I tend to agree with the sentiments that support starting the best 5 and also then playing them more minutes. However, I honestly don't know who the best 5 are and there are many contenders (not because we have so many great players but because we have a bunch of incomplete, and not great players). I think we all tend to be the most down on Tyne, Tanner and Walz. But I am not so sure its because they aren't among the 5 "best' as much as it is we have seen more of them and all their flaws than the newer guys and we just aren't as sick of the new guys (yet). But as I try to look at things - - I can't get very excited about most of the rest of the group either.
Looking at some of these difficult to put in perspective views - - First team wise - - GW game is such a prime example. We were downright good offensively. 49% overall, 43% from 3 on good volume, got to the line a good amount (and more than GW) and made 80+% FT, more than held our own on the glass (including 10 offensive rebounds) and only turned it over 8 times. That's about as complete of an offensive performance as we can expect. And basically we were never a threat to actually win the game (at home) against a middling conference foe. Then look within the game and see these kinds of things - - Daughtry can and did score, but zero rebounds and was horrible defensively. I was leaning heavily to he is among the best 5 but the more critically I look, he has been a part of the problems and not some shining light for sure. Johnston scored yesterday, but was god awful defensively (and not just yesterday) and was coming off back to back zero point efforts. Is he really clearly one of the best 5?? Beagle looked great for a spell earlier but has now reminded us that against real bigs, he struggles on D and the glass etc. I can make lots of arguments for/against literally every player in the current rotation as to why they are or aren't one of the 5 best who should be starting and getting more minutes.
So I have a new standard for deciding who should play - - how long will you be with the program. Might as well play the guys who will be here the longest and hope they develop! So AA starts and get the most minutes which seems obvious. And Tyne's cedes even more minutes for this to happen. He isn't a senior, but he has played enough that I think we see whatever development there is to see. After that it gets tricky though. First place I start is with AP. He sits to give his minutes to others - - he has been decent but has become the Mooney trained kind of player I hate. Doesn't make a ton of mistakes, runs the Mooney offense well etc, but can't defend and doesn't make any plays really. Not making mistakes doesn't mean you are making plays. A concept Moon man seems to get confused on sometimes. Might be a good guy to have as a sub on a better team, but no place here to be taking time from others as a senior substitute on a mediocre team trying to rebuild. I actually like Thomas as perhaps closest thing we have to a two-way guard and as a Junior, I'd flip flop his and Johnston's role's to see what he can do. We have no choice really but to continue the time share at the 5, but I'd lean more into Walz because i think he is considerably better (not to be confused with good) on D and rebounding etc. especially against better opponents. But I might be looking to play smaller more to get Daughtry and JRob more time. And J Rob is getting a lot more time. And I am finding time for Harper too. That leaves Tanner in the current J Rob role (at best). The big issue here is that Tyne and Tanner (and AP) would lose time (lots) and that's problematic for Mr Loyalty at the helm.
So, AA and Thomas start at guard. I will keep Lopez at the three (i know he is a senior but closest thing we have to two-way player and he is the best of the Seniors). Daughtry and the two headed pivot monster round out my five. And AA, Daughtry get 30 minutes a night and Thomas jumps up to the mid 20's right away and more if it goes well. The two-headed pivot gets 32-35 and we play smaller 5-8 minutes. That leaves me about 25 minutes at guard. Harper get first priority and he gets 15 (and hopefully earns more). Johnston and Tyne get the rest (which may end up Tyne because we will need some PG minutes plus loyalty). That leaves Johnston sorta out but this is where the age part comes in - - - these minutes are better spent on younger people when the seniors aren't that much if any better really. But if Johnston gets those minutes over Tyne, I am fine with that. J Rob gets 10 behind Daughtry and 5 when we play without a real 5. And he gets more if he plays well. That leaves me maybe 15 min behind Lopez (although I'd be pushing Lopex closer to 30 than 25 minutes. So that can get filled with Tanner, AP, three guards (i.e Johnston) etc. So losers are AP and Johnston (Seniors and we have younger options) and Tyne and Tanner (Juniors but lots of experience and no more development left in all likelihood). Winners are Thomas, JRob and Harper (lets see what we have with more minutes for this group) and some time increases for Lopez, AA. Walz/Beagle just keep on truckin - warts and all.
AA 30+
Thomas 25
Daughtry 30
Lopez 28
Pivot Monsters 35 (combined)
Harper 15 (more if he plays well)
JRob 15 (also more if he earns it)
Back Up G 10 (Tyne/ Johnston - but to Harper if he plays well)
Back up F 12 (Tanner/AP - but to JRob if he plays well)
And those back up minutes would all go to one guy or the other for the full 10-12 not 5-6 each). So the rotation will go down by two people.
.
most times, or some other easy shot. I heard them telling teamates that is what their HS coach taught them. Very very weird, but the same staunch belief in a broken system.
