Future teams

[waterhead]

I guess the next question would be. Would Brannen play 4 guards with Scott at the 5 if that is where our strength lies? If Brooks leaves and Diara is not ready for big minutes...there would be a choice to make. Of course all of this still assumes Cumberland comes back but who knows.

Johnson
Curtis
Cumberland
Williams
Scott

??? One of the things many fans have been wanting to see is to put our best 5 players on the court as much as possible so long as it doesn't include 5 guards or 3 bigs. And we don't know much about Johnson and Curtis yet except they were higher rated recruits although I have seen enough of Johnson to feel good about him. Perhaps a guy like Moore could still impact the team if he makes shots and or a guy like Gillam who we know very little about.

 

[waterhead]

Brooks rim protection was off the charts.


We were such a better team when he was on the floor. If Brannen is going to be pressing then you absolutely need a guy like brooks to protect the rim.

I'd say he is most likely gone. but we aren't going to find a good replacement this late in the cycle/

In my opinion, Diarra might be the perfect 5 man for Brannen's system.

I wonder if Diara is going to be better off in a defensive system that is not as hard to figure out. It seemed his biggest problem was being out of place. So if it gets simplified...maybe he's ready to go. I am sure Brannen will like his aggressiveness on offense more so than Cronin would. If he's not missing as many assignments on D that would be another factor in his favor.

 

[waterhead]

Brooks rim protection was off the charts.


We were such a better team when he was on the floor. If Brannen is going to be pressing then you absolutely need a guy like brooks to protect the rim.

I'd say he is most likely gone. but we aren't going to find a good replacement this late in the cycle/

In my opinion, Diarra might be the perfect 5 man for Brannen's system.

By the way, I would agree Brooks, in Cronin's system, was possibly next most important to Cumberland. Although only playing about 50% of the minutes isn't ideal for that type of player. You gotta figure out a way to keep him on the court but Cronin couldn't do it.

We probably win the Iowa game if he's playing 30 minutes. He got some bad calls this year but clearly the message was not strong enough to keep him from getting in some of those situations.

 

[cincycpaw]

By the way, I would agree Brooks, in Cronin's system, was possibly next most important to Cumberland. Although only playing about 50% of the minutes isn't ideal for that type of player. You gotta figure out a way to keep him on the court but Cronin couldn't do it.

We probably win the Iowa game if he's playing 30 minutes. He got some bad calls this year but clearly the message was not strong enough to keep him from getting in some of those situations.

Brooks was certainly elite on the defensive end when he could stay out of foul trouble and on the court. He, unfortunately couldn;t do that as much as he needed. As you mention, the iowa game is the perfect example of that. Yes, he got some bad calls, but he never adjusted to the refs in any game. But his rim protection was extremely valuable.

He was also a beast on the boards at times. But we may not need that as much if we can actually take better shots and hot a higher %. We have others that can rebound (including Logan Johnson once he gets on the court).

So losing Brooks is most certainly a big loss. Using 3 years of a scholly to get 0.5 years of good production is disappointing. Losing him right when he is hopefully able to start contributing consistently on both ends is disappointing. And losing him on this timing...we won't replace him with equal talent.


But if does leave I won't miss watching him be so weak around the basket. Weakest 7' I've seen in some time. He seemed to be starting to be more aggressive at the rim at the very end of the season so I had hoped that was the next jump in his game. I hope it is, and I hope he somehow decides to come back as I truly think it's best for him and the program.

 

[beeman7467]

By the way, I would agree Brooks, in Cronin's system, was possibly next most important to Cumberland. Although only playing about 50% of the minutes isn't ideal for that type of player. You gotta figure out a way to keep him on the court but Cronin couldn't do it.

We probably win the Iowa game if he's playing 30 minutes. He got some bad calls this year but clearly the message was not strong enough to keep him from getting in some of those situations.

I am, for one, am excited about the upcoming season. New set of eyes evaluating talent and using it differently.

