Howard and Battle need to be up top. We're not going to score in the halfcourt anyway, so let's at least use the right personnel on defense, get them used to playing together and hope to get an extra 10 points in transition. Gillon can learn all the slides in the world, but he's still a better fit for the lollipop guild than the 2-3.
want to believe is there.
Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean those of us who do are imagining it. 'want to believe' comes across a little passive aggressive.
No it doesn't -- Frank Howard is my favorite player on the team. You are inferring something that isn't implied.
And yes--if after the last two games you think that Frank is running the team adroitly, I'd say that it is closer to wishful thinking / imagination than reality. He has a LONG way to go before he can be counted upon to run the team against high major competition.
Being objective about his performance isn't "passive aggressive" -- it is being pragmatic. I too hope for the best, for him and the team.
He's so special that he could do NOTHING against that kid from Wisconsin. He couldn't get around him on multiple attempts and not to be stereotypical here but Howard should have a significant athleticism and speed advantage over him. Pretty disheartening to me.let him run the show and dont yank him after his first bad play. this kid is special, i think he can handle it
What are you, my English teacher? Lighten up.A normal way to put it would have been to say you see something we don't see, or vice versa. "Want to believe," whether you intended it this way or not, comes across like you think those who see the ability in him to do well if given the opportunity are not only wrong, but have no basis for thinking so. Being pragmatic doesn't have anything to do with the passive aggressive part of it.
What is the alternative? John Gillon running the team? Again, and I know I'm a broken record at this point, but it's MORE wishful thinking after the last two games to believe Gillon can run it effectively.No it doesn't -- Frank Howard is my favorite player on the team. You are inferring something that isn't implied.
And yes--if after the last two games you think that Frank is running the team adroitly, I'd say that it is closer to wishful thinking / imagination than reality. He has a LONG way to go before he can be counted upon to run the team against high major competition.
Being objective about his performance isn't "passive aggressive" -- it is being pragmatic. I too hope for the best, for him and the team.
Why?He's so special that he could do NOTHING against that kid from Wisconsin. He couldn't get around him on multiple attempts and not to be stereotypical here but Howard should have a significant athleticism and speed advantage over him. Pretty disheartening to me.
I personally don't see "special" in Frank. I see solid in his future but that's about it.
I guess it's all relative to what "special" means.
He's so special that he could do NOTHING against that kid from Wisconsin. He couldn't get around him on multiple attempts and not to be stereotypical here but Howard should have a significant athleticism and speed advantage over him. Pretty disheartening to me.
To answer the question your avatar asks - no. Thanks for your service, enjoy your next chapter.
I have to agree with you. There are no easy answers but the most logical choice is Howard. In '13 it was our sophomore starting point guard MCW who took on a much larger (and much needed) leadership role at the end of the season after we had a pretty brutal stretch, and he helped lead us to FF. Imo FH needs to man up and really start to lead this team. Good news is as opposed to '13 there is more time for him to step up, he has months to mature into the role . Patience. Like MCW in '13 , FH doesnt have to be the only leader, but someone needs to step up and takes the reigns and it might as well be the guy who needs to be the floor general...Go CuseI agree with Jack Hall. This team has a bunch of new parts and a handful of returning players but no one to really look to on the court. Who is going to be the leader?
I also feel like the starting lineup just doesn't work. After watching Roberson the last two games I'd be bringing him off the bench and if he doesn't bring it he can sit back down for TT. Its simply way to late in the game to rely on him to come out of the gate engaged.
This would basically make White a full time forward (he's not a guard anyway) except a minute or two here and there. I'd start Battle and Howard because they are next years backcourt. Let them figure things out with Gillon as a spark plug 3rd guard. That would get all 3 more regular minutes which it looks like they need. The offense to start the game will be much better once Frank and Tyus find their rolls alongside two forwards who can shoot and Coleman who is showing some offense on the block. If Roberson or Thompson are really playing well then Lydon sees more time at the five that game when Coleman sits. You get Chukwu minutes where you can in the easy games. Maybe think about playing Thompson at the 5 some.
Back to Jack Hall's point though! Who's it going to be that takes the reigns of this team on the court? I don't see White, Roberson or Lydon being that guy, in fact they are the ones that need that guy to get them to do the following. White to play withing the offense, Roberson to play fired up and Lydon to be more aggressive offensively. To me Frank is the guy that needs to do it. He needs to look at his own play correct things and start to verbally expect that form the others. I'm not sure he's emotionally mature enough for that at this point though. Coleman can help here but he's a post guy.
And bring in The Real DC for a month's Consulting Fee to work on Chukwu. Intensively. Like a friggin Scared Straight Boot Camp.