11 spots. 3 openings.
In a perfect world, if there is only room for 11 players, I think you break it down as follows:
2 centers
2 power forwards
2 small forwards
2 shooting guards
2 point guards
plus one more player, preferably a wing who can play guard and small forward.
I would break down the players we have today as follows:
2 centers (Chukwu and Sidbie)
2 power forwards (TT, MM and OB)
2 small forwards (none)
2 shooting guards (HW)
2 point guards (FH)
TB as the swingman
So the roster is horribly balanced. Losing TL was in a way, a blessing, because it opened a slot for a guard that was going to be taken by a PF/C.
We need 2 SFs, a SG and a PG but can't get them all because we have to many power forward types on the roster.
So I think with Battle able to play SG and presumably SF, I think we take two SFs and a PG. If one of the SFs can also play SG, all the better.
Tucker is desperately needed to fill a SF slot.
Ayala would be huge for the PG spot. Both would probably start from day one.
Another SF would be great...if we get one, I would guess he will be a grad transfer or a foreign dude.
If no Ayala, then we try more unlikely class of 2017 options or get a grad transfer at PG.
How long has it been since we had more than 3 serviceable guards in the program? Could we really go another year like this again?
Sure hope not.
Great post, Tomcat.
I'll add that those lines can blur, because we often have players who can slide into more than one of those traditional positional roles. I.E., power forwards who can play center in our system a la Lydon, wings who can be either shooting guards or small forwards, forwards who have versatility a la CJ Fair and Southerland, who don't fit cleanly into either position in a traditional sense, etc.
So I don't know that we need to establish the positions so rigidly in constructing the roster. The key for me is whether the personnel on hand can adequately FILL the various roles. And as you state, right now we don't have a true 3 [although Battle COULD play there in a pinch], we might not have a point guard capable of starting [unless Howard bounces back in a big way, or unless Washington is more ready to contribute than expected].
We land Tucker / Ayala, and this is a HUGE bounce back for the staff, rounding out a top 25 caliber class. This would then be an important foundational class that replenishes depth and puts a bunch of much needed program guys back into our base. But there's no superstar [barring Ayala or Tucker emerging as a high major contributor, which admittedly could happen] in the bunch -- which fuels my belief that we only go as far next year as Battle / Thompson take us. Here's hoping both make the proverbial sophomore jump, which definitely isn't outside of the realm of possibility. If Thompson returns as an improved rebounder who doesn't treat defense as optional, and Battle becomes the go to guy who fuels our offensive attack while establishing himself as a lottery pick -- again, both of which could easily happen -- then we might be onto something, and be much better than most will project next season.
Will also be interesting to see who [if anybody] might be out there as a fifth year transfer candidate. Would love to see us land that SF from Rice [just for example], as an experienced guy who could step in at the 3 and start immediately, and provide us with a consistent shooting / scoring threat who can serve as the third consistent scorer behind Battle and Thompson.
If THAT happens, this will turn into a very, very good class. Far cry from what it seemed when we only had two recruits to flesh out a five person class.