 

[waterhead]

Brooks was certainly elite on the defensive end when he could stay out of foul trouble and on the court. He, unfortunately couldn;t do that as much as he needed. As you mention, the iowa game is the perfect example of that. Yes, he got some bad calls, but he never adjusted to the refs in any game. But his rim protection was extremely valuable.

He was also a beast on the boards at times. But we may not need that as much if we can actually take better shots and hot a higher %. We have others that can rebound (including Logan Johnson once he gets on the court).

So losing Brooks is most certainly a big loss. Using 3 years of a scholly to get 0.5 years of good production is disappointing. Losing him right when he is hopefully able to start contributing consistently on both ends is disappointing. And losing him on this timing...we won't replace him with equal talent.


But if does leave I won't miss watching him be so weak around the basket. Weakest 7' I've seen in some time. He seemed to be starting to be more aggressive at the rim at the very end of the season so I had hoped that was the next jump in his game. I hope it is, and I hope he somehow decides to come back as I truly think it's best for him and the program.

We lost 1 game where he played 25 minutes or more. I thought many times during the season that we needed Scott to handle a little bit more of the "last line of defense" assignments since Scott was hardly ever in foul trouble. But I am not a coach and I'm not sure how to do that when Brooks is the rim protector. But we needed Brooks on the court so we needed the guards or Scott to hack a few players before they got into Brooks. Especially when Brooks was in foul trouble already...which was VERY often.

 

[waterhead]

I am, for one, am excited about the upcoming season. New set of eyes evaluating talent and using it differently.

It will be interesting seeing not only how he evaluates the talent...but what he works on with skill sets etc. Can he get guys to shoot better by working on form or psyche? Also, how much he is willing to put more talented players on the floor and live with a few mistakes etc. It will be fun to see what his lineups look like compared to what Cronin's did. Will he take players and try to mold them into new positions etc. Will he think anyone was playing out of position? Will he pull players for turnovers or missed assignments?

I expect a fairly radical change but not sure in which ways Cronin and Brannen have similarities.

 

[waterhead]

I am, for one, am excited about the upcoming season. New set of eyes evaluating talent and using it differently.

One of the things I have heard about Brannen was his philosophy that he presented to Bohn about March using analytics. Suggesting a higher tempo and taking first available shots are a better way to get results.

What I am also wondering is how he will treat more talented underclassmen early in the season. Cronin liked to inch them along and keep upping their minutes as we went (if he let them get there at all). I think some of us wondered whether we could start that process earlier so they were really ready come March. That might mean a couple of early bumps in the road (losses)...but in the end a more prepared team with the most talented players ready to roll when it counts.

Tough to say really which would work best...but I am interested to see if he will change that philosophy. Cronin's philosophy got a lot of regular season wins...but we also fell short in March a lot. Perhaps that was due to not having the most talented players ready enough...and perhaps not.

A lot of regular season wins means a better seed (should be an easier win). Having younger talent more prepared could mean a worse seed but better March potential. Could be a wash who knows...but there are other teams who play more talented players early and do a little better in March.

I also think a guy like Broome would have maybe had different results under Brannen. Who knows if jenifer would have had the chance to do what he did this year...which was a very good year. But who can say if Cane wasn't out there doing what he can do for 35 minutes would not have been better in a different system?

 

[beeman7467]

One of the things I have heard about Brannen was his philosophy that he presented to Bohn about March using analytics. Suggesting a higher tempo and taking first available shots are a better way to get results.

What I am also wondering is how he will treat more talented underclassmen early in the season. Cronin liked to inch them along and keep upping their minutes as we went (if he let them get there at all). I think some of us wondered whether we could start that process earlier so they were really ready come March. That might mean a couple of early bumps in the road (losses)...but in the end a more prepared team with the most talented players ready to roll when it counts.

Tough to say really which would work best...but I am interested to see if he will change that philosophy. Cronin's philosophy got a lot of regular season wins...but we also fell short in March a lot. Perhaps that was due to not having the most talented players ready enough...and perhaps not.

A lot of regular season wins means a better seed (should be an easier win). Having younger talent more prepared could mean a worse seed but better March potential. Could be a wash who knows...but there are other teams who play more talented players early and do a little better in March.

