Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Gallia Academy (4-3) beat Coal Grove 65-58.  

Zach Loveday — who was limited to just three field goals and 10 points in the first half — dominated the second half as the junior poured in 10 points in the third while helping Gallia Academy to a 50-44 edge headed into the finale.  Loveday tacked on another nine points down the stretch as the Blue Devils closed regulation with small 15-14 run, wrapping up the final seven-point outcome.  Loveday poured in a game-high 29 points despite going 5-of-16 at the free throw line. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

Transferred to Huntington Prep
 

Major news out of Ohio today.

Top-50 junior Zach Loveday has transferred to powerhouse, Huntington Prep.

“I know it was tough to leave but I know this is a better situation for me,” Loveday told me.

He joins 2020 five-star Jaemyn Brakefield, Top-15 sophomore JT Thor, Jimma Gatwech, and Louisville signee Quinn Slazinski.

“I did a shadowing thing today but I’m officially enrolled and I get my schedule tomorrow,” Loveday said.

“This move just puts me in a better position on the court with better players, a bigger stage and staff that will take great care of me. The school is great too the teachers are really caring.”

He also added how he visited Louisville for the game against Kentucky last weekend.

  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...
Posted

I approve of this development. Not sure how likely IU is to land him, but I would always like to see 2 real centers on the roster- no one under 6'9" need apply :) I know there have been LOTS of under-sized over-achievers, but I would prefer over-sized over-achievers for once. 

I am not sold on "positionless" basketball. Unless you have lots real talent it seems to be an empty buzzword for unbalanced rosters full of tweeners that don't do anything well. 

All that said- C'mon down Zach! IU has as a nice 3 year starter opening for you! 

Posted
43 minutes ago, Hardwood83 said:

I approve of this development. Not sure how likely IU is to land him, but I would always like to see 2 real centers on the roster- no one under 6'9" need apply :) I know there have been LOTS of under-sized over-achievers, but I would prefer over-sized over-achievers for once. 

I am not sold on "positionless" basketball. Unless you have lots real talent it seems to be an empty buzzword for unbalanced rosters full of tweeners that don't do anything well. 

All that said- C'mon down Zach! IU has as a nice 3 year starter opening for you! 

Positionless basketball is decent term for it but regardless what you call them you still need a big, a ball handler, a slasher and at 2 shooters. 

Obviously if there’s some overlap you can have more. The issue with Creans positionless was that resulted in missing key roles

Posted
On 5/31/2019 at 1:41 PM, Hardwood83 said:

I approve of this development. Not sure how likely IU is to land him, but I would always like to see 2 real centers on the roster- no one under 6'9" need apply :) I know there have been LOTS of under-sized over-achievers, but I would prefer over-sized over-achievers for once. 

I am not sold on "positionless" basketball. Unless you have lots real talent it seems to be an empty buzzword for unbalanced rosters full of tweeners that don't do anything well. 

All that said- C'mon down Zach! IU has as a nice 3 year starter opening for you! 

Positionless basketball doesn’t mean you don’t have bigs, it means those bigs are skilled guys that can handle, pass, shoot and defend the perimeter. For example, I just watched Boogie Cousins, who is a big dude, grab a board and take it up in transition and the kick it out to Iggoudala for a 3. 

Posted
5 hours ago, BGleas said:

Positionless basketball doesn’t mean you don’t have bigs, it means those bigs are skilled guys that can handle, pass, shoot and defend the perimeter. For example, I just watched Boogie Cousins, who is a big dude, grab a board and take it up in transition and the kick it out to Iggoudala for a 3. 

While I agree with your description, I can’t say I agree with your example. You described a PF that can maintain his handle for 90 feet. Lebron James and Kevin Durant are examples of positionless players. Players like that only come along once or twice in a decade which means it’s probably not the best approach when building a program. 

Posted
While I agree with your description, I can’t say I agree with your example. You described a PF that can maintain his handle for 90 feet. Lebron James and Kevin Durant are examples of positionless players. Players like that only come along once or twice in a decade which means it’s probably not the best approach when building a program. 

