From where I sat

[SWC75]

It's a good summary, SWC, enjoyed it. I watched the game, and reviewed it on the dvr. I think you were dead on about most things. But MG does bring value to the team. Basically, he's a swiss army knife. He can play 3 positions and adds desperately-needed depth ... especially at the point and SF, where we have a freshman (who looked great last night) and TR who played very tentatively. Gbinije is not a volume scorer or outside assassin, but at least he can come in and hit the open shot and run the team.

Where's he's really valuable is on defense. He has an impressive vertical and good footwork. Why is this valuable -- well when Roberson was repeatedly out of position and got yanked, MG came in and cleaned it up. When KJ needed a break, MG came in and played well -- 6 points and 1 TO in probably 13 or 14 minutes playing guard. That's value. You're not going to have a Dion every year to bring NBA-level offense off the bench. So absent spectacular at one skill (or position), I'll settle for reliable and (nearly) mistake-free at three - that was MG last night.

Mr. Swiss Army also tied CM for a team-high 6 rebounds ... which is more than can be said for our center.

Where did I say that MG doesn't bring value to the team?

 

[reedny]

Where did I say that MG doesn't bring value to the team?

plays like the complimentary player he was last year. I expected more This is the part where I assumed you weren't impressed. But my point was not to criticize you, just to point out the value of what he brings to the table this year.

 

[SWC75]

plays like the complimentary player he was last year. I expected more This is the part where I assumed you weren't impressed. But my point was not to criticize you, just to point out the value of what he brings to the table this year.

Expecting more doesn't mean that I see no value in him. As I've said in this thread, the problem was that I was looking for spectacular plays form him when he was helping the team in a lot of different ways. The poster who called him a complimentary scorer was probably correct.

 

[mark79]

When SWC says "complementary" player, not to speak for him, but I think he means simply that he doesnt think he has yet developed into the "alpha dog" type of "give me the ball and I'll win the game for us" type of player.

Which doesn't mean he isn't very valuable for us this year, as he clearly is. Because of his versatility he is extremely important to us this year with our thin bench. We would be dead without him.

It also doesn't mean he isn't very skilled, because he seems to have improved his rebounding, his handle and his shooting. And his decision making seems also to be very steady.

Finally it doesn't mean that he will never become an "alpha dog"'type of player. I think he has the raw skills. He did surprise me quite a few times skying for rebounds. He also surprised me in the tourney last year.

I actually think he is intelligent and unselfish enough to know that a team can't have 5 alpha dogs on the same team all wanting the ball in key situations. Last year the team needed CJ to play "alpha dog" and I'm not quite sure that he was ever totally comfortable in that role.

 

[reedny]

When SWC says "complementary" player, not to speak for him, but I think he means simply that he doesnt think he has yet developed into the "alpha dog" type of "give me the ball and I'll win the game for us" type of player.

Which doesn't mean he isn't very valuable for us this year, as he clearly is. Because of his versatility he is extremely important to us this year with our thin bench. We would be dead without him.

It also doesn't mean he isn't very skilled, because he seems to have improved his rebounding, his handle and his shooting. And his decision making seems also to be very steady.

Finally it doesn't mean that he will never become an "alpha dog"'type of player. I think he has the raw skills. He did surprise me quite a few times skying for rebounds. He also surprised me in the tourney last year.

I actually think he is intelligent and unselfish enough to know that a team can't have 5 alpha dogs on the same team all wanting the ball in key situations. Last year the team needed CJ to play "alpha dog" and I'm not quite sure that he was ever totally comfortable in that role.

Yep, agree with both of you. His role is complimentary and I doubt he's ever going to be a go-to (alpha dog) type contributor on offense. Just solid on D, good rebounder and complimentary scorer.

 

[reedny]

Looking at the box score, I can see that G-man had a good game: 6 points, 6 rebounds, 4 assists and a block in 35 minutes. And, of course he had to be part of the defensive effort in the second half. I didn't find him particularly visible but that's because he was doing the little things that helps the team win. Or maybe after watching two SU games in less than 24 hours, my eyes were a bit bleary.

ok then. lol. this is what i was getting at before. But thinking about the rotations, at least at SF, I would rather see MG logging fewer minutes... because that would mean that Roberson was playing up to expectations and didn't need MG to come in and bail out his defense. Roberson's really the guy we could have expected more from against Carlton. 2 points and 4 rbs in 17 minutes -- obviously his upside is what has him starting at this point. It's early. After a few games we can start figuring this out.