I also think a guy like Broome would have maybe had different results under Brannen. Who knows if jenifer would have had the chance to do what he did this year...which was a very good year. But who can say if Cane wasn't out there doing what he can do for 35 minutes would not have been better in a different system?

All valid points. Cronin had kids who flourished under his system. But I always got the impression he didn't completely trust them until they were seniors. And even then, it depended on who you were. It's been said before, but if you're looking over your shoulder every time you make a mistake, you will struggle. My hope is that Brannen let's them play without that concern. The AAC gets knocked around a lot, but it's a huge step up from the Horizon. He'll be under more pressure here than at NKU, so I hope he sticks with his MO even if it's a struggle at the start.

 

[waterhead]

In Cronin's system the value of Brooks over Diara or Eliel was significant. If Brooks was option 1A then the other two were tied at option 3A and B. There was really no clear option 2.

In Brannen's system the value of Brooks over Diara is probably going to be quite a bit less and Diara's value over Eliel quite a bit more. I think Diara moves up to clear option 2. I am not even sure Eliel is going to be option 3 because of small ball options or having a guy like Gillam move Scott over to the 5 before we would trot Eliel out there.

Even if we don't retain Brooks and we don't land a transfer big who can shoot...we may have all the options we need. A lot of that depends on Brannen's evaluation of Diara I guess or even Gillam.

We are likely not getting a transfer who would be as valuable as Brooks. We might not even find one who is better than Diara as a fit for the system. We have depth at the 4 and 5 already (even without Brooks) and certainly with the options of playing smaller.

So Brannen may feel like he can wait on Brooks (as Jhub explained). But he has to feel comfortable with the backup plans on the current roster. There is not a lot to go on with guys like Diara, Eliel, Gillam, or Hardnett. Hell there is not a lot to go on for our small ball options either with Johnson and Curtis and Moore etc.

 

[skyblade]

In Cronin's system the value of Brooks over Diara or Eliel was significant. If Brooks was option 1A then the other two were tied at option 3A and B. There was really no clear option 2.

In Brannen's system the value of Brooks over Diara is probably going to be quite a bit less and Diara's value over Eliel quite a bit more. I think Diara moves up to clear option 2. I am not even sure Eliel is going to be option 3 because of small ball options or having a guy like Gillam move Scott over to the 5 before we would trot Eliel out there.

Even if we don't retain Brooks and we don't land a transfer big who can shoot...we may have all the options we need. A lot of that depends on Brannen's evaluation of Diara I guess or even Gillam.

We are likely not getting a transfer who would be as valuable as Brooks. We might not even find one who is better than Diara as a fit for the system. We have depth at the 4 and 5 already (even without Brooks) and certainly with the options of playing smaller.

So Brannen may feel like he can wait on Brooks (as Jhub explained). But he has to feel comfortable with the backup plans on the current roster. There is not a lot to go on with guys like Diara, Eliel, Gillam, or Hardnett. Hell there is not a lot to go on for our small ball options either with Johnson and Curtis and Moore etc.

I doubt Brooks is any less valuable in Brannen's system. Fans seem to be obsessed with having a 5 who can shoot. But the value a shooting 5 can provide is pretty minimal compared to having a big who can be a force on the boards and both ends, a rim protector, a defender and an option on pick-and-rolls. Not to mention, for all the hate on Brooks he actually had a pretty good 15 foot and in shot.

Compare that to Diarra who looked lost on the court on both ends throughout the season.

Small ball and shooting 5's is the true mid-major option. Teams do it not because the want to, but because they can't recruit the guys with the size and athleticism to play a true center. Look at the NBA, Houston starting and backup centers don't shoot 3's, the Warriors Draymond Green shoots under 30%.

I also don't think Diarra will be a clear option one if Brooks leaves. Nsoseme was injured throughout the year last year. His better understanding of the game and better rebounding will likely get him just as much if not more court time as Diarra unless Diarra makes a big jump this off-season.