A good majority of NBA players fall under his description for a positionless player. You picked the two best players on the planet at it. You don’t have to be the best at it to make it true.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app
Posted
1 hour ago, mdn82 said:


A good majority of NBA players fall under his description for a positionless player. You picked the two best players on the planet at it. You don’t have to be the best at it to make it true.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

So you'd consider Demarcus Cousins to be a positionless player? You'd trust him to be your primary ball handler and you'd have no problem with him leading the team in 3 point attempts?

I picked those two guys because they are the only ones that can do all of those things at a high enough level to negate the need for players that specialize in those skill sets. Sure, there are guys that can do a little bit of all those things, but there aren't enough to say that positionless basketball is the best approach to building a team. Especially if we start talking the college level.

Posted
52 minutes ago, Bigred3588 said:

So you'd consider Demarcus Cousins to be a positionless player? You'd trust him to be your primary ball handler and you'd have no problem with him leading the team in 3 point attempts?

I picked those two guys because they are the only ones that can do all of those things at a high enough level to negate the need for players that specialize in those skill sets. Sure, there are guys that can do a little bit of all those things, but there aren't enough to say that positionless basketball is the best approach to building a team. Especially if we start talking the college level.

Position less doesn’t mean they can play all 5 positions. Position less mean they can float and play multiple roles for them. There literally is no team anywhere where everybody can play every role. 

Posted
So you'd consider Demarcus Cousins to be a positionless player? You'd trust him to be your primary ball handler and you'd have no problem with him leading the team in 3 point attempts?
I picked those two guys because they are the only ones that can do all of those things at a high enough level to negate the need for players that specialize in those skill sets. Sure, there are guys that can do a little bit of all those things, but there aren't enough to say that positionless basketball is the best approach to building a team. Especially if we start talking the college level.

Can Durant guard a big on the block? By your statement he wouldn’t be positionless player. Cousins can bring the ball down the court if he needed to. But he isn’t as quick down the court as others. That’s why he wasn’t in the game much in fourth despite playing a really good game last night all things considered. Well that and his defense on pick and roll. You don’t need a team that can do everything. Everyone has a role but they have flexibility which is what this is. If it wasn’t you would have a true pg, sg, sf, pf, and back to basket center. You really will struggle to win that way anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app
Posted

Strom is so, so on point. 

Need players to rebound and defend against size - not 'positionless' in that respect. But on offense, there are plenty of skillsets that can work with so many different size players filling them. 

For instance, I grew up a Chicago Bulls fan. In the 70's they had a 'true' point (Van Lier) at 6'1", a true sg (Sloan) at 6'4", two true forwards (Love & Walker), and  true 5 (Boerwinkle) at 7'0"" Each of those players skills fit the conventional definition of what their size and position should encompass, and they were perenniel contenders.

In the 90's the Bulls had either Kerr, Paxson, or BJ Armstrong at 6'1" at the guard spot opposite Jordan for a large amount of time. On defense each of these small players guarded the other team's conventional point, but on offense they were pure wings, with Jordan, Pippen, or Kukoc playing the point. 

 

Posted
On 6/3/2019 at 3:04 AM, Bigred3588 said:

While I agree with your description, I can’t say I agree with your example. You described a PF that can maintain his handle for 90 feet. Lebron James and Kevin Durant are examples of positionless players. Players like that only come along once or twice in a decade which means it’s probably not the best approach when building a program. 

Positionless basketball does not mean 5 LeBron’s on the floor. It doesn’t mean 5 guys that are wings all playing together. It typically means a guard, 2 wings, a stretch or perimeter 4 and a big that is athletic enough to switch defensively on the perimeter and has the skill to handle a bit, play the pick and roll, etc. 

Bigs IU has had that fall under a positionless lineup would be Zeller, Vonleh, Bryant, Beifeldt, Morgan, I’d expect TJD, etc. Perimeter 4’s we’ve had that fall under this are Watford, Troy Williams, Justin Smith, etc, 

So yes, you can build a program that way. 

 

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...