Re: What a difference ...

[Brent Wyrick]

So the question becomes are they really all 6-10 or taller? They could be
like the guy from Charlotte who was listed at 7-0 and showed up at Chicago
draft camp as 6-9 in sock feet.

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Michael Ryan
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 5:46 PM
To: UC Basketball Forum
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] What a difference ...

Hrycaniuk is mentioned . . . .

To your point, I dont believe that Cincinnati has ever had three players
listed at 6-10 or taller on a roster.

--
Mike Ryan


On 10/12/06, Rick Saylor <address@hidden> wrote:
> It is a great post , however you failed to list Hrycaniuk? when is the
> last
> time we could potentially have three 6-10 in at the same time?




----- Original Message -----
> From: "Randy Shinkle" <address@hidden>
> To: <address@hidden>
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:33 PM
> Subject: [UC Basketball] What a difference ...
>
>
> What a difference 15 years makes . or does it?
>
> Throughout the off-season, various comments have been made in this
> Forum comparing Mick Cronin's first Bearcat squad with UC teams of the
> past.  In particular, there have been references to the '92 Final Four
> team, mostly because that was supposedly "the last time we recruited
> all juco's ."
>
> Not only was that technically untrue (then and now), it didn't allow
> for the players returning in the program.  While the '92 team
> certainly benefited from an influx of Juco talent (Blount, Martin,
> Nelson, VanExel), they were outnumbered in the rotation by players who
> were already on board.  Gibson, the first Huggins recruit at UC, was
> in his third year.  Jackson, Jones and Scott were in their second
> years, and all three began the season as starters.  And Buford, while
> playing his only year as a Bearcat, was the most experienced at
> playing for Huggins.
>
> I don't need to remind anyone that the current circumstances don't compare
> well.
>
> However, there may yet be a meaningful comparison between this year's
> team and the '92 team.  It appears to me that both teams have a more
> classic depth chart of guards, forwards and centers, and therefore we
> may see a similar nine player rotation.  Here's my take on how they
> stack up .
>
> '92 Guards:  Buford, Gibson, Jackson, VanExel
> '07 Guards:  Crowell, Gentry, Vaughn, Warren
>
> Like in '92, the '07 group looks to be fairly interchangeable, with no
> pure point guards (except maybe Crowell) and all with some scoring and
> ball handling ability.  Some may see this as a weakness, with no
> "floor general" always in charge (as might have been the case this
> year had Downey stayed), but I think it can be a strength.  My main
> memory from the '91 Midnight Madness was how solid and similar the
> guards appeared.  (Well, that was actually my second memory.  My first
> was that Nicky, the baby-faced surprise, didn't miss a shot.)
>
> The challenge for this year's group is, who will step up as a "go to
> guy" late in games?  Buford began the '92 season as that guy, and
> VanExel took over later.  I'm thinking Warren may be a strong enough
> scorer to fill this role, but that's hearsay at this point.
>
> '92 Forwards:  Jones, Martin, Nelson
> '07 Forwards:  McGowan, Sikes, Williamson
>
> Like the guards, the '07 group is more interchangeable, but that's not
> necessarily the best thing.  Martin was most similar to them, but he
> only began to make an impact late in the season; the following year he
> was much better.  All of the current forwards are better scorers than
> Nelson, but none are his match defensively.  And, to be sure, none of
> them are Herb Jones, "the straw that stirred the drink" in '92.
>
> I'd like this year's group to play "inside-out," focused first on
> rebounding (and scoring on stick-backs) and securing the inside
> defensively, but I fear they may be more interested in scoring from
> the outside.  I don't think that's the most likely route of success
> for this team.  This may be one of Cronin's biggest challenges.
>
> Then there's Allen and Hrycaniuk.  Either or both could make a major
> impact on this team scoring off the bench, if they can get off the
> bench.  Unfortunately, Allen's overall skills and Hrycaniuk's overall
> history may keep them there.  Then again, a redshirt year for
> Hrycaniuk may ultimately be best for the program's future anyway.
>
> Finally, if this team really needs Barwin by the time he arrives, none
> of us may want to watch anymore.  No disrespect to him, but the other
> guys need to be better.
>
> '92 Centers:  Blount, Scott
> '07 Centers:  Hall, Herrera
>
> This is the most favorable comparison for this year's team.
> Remembering the solid but unspectacular contributions of Blount and
> Scott, it wouldn't be a shock if Hall and Herrera matched them.
> However, an injury to either and the inside depth looks a lot more
> like last year.  Both of these guys need to play consistently well.
> Not great, but good.
>
> Lest anyone think I'm saying these two teams are very much alike,
> there is one enormous difference.  The '92 team had three leaders who
> were critical to their success.  Buford knew Huggins well, and he kept
> problems from developing between the players and the staff, especially
> during the preseason when Huggins was working them so hard in
> practice.  Jones led by example, with his stellar play and work ethic.
> And Nelson kept everyone loose, helping them handle their growing
> success without being overwhelmed by it.
>
> This year's team may well have none of that.  If so, the first year
> coach has a huge management job on his hands.  The team chemistry
> could end up resembling a lab experiment gone awry.  This is another
> way Downey could have helped.  If he were here, he'd be the team
> leader, and I think he would have been up to the task.  As it stands,
> McGowan has the mantle on his shoulders by default, at least for now,
> and I'm less confident he can handle it.
>
> If you're attending Bearcat Madness tomorrow, I'd suggest you watch
> the scrimmage not for dunks, no-look passes and long feathery 3's, but
> for who among the players seems to be in charge.  That will tell you
> the most about what this team could be.