Class of 2015 C/PF Thomas Bryant (NY) Verballed to Indiana

[wallacecuse]

Could anyone stop us from giving Bryant a football scholarship as the third-string punter and have him play basketball as a walk-on? He could just come to football practice once in awhile kick a ball pretty high in the air and leave.

Is that just a don't do that nonsense unwritten rule, or is there some way the NCAA actually prohibits game-playing like that? Hey, this kid is on a tennis scholarship! Walk-on for football!

Just curious...

The U got busted for this practice 20+ years ago, putting football players on track scholarships. The NCAA then made a rule that if you are on an athletic scholly and play football, the scholly counts towards football. Dont know if the same rule applies to bball.

 

[reedny]

Except we play a zone, so the difference between the 3 and the 4 isnt nearly as noticeable as man to man. Therefore, whether Roberson is a "3" or a "4" doesn't matter- he'll "be exploited on the glass and on interior D against bigger teams" regardless of what side of the floor he is standing on.

As for offense, Roberson's strength is rebounding, putbacks, and attacking the rim, often from the elbow to the baseline. He's much more a 4 on offense than a 3. We'll agree to disagree.

As for Chris, he has a nice shot right now. Both of them are much more power forward type than small forward, mind you, but for the sake of this discussion, I'll take my chances with Roberson banging inside and Chris shooting mid-range jumpers.

Interesting analysis, but it's certainly not "laughable" that the coaching staff was starting a 6'10" (PF) guy inside (as the second big) and letting the 6-7/-8 210 guy slash and rebound at the second level. That obviously makes sense -- the current situation is only there because of injury.

I do agree that in JB's system, the forwards have similar roles defensively -- but usually there are two primary rebounders .. one on either side of the rim. Accordingly ... just like in 03' and other years, it's not rocket science to let the 6'9 - 6'10 guy, with the low block game (Warrick), stay inside with the center while the smaller guy slashes to the rim (Anthony). And if JB had Carmelo Anthony playing (mostly) at the 3, TR sure as hell isn't a 4 ... at least not with Chris McCullough available. Try looking at the LV game in the spots I mentioned .. and you can see what I mean. Tyler got exploited .. and understandably so against much bigger players.

But all this aside, what a tremendous effort the other night against a physical pitt team (and 3 incompetent ref's) ... to see him get hit that hard and come back and give it a go .. speaks volumes about his heart.

I just think he needs a jumper and any discussion about where to put him would be over.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Interesting analysis, but it's certainly not "laughable" that the coaching staff was starting a 6'10" (PF) guy inside (as the second big) and letting the 6-7/-8 210 guy slash and rebound at the second level. That obviously makes sense -- the current situation is only there because of injury.

I do agree that in JB's system, the forwards have similar roles defensively. However... just like in 03' and other years, it's not rocket science to let the 6'9 - 6'10 guy, with the low block game (Warrick), stay inside and while the smaller guy slashes to the rim (Anthony). And if JB had Carmelo Anthony playing (mostly) at the 3, TR sure as hell isn't a 4 ... at least not with Chris McCullough available. Try looking at the LV game in the spots I mentioned .. and you can see what I mean. Tyler got exploited .. and understandably so against much bigger players.

But all this aside, what a tremendous effort the other night against a physical pitt team (and 3 incompetent ref's) ... to see him get hit that hard and come back and give it a go .. speaks volumes about his heart.

I just think he needs a jumper and any discussion about where to put him would be over.

Using our most famous, and arguably best and versatile, player of all-time is a terrible example. Carmelo Anthony played 1-4.

 

[reedny]

Using our most famous, and arguably best and versatile, player of all-time is a terrible example. Carmelo Anthony played 1-4.

Forth played center, and Hakim Warrick played the 4. If you can't see the difference between warrick and Tyler .. I can't help you. And I'd be shocked if CM didn't return and start at PF, just the way the season started through the -St game.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Except we play a zone, so the difference between the 3 and the 4 isnt nearly as noticeable as man to man. Therefore, whether Roberson is a "3" or a "4" doesn't matter- he'll "be exploited on the glass and on interior D against bigger teams" regardless of what side of the floor he is standing on.
.

Roberson will get exploited on the glass? He's the best rebounding forward we've had in a long time.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Wasn't the point. The point was that TR, who's a nice young man that has put in a ton of work for us recently (e.g., nice game against Duke and a great effort against Pitt), can be exploited on the glass and on interior D against bigger teams. That's it ... I wasn't claiming he lost the game for us.

