Re: Re: Pilgrim update

[Jon Macomber]

I know Whaley and White were out, but only 6 players scored last night.  I'm
not worried about that though - but only 4 front line players doesn't leave
room for error if we have an injury or a night with a lot of fouls.  But if
Huggs says redshirt Soulman (probably a done deal) and Pilgrim (depends on
injury) than I say go with Huggs.  But imagine Whaley out until January.
We're back to Maxiell at PF, Johnson at C, and Hicks backing up.  Shades of
last season - everyone's better, but remember the complaints?

Max is undersized for a NBA PF, but he still has those long arms and decent
jumps.  But I don't think he can consistently hit 10 foot jumpers like a pro
should (not that's the NBA style right now...).  His passing is suspect
outside of offensive set plays.  He's athletic and can run the floor okay-
but his offensive moves take too long to develop.  Imagine trying those
turnarounds and junk hooks with a 6'11" PF jumping through the ceiling in
front of him.

But he's tenacious and that's a factor (not on paper though).  I wish he was
more mobile and active - maybe operate out of that top post like Kenyon used
to do - run the offense through him.  But I don't think he's suited for
that.  Huggs has said that's a tough part of the offense and after Kenyon
only Jamaal Davis understood that role.

Finally - I hope we get to the Big East next season - we should have a lot
of talent back, and Kirkland or White could take over for Field/Bobbitt no
problem.  The year after we'll see the Hicks/Kirkland/Moore triumvirate hit
their senior years.  More "on paper" thinking - but we should have some
solid teams for quite awhile.

Jon M


----- Original Message -----
From: "Reber, Steven Edwin (Steve)" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 2:40 PM
Subject: [UC Basketball] Re: Pilgrim update


> Pappas:>>>Anyone have an idea when Mike Pilgrim will be ready to play?
>
> Somebody asked, I think it was on last week's Radio show (Reminder tonight
> at 8pm)
> about redshirting BOTH Souleymane and Pilgrim and Huggins said that "I
think
> we have passed that point."
> Seeming to say that they are both too far behind in learning (because of
> injury and lack of full-assimilation English skills)
> that barring a disaster, both probably would redshirt.
>
> So if Whaley and Max both return next year, that makes a front court of
> (Whaley/Max/Hicks) with Pilgrim and Souley as
> redshirt-freshman, looking at major/starting minutes in their "sophomore"
> year (05/06).  This does a LOT towards getting
> back to a full complement of 13 players, even if the disgusting 8/5 rule
> does not get thrown out.  I think Kenny Satterfield's
> mistake in leaving early was that he DOMINATED for only about 3-4 weeks at
> the end of his last year, pro teams would like
> to see a player have a whole dominant YEAR to be real comfortable drafting
> them, since Max is undersized for pro PF he
> better be confident when he goes to the draft, and with Whaley's knee
repair
> the clock is ticking on having a full
> DOMINANT year.  Not that Max will not be a long time pro, or an upper tier
> pro, eventually (Charles Barkley gets shorter all
> the time when people talk about non-prototype pro PFs).
>
> I think the discussions of going to Big East next year have to wait until
> all the football bowl bids are finalized, because
> they involve sharing the bowl payouts and early departure penalties, and
the
> financial realities that ADs deal with.
> So when each conference knows exactly how many bowl share dollars are
> leaving and how many are entering they can
> discuss financial penalties.
>
> RMayer:>>>I heard the show on WLW. He seemed pleased about the play.
Didn't
> hear alot,
> > > > didn't even realize it was on full court. So I missed a tv game as
well!
> Sorry, I mentioned last week that ESPN had revised the list, I should have
> re-posted yesterday, anybody in Columbus who
> wants to borrow the tape, let me know (You have two weeks to fill before
the
> next game anyway...)
>
> Steve in Columbus
> sreber at lucent dot com (lets see the webcrawlers try and parse that and
> generate spam).