Either way, Brooks going leaves a big void. Brooks was on pace to be a star next year and clearly belong on the court last year, the other two were guys we would hope could buy some minutes and not be a disaster.

 

[cincyalum2014]

In Cronin's system the value of Brooks over Diara or Eliel was significant. If Brooks was option 1A then the other two were tied at option 3A and B. There was really no clear option 2.

In Brannen's system the value of Brooks over Diara is probably going to be quite a bit less and Diara's value over Eliel quite a bit more. I think Diara moves up to clear option 2. I am not even sure Eliel is going to be option 3 because of small ball options or having a guy like Gillam move Scott over to the 5 before we would trot Eliel out there.

Even if we don't retain Brooks and we don't land a transfer big who can shoot...we may have all the options we need. A lot of that depends on Brannen's evaluation of Diara I guess or even Gillam.

We are likely not getting a transfer who would be as valuable as Brooks. We might not even find one who is better than Diara as a fit for the system. We have depth at the 4 and 5 already (even without Brooks) and certainly with the options of playing smaller.

So Brannen may feel like he can wait on Brooks (as Jhub explained). But he has to feel comfortable with the backup plans on the current roster. There is not a lot to go on with guys like Diara, Eliel, Gillam, or Hardnett. Hell there is not a lot to go on for our small ball options either with Johnson and Curtis and Moore etc.

I think it will be Diarra 1A and Prince will be 2. Prince is a very talented player and has great skills for a "big". He is on the smaller side, if he was 6'10 he would be playing somewhere much bigger than UC. I don't really know much about Laquill so I cant speak to much on his style of play. I don't see Nsoseme really flourishing in JB's system but he plays very hard so he will find some minutes. I like Brooks a lot and think he made a huge improvement this year so it would suck to see him leave regardless of how he fits in the system, he is an excellent rim protector and if JB is looking to play faster you need a guy like Brooks back to protect the rim.

Also saw Jarron was not invited to the NBA combine but was invited to the G league combine with Luke Maye and Tyus Jones and others. We all know he most likely wont be drafted but if he performs well in this combine and gets a G league shot I think he's gone.

 

[juckerrules]

I would be shocked if he isn’t gone. Doesn’t The G league pay something like 35 grand with housing I& insurance benefits? I mean, if he stayed another year at UC he’ll get less NBA-focused training and no money. If his goal is to play in the NBA, it seems like going straight to the minor leagues beats staying in college

 

[indydoug]

I would be shocked if he isn’t gone. Doesn’t The G league pay something like 35 grand with housing I& insurance benefits? I mean, if he stayed another year at UC he’ll get less NBA-focused training and no money. If his goal is to play in the NBA, it seems like going straight to the minor leagues beats staying in college

He'd make much more overseas than $35K

 

[waterhead]

I doubt Brooks is any less valuable in Brannen's system. Fans seem to be obsessed with having a 5 who can shoot. But the value a shooting 5 can provide is pretty minimal compared to having a big who can be a force on the boards and both ends, a rim protector, a defender and an option on pick-and-rolls. Not to mention, for all the hate on Brooks he actually had a pretty good 15 foot and in shot.

Compare that to Diarra who looked lost on the court on both ends throughout the season.

Small ball and shooting 5's is the true mid-major option. Teams do it not because the want to, but because they can't recruit the guys with the size and athleticism to play a true center. Look at the NBA, Houston starting and backup centers don't shoot 3's, the Warriors Draymond Green shoots under 30%.

I also don't think Diarra will be a clear option one if Brooks leaves. Nsoseme was injured throughout the year last year. His better understanding of the game and better rebounding will likely get him just as much if not more court time as Diarra unless Diarra makes a big jump this off-season.

Either way, Brooks going leaves a big void. Brooks was on pace to be a star next year and clearly belong on the court last year, the other two were guys we would hope could buy some minutes and not be a disaster.

I don't think Brooks loses value in Brannen's system only that Diara gains value. And he may have been lost in the system but I wonder what an easier system would do for him mainly on defense.

