candidates to have more experience and a larger body of work in their resume to prove this before I'd start a guy out of position over the teams best and most versatile defender.
Last edited:
I don't really care about who starts. King, Fletch and Fortune will all get plenty of starts and all will play starter's minutes just as Levi did as a senior.
One thing I do care about is that Wes plays differently if he gets involved early in the game with something positive happening for him on offense. Him playing at a high level is crucial, so he has to start and be targeted.
One thing I do care about is that Wes plays differently if he gets involved early in the game with something positive happening for him on offense. Him playing at a high level is crucial, so he has to start and be targeted.
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
I think people are also forgetting the Wes plays better without Josh on the floor. I love how the idea on this board is if we took Gordon out defense would be terrible. Think thats naive at best. Also, just because Wes played well, you think thats why we won game? How about fact George King didn't get to start and only had 2 points in 1st half. Would that have been different if he started? Would the team have found an offensive rhythm earlier.
How about as buffnik alluded to Wes plays better when he gets going on offense. Does that fact not apply to the entire team. Of course it does. Its human nature. If team is running and gunning on offense, they will play a better brand of defense.
How about as buffnik alluded to Wes plays better when he gets going on offense. Does that fact not apply to the entire team. Of course it does. Its human nature. If team is running and gunning on offense, they will play a better brand of defense.
You can't just dismiss the entire other side of an argument with "it's naive" - evidence please.
Jimmy thanks for coming by and trolling, 2 things:
- Tad is 4-2 against Mike Montgomery lifetime.
- Didnt people stop paying you to writing about things CU for rivals, or talk about them on the radio? (do you think there is a reason?)
jgisland
Club Member
you mean, "but Mike Montgomery said" isn't enough?
Jimmy_Wood
Active Member
Um Im actually on the radio again? And yes best way to determine if one coach is better than another is head to head. Come on. That's straight trolling. 677-317. 5 Regular Season Pac-10 titles. National Coach of the Year. Wooden Legacy Award. 4 PAC-12 Coach of the Year Awards. 21 20 win seaons. 3 30 win seasons. Went to NCAA in 14 of his last 16 seasons. Whose really trolling here?
As far as evidence to whether people play better defensive if they get involved offensively? Isn't this a pretty known common principle throughout basketball. Does it play more to certain people, sure, but not by some noticeable variable margin.
Man crush on a guy Tad sent into retirement aside, isn't your entire theory that King would play better defense (and comparable to Gordon) based on the theory that more time = better defense utter speculation? Seems naive.
jgisland
Club Member
Can you tell me more about these "pretty known common principles throughout basketball"