And I think that most people would argue with you on this point. The kid has hit double figure rebounds in the majority of games he's started since Chris got hurt. He is at least Fair's equal on the glass, and is likely better in the long run. Fair, you will recall, led us in rebounding.

 

[reedny]

And I think that most people would argue with you on this point. The kid has hit double figure rebounds in the majority of games he's started since Chris got hurt. He is at least Fair's equal on the glass, and is likely better in the long run. Fair, you will recall, led us in rebounding.

No doubt Tyler's a talented rebounder, at least as good and possibly better than CJ. But the choice is between Tyler and CM at the 4, and I think CM started this year (and will next year at PF) because he has better size and ability to defend the rim. Here's a break-down:

1) Rebounding is only part of the story. Tyler's a talented rebounder, so this somewhat masks the shortcomings of his smallish build in other areas. At any rate, I think he's in double figures (rebounding) 5 of 11 times since CM was hurt, and overall, 8 of 24 games played. However, his higher numbers are generally against weaker/smaller teams (see point 4);
2) It seems illogical to insist that a 6/7 - 6-8 210 pound kid should start/play the majority of the minutes as our second big (on the other side of the rim from the center), when a much taller player (CM) is available ... with a much better upside, including greater potential to finish over size and a (developing) low post game. Neither of these abilities is within TR's primary skillset;
3) Against bigger teams (those with a secondary big besides the center that Rak plays), CM is a better shot-blocker and (as he gets stronger and grows into his huge frame) will be able to establish and maintain inside position to defend the rim. With Chris hurt, Tyler has been struggling with his interior D against bigger inside players. My post gives examples of that issue against LV;
4) As to rebounding, the only top tier ACC team that Tyler did well on the glass against was Duke. IMO this is because Duke spreads the floor for its shooters -- giving TR opportunities to RB at the second level (which is where CJF was good, and would probably have played the 3 if we had a taller big available last year). With that loan exception, here are the games where he had double digit rebounds:

- Kenesaw St.;
- L-Tech;
- V-Tech (twice);
- Wake
- Miami (has a 7' C and 6'10 backup), but no good secondary rebounder, so Tyler did well);
- Clemson.

Obviously, these teams are not the elite of the ACC. So he's a good rebounder primarily against smaller teams, mostly in the lower half of the league. Against beefier, taller teams -- in games where possessions are more critical -- he is less effective on the glass AND gets exploited on interior D. See G-Tech, UNC, Pitt both times, Louisville, [By Edit] Virginia, etc.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Somebody must have hit reply on the wrong post.:noidea:

Yep

 

[Ghost]

My understanding of the rule is that if a kid is on scholarship for football and another sport, the scholarship counts against football's 85 scholarships. But that's not going to happen.

Perfect! I know it won't happen, just curious.

 

[bpo57]

And you missed my point entirely, which is that against bigger teams we're better off with him at the 3 (especially if his jump shot arrives). That's why CM started this year at the 4, the position he'll return to next season. If you don't believe, me ... replay the LV game, stop at the points I mention, and watch for yourself. Then maybe you'll see what I'm trying to get at here.

You said you'd like to see him come off the bench as a slasher.

 

[bpo57]

No doubt Tyler's a talented rebounder, at least as good and possibly better than CJ. But the choice is between Tyler and CM at the 4, and I think CM started this year (and will next year at PF) because he has better size and ability to defend the rim. Here's a break-down:

1) Rebounding is only part of the story. Tyler's a talented rebounder, so this somewhat masks the shortcomings of his smallish build in other areas. At any rate, I think he's in double figures (rebounding) 5 of 11 times since CM was hurt, and overall, 8 of 24 games played. However, his higher numbers are generally against weaker/smaller teams (see point 4);
2) It seems illogical to insist that a 6/7 - 6-8 210 pound kid should start/play the majority of the minutes as our second big (on the other side of the rim from the center), when a much taller player (CM) is available ... with a much better upside, including greater potential to finish over size and a (developing) low post game. Neither of these abilities is within TR's primary skillset;
3) Against bigger teams (those with a secondary big besides the center that Rak plays), CM is a better shot-blocker and (as he gets stronger and grows into his huge frame) will be able to establish and maintain inside position to defend the rim. With Chris hurt, Tyler has been struggling with his interior D against bigger inside players. My post gives examples of that issue against LV;
4) As to rebounding, the only top tier ACC team that Tyler did well on the glass against was Duke. IMO this is because Duke spreads the floor for its shooters -- giving TR opportunities to RB at the second level (which is where CJF was good, and would probably have played the 3 if we had a taller big available last year). With that loan exception, here are the games where he had double digit rebounds:

- Kenesaw St.;
- L-Tech;
- V-Tech (twice);
- Wake
- Miami (has a 7' C and 6'10 backup), but no good secondary rebounder, so Tyler did well);
- Clemson.