But his rebound numbers and block numbers per 40 minutes were roughly identical to Brooks and for that matter Nsoseme. Brooks fouled a lot more than both of them though.

Now this is small sample stuff and I think Brooks is obviously the candidate we could count on here. He would still be option 1A. Just saying...Diara is an athletic freak. Even if he can't box out he is going to grab his rebounds. Even if he's out of position he's going to get his blocks. It would be preferred that he is boxing out and in position so everything else doesn't break down. But maybe Brannen's system or coaching style can help Diara simplify things.

Maybe not

 

[waterhead]

He'd make much more overseas than $35K

Yah...I don't see the point in going G league. SK worked his damn tail off just to get a sniff of the real deal. Cumberland hasn't shown that type of work ethic so I think overseas would be not only higher paying but an easier gig. I am not saying Cumberland doesn't work hard...but SK was going to put in every ounce of energy he had to making his dream a reality. And he did that even if for a fleeting moment...and it still wasn't enough in the end.

 

[cincyalum2014]

Yah...I don't see the point in going G league. SK worked his damn tail off just to get a sniff of the real deal. Cumberland hasn't shown that type of work ethic so I think overseas would be not only higher paying but an easier gig. I am not saying Cumberland doesn't work hard...but SK was going to put in every ounce of energy he had to making his dream a reality. And he did that even if for a fleeting moment...and it still wasn't enough in the end.

SK was also 24 when he left college, I think Jarron is 21? In the eyes of the NBA that's old. I think if Jarron's main goal is to get to the NBA he needs to leave now. As much as I would love for him to stay, he does nothing by coming back other than improving his legacy at UC and breaking some records. He will not be a first round pick next year and if he's drafted in the 2nd round its still not a guaranteed contract and he will just be another year older. The window to get into the NBA is extremally small for guys like Jarron and SK.

 

[waterhead]

SK was also 24 when he left college, I think Jarron is 21? In the eyes of the NBA that's old. I think if Jarron's main goal is to get to the NBA he needs to leave now. As much as I would love for him to stay, he does nothing by coming back other than improving his legacy at UC and breaking some records. He will not be a first round pick next year and if he's drafted in the 2nd round its still not a guaranteed contract and he will just be another year older. The window to get into the NBA is extremally small for guys like Jarron and SK.

I tend to agree. He could come back and slim down and work on ball skills or something else but he can do that somewhere else too if he WANTS to. But I don't know a guy better than Rehfeldt to get his body in tip top shape. If Brannen can sell him on helping his skills who knows.

It's a tough sell but there is at least an outside chance to improve his stock. I think he's probably been told by NBA scouts he's not the most athletic guy and he's flat footed etc. Needs to improve lateral quickness etc. Rehfeldt can help him do that as well as anyone and he can become a legend here while getting that done.

 

[waterhead]

If Jarron comes back this year and still plans to eat chicken nuggets and fries he may as well leave. If he comes back dedicated to getting his body in tip top shape I think his stock goes up.

There are also places he can improve his game. Ball skills and improving is 2 point % could help him get to 22 plus ppg.

As of right now...he's just not there for the NBA. He can shoot the ball from deep and he can pass the ball but he's not a great defender and he's not good enough to take over a game in the NBA over other players currently there.

To get in round 1 he has to be much more athletic and he's got to be an absolute nightmare on offense. The question becomes is he up for the challenge or would he rather just start making money and have some fun overseas. I don't think the G league will do him any favors unless he does the things he could be doing here.

 

[waterhead]

Looks like we are looking at a kid Chris Maidoh. 6' 10" and seems to be a kid similar to a Diara mold. No offer yet from us as far as I can tell but a late bloomer 2019 guy. Seems to run and jump like a deer and from what it sounds like can at least hit a 3. Length for blocks looks real good. Looks like he might be able to dribble a little too. Doesn't look like he has a polished inside game but he can run the court extremely well.

From the videos out there he seems to check off a lot of boxes. Needs weight training but so does Diara. Seems like a very excitable guy! If Brooks should decide to go I would have no problem putting him on the squad right now.

I'm actually impressed