Obviously, these teams are not the elite of the ACC. So he's a good rebounder primarily against smaller teams, mostly in the lower half of the league. Against beefier, taller teams -- in games where possessions are more critical -- he is less effective on the glass AND gets exploited on interior D. See G-Tech, UNC, Pitt both times, LV, etc.

Why can't they both start as the forwards.? This notion that only one of them can start is maddening. How do you bench a guy that rebounds like TR does? Plus his offensive game has plenty of upside.

 

[reedny]

I have no problem with them both playing as forwards .. as long as CM is in there as the second big (with the center). CM (as PF) can work on the other side of the center - since CM has a low block game and shot-blocking size. That frees up Tyler to play the 3 and slash, rebound in space and do his thing. Yes he's a good rb for his size, but (as I showed above) he struggles against bigger front lines when he's asked to play the 4.

As far as upside, sure .. at the 3. Once his shot arrives, watch out. He had a great game slashing against Duke, and he will be a potent second-level rebounder. I just don't want him on the other side of the center against bigger teams because he struggles offensively and defensively.

 

[jordoo]

I think we might want to steer it back to Bryant but I'll add my two sense on this Roberson thing.

Roberson is a GREAT rebounder if he is playing with a legit 4 and 5 no matter what position we want to say he is. At his size and weight he's a great rebounder but there are some teams where situationally as our second big he gets exposed on the block defending the rim and the glass. He's not a big guy with lots of weight to toss around. But not too many teams can expose him in this its mainly just the cream of the crop type of teams.

My concern for him playing as a 3 is more on offense however. This is where I worry about him and Chris being the starting forwards unless both really improve there jumper and one becomes almost automatic when left open outside of 15'. Those two playing with a post 5 man the way they are now gives me spacing and flow headaces just picturing it.

 

[reedny]

You said you'd like to see him come off the bench as a slasher.

Next year, the SF personnel won't change .. you've got the swiss army knife, G, playing the 2/3. And you've got TR playing the 3/4. I think how much time each player spends at each position is going to depend on matchups and the hot hand.

For my money, the less time Tyler spends at the 4 against bigger/top tier conference teams, the better. CM is the better candidate for PF duties, and it's just asking too much for Tyler to try to score and defend the rim against bigger front line players. I think my post gives good examples of his struggles in that role .. which are obvious on tape.

 

[reedny]

I think we might want to steer it back to Bryant but I'll add my two sense on this Roberson thing.

Roberson is a GREAT rebounder if he is playing with a legit 4 and 5 no matter what position we want to say he is. At his size and weight he's a great rebounder but there are some teams where situationally as our second big he gets exposed on the block defending the rim and the glass. He's not a big guy with lots of weight to toss around. But not too many teams can expose him in this its mainly just the cream of the crop type of teams.

My concern for him playing as a 3 is more on offense however. This is where I worry about him and Chris being the starting forwards unless both really improve there jumper and one becomes almost automatic when left open outside of 15'. Those two playing with a post 5 man the way they are now gives me spacing and flow headaces just picturing it.

So, yes, good idea getting back to Bryant .. what do you see as the starting front line rotation next year if he comes in?

Center - TB with DC2 backup?
PF - CM with TR backup? (Diagne getting a few minutes/learrning or contributing?)
SF - TR/G [by edit BJ]? (Lydon getting a few minutes/contributing?)

 

[jordoo]

So, yes, good idea getting back to Bryant .. what do you see as the starting front line rotation next year if he comes in?

Center - TB with DC2 backup?
PF - CM with TR backup? (Diagne getting a few minutes/learrning or contributing?)
SF - TR/G? (Lydon getting a few minutes/contributing?)

If we get an NCAA announcement saying no ban next year and G is back think its like this.
SF: G/Tyler/Lydon
PF: Chris/Tyler/Diange
C: Thomas/DC2/Diange
Mike coming back is a big question and if he doesn't can Malachi play at all there? Does Mike leaving have BJ staying because honestly he is a better fit at the 3 than Tyler and he rebounds very well f0r his build.
DC2 is a huge wild card IMO because no one knows if the knee will hold up or how many minutes he can play on the knee each game. He could be healthy and a huge load locking out minutes from Diange or he may wind up playing very little.

The great news is that we have a lot of guys for the staff to figure out what works. Chris and Mike will play big minutes if back and if both are back I'd bet none of the other front court guys play more than 25 per.

 

[RF2044]

So, yes, good idea getting back to Bryant .. what do you see as the starting front line rotation next year if he comes in?

Center - TB with DC2 backup?
PF - CM with TR backup? (Diagne getting a few minutes/learrning or contributing?)
SF - TR/G? (Lydon getting a few minutes/contributing?)

Hard to say, because a couple of variables are unknown, namely:

• Does Coleman come back anywhere close to 100%?
• Does Bryant come here?
• Does McCullough come back anywhere close to 100?
• Does McCullough declare for the NBA?
• Does Gbinije declare for the NBA?
• Does Patterson stay or depart?
• Does BJ stay or depart?

Please note that I'm just listing the unknown factors, not advocating that any of the above can or will occur. For the purposes of responding to your note, I'm going to make a couple of quick assumptions:

• Bryant ends up at SU
• Coleman returns, but isn't 100%
• McCullough and Gbinije both return
• Patterson transfers

So, with that in mind, here's how I see the rotation:

PG--Joseph, backed up by Gbinije. Howard is the third option in a two-player rotation at lead guard

SG--Cooney, with Malachi Richardson backing him up and occasionally playing alongside him. Gbinije can also fill in here.

SF--Gbinije starts, but reprises his role as the team's primary lead guard / facilitator. Roberson can play here in a pinch. BJ returns and gives us a legit bench scoring option

PF--McCullough or Roberson start here. The other is a top bench guy. Diagne could fill in here, too. Lydon doesn't play much next year.

C--Bryant starts, Coleman backs him up. Both end up playing about 50% of the game. McCullough can also slide into the pivot, as can Diagne as the fourth option. Obokoh doesn't play much next year.


If Bryant doesn't come here, then it all comes down to whether Coleman can start or not. If he can, he's the center. If he can't, then while it is less than ideal, I see McCullough potentially starting at the 5 with Roberson starting at the 4.

 

[reedny]

Hard to say, because a couple of variables are unknown, namely:

• Does Coleman come back anywhere close to 100%?
• Does Bryant come here?
• Does McCullough come back anywhere close to 100?
• Does McCullough declare for the NBA?
• Does Gbinije declare for the NBA?
• Does Patterson stay or depart?
• Does BJ stay or depart?

Please note that I'm just listing the unknown factors, not advocating that any of the above can or will occur. For the purposes of responding to your note, I'm going to make a couple of quick assumptions:

• Bryant ends up at SU
• Coleman returns, but isn't 100%
• McCullough and Gbinije both return
• Patterson transfers

So, with that in mind, here's how I see the rotation:

PG--Joseph, backed up by Gbinije. Howard is the third option in a two-player rotation at lead guard

SG--Cooney, with Malachi Richardson backing him up and occasionally playing alongside him. Gbinije can also fill in here.

SF--Gbinije starts, but reprises his role as the team's primary lead guard / facilitator. Roberson can play here in a pinch. BJ returns and gives us a legit bench scoring option

PF--McCullough or Roberson start here. The other is a top bench guy. Diagne could fill in here, too. Lydon doesn't play much next year.

C--Bryant starts, Coleman backs him up. Both end up playing about 50% of the game. McCullough can also slide into the pivot, as can Diagne as the fourth option. Obokoh doesn't play much next year.


If Bryant doesn't come here, then it all comes down to whether Coleman can start or not. If he can, he's the center. If he can't, then while it is less than ideal, I see McCullough potentially starting at the 5 with Roberson starting at the 4.

Interesting take... and yes, more questions than answers at this stage. I think having TB come in would represent a huge upgrade to the front line, specifically the 5. It would allow DC2 to phase in his return more slowly, and wouldn't require CM to have to play center as much -- which rotates our front line down a size.

At SF, I forgot BJ totally ... and he's starting to pop. I still think G starts at the 3 (but helps at PG as you say), and I like Tyler to back up there IF he can at least get a mid-range/slashing game going offensively. If not, I see him as backing up the 3 with BJ and the 4 for CM.

As to PF, Francis has an interesting take here on Diagne ... I'm not going to try to speak for him. But he mentioned that Diagne projects more as a 3rd center option than PF because he'll come in at 250+. That's also a good thing ... to have 3 guys capable of playing 5 ... so CM can concentrate as the PF/second big with Tyler backing him up.

 

[jordoo]

As far as unknown factors I think the NCAA report and final verdict on any additional ban is very key.

If there is a ban next season Bryant is very likely not coming here. Also Mike and possibly Trevor are gone as they will both be free to transfer without sitting out or play for pay.

If there is no ban next season I expect Bryant to be here. Trevor obviously would be back as well plus it gives is the best possible chance for Mike to come back because we would be post season eligible and a very good team although I'd still say no guarantee in any direction for what Mike will do.

Mike coming or going effects BJ more than anyone else IMO. If BJ was considering transferring and Mike is back he would likely still be considering it no matter how good he does in the last 3 games. (like RF2044 not advocating any which way just speculating) If Mike is not back and BJ finishes strong he could have the inside track to start at the 3 and would at lest play big minutes off the bench.

Chris is coming back per JB at this point. I expect this is a forgone conclusion more than a question. Would be shocked to find out anything other than that.

Patterson is behind Kaleb, Trevor and Mike (to an extent) now. We possibly bring all three back and have Frank and Malachi coming in. I think he would have to improve ten fold on offense to have a meaningful roll other than being a practice player next year. Although he does more good on D than Kaleb he gambles quite often which gets everything out of position and costs the defense severely. He also misses almost as many shooters as Kaleb but he does at least always get his hands up on the close out. The staff will be frank with him in his close out interview and I would not be shocked to see him go to say Eastern Michigan.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Hard to say, because a couple of variables are unknown, namely:

• Does Coleman come back anywhere close to 100%?
• Does Bryant come here?
• Does McCullough come back anywhere close to 100?
• Does McCullough declare for the NBA?
• Does Gbinije declare for the NBA?
• Does Patterson stay or depart?
• Does BJ stay or depart?

Please note that I'm just listing the unknown factors, not advocating that any of the above can or will occur. For the purposes of responding to your note, I'm going to make a couple of quick assumptions:

• Bryant ends up at SU
• Coleman returns, but isn't 100%
• McCullough and Gbinije both return
• Patterson transfers

So, with that in mind, here's how I see the rotation:

PG--Joseph, backed up by Gbinije. Howard is the third option in a two-player rotation at lead guard

SG--Cooney, with Malachi Richardson backing him up and occasionally playing alongside him. Gbinije can also fill in here.

SF--Gbinije starts, but reprises his role as the team's primary lead guard / facilitator. Roberson can play here in a pinch. BJ returns and gives us a legit bench scoring option

PF--McCullough or Roberson start here. The other is a top bench guy. Diagne could fill in here, too. Lydon doesn't play much next year.

C--Bryant starts, Coleman backs him up. Both end up playing about 50% of the game. McCullough can also slide into the pivot, as can Diagne as the fourth option. Obokoh doesn't play much next year.


If Bryant doesn't come here, then it all comes down to whether Coleman can start or not. If he can, he's the center. If he can't, then while it is less than ideal, I see McCullough potentially starting at the 5 with Roberson starting at the 4.

FIND OUT ON THE NEXT EPISODE OF DRAGON BALL Z

 

[CuseitUp]

5-TB with DC2/Diagne backup
4-CM with TR/Diagne backup
3-TR/BJ
2-Cooney/Richardson
1-G/KJ
I dont think Lydon and Howard are going play much. This lineup also assumes that Buss would be the one possible transferring, which would be sad but entirely possible as he can't play the 1, and MR would consume nearly all of his minutes.

 

[themorey]

Lots of talk about transfers but I seldom see Obokohs name come up. If he can't get PT as the #2 C how would he get any as the #3 or #4 option? I'm not advocating for him to transfer but imo he would be the most likely.

 

[iommi]

Lots of talk about transfers but I seldom see Obokohs name come up. If he can't get PT as the #2 C how would he get any as the #3 or #4 option? I'm not advocating for him to transfer but imo he would be the most likely.

It's not likely because he wants an education and he's good friends wth Bryant.

 

[AWMKY]

Lots of talk about transfers but I seldom see Obokohs name come up. If he can't get PT as the #2 C how would he get any as the #3 or #4 option? I'm not advocating for him to transfer but imo he would be the most likely.

He went to high school with Bryant. Friends. Doesn't seem likely he'd be the one.

 

[jordoo]

Lots of talk about transfers but I seldom see Obokohs name come up. If he can't get PT as the #2 C how would he get any as the #3 or #4 option? I'm not advocating for him to transfer but imo he would be the most likely.

Chino has done exactly what he was brought here to do. Get good grades, work hard, be a back up big and he was a high school team mate of Bryant. He's not a kid who's here strictly for his basketball career. Basketball is his vehicle for education.