Dean Smith

I don't think neither one of them were post players. I don't know what criteria you are using but we aren't discussing ability level just whether they are post players. Diaz was a post in the classical sense of the 1980's pre European influence.

Harriman said on the radio today that he measured "close to 6'4". Based on these two statements, I would guess that they are going to "list" him as 6'4" on the official roster. Of course, we all know he isn't really 6'4". I have no idea why they measure them in shoes, and Tai himself said he measured 6'3 1/4 in shoes, but on a relative scale, it says a lot. The fact is that ALL teams fib regarding their players height. So, it is all relative at this point. Even though we know a listed height of 6'4" isn't actually accurate, it is accurate in the sense of how he relates to other players on the court with him and against him. In this sense, he is a very good sized PG to have. And I think that is why Miles and the staff are so high on him. Miles has shown that he likes height in all his players, including his PG. This is why he put Talley in at PG last year. If another team has a wing listed at 6'5", Tai should be able to guard him on a switch (stength aside) because most likely that wing listed at 6'5" is actually only 6'3". Again, it is all relative to the scale that all NCAA BB teams have set. Plus, based on the picture of Tai "smiling", he looks quite long and his hands are huge. This extended reach should allow him to play a legit 6'4" even if he is not. (As a side note, I watched a documentary on Dr. J a few weeks ago and everyone that played with him or agaisnt him constantly referred to his huge hands and how lethal this made him on the court. I don't think Tai has Dr. J hands, but his extra grip will certainly help him when he is driving to the basket and making plays.) Harriman also said that they plan to have him play primarily PG. I think we all suspected this, but it seems to be confirmed by the coaches--at least as of now. If Tai can truly handle the ball and make plays, having a 6'4" PG for 3 or 4 years could be a huge advantage. I hope he can knock down that outside shot, b/c that is what will make him be the complete player we need (that, and playing good defense, which will definitely be a challenge for him initially until he adapts to the speed and strength of the American players.) They measure them in shoes because they play in shoes. Why wouldn't they measure them that way? My college coach measured us in our socks. I tried to tell him I never play in just my socks but he wouldn't listen.

Found this? Colors would need reversed.

I know statistics are what they are, but its not the same favorite shot for everyone. The NBA corner three is a closer shot but NCAA is the same all around. Not a great shooter myself but my % is much higher from the top than the corner & I know others who are the same. Statistics are numbers that can help but people have brains that are screwy so not every shooter will have a higher % from the corners.

A strength of the motion offense is it is unscoutable because it is unpredictable. A weakness (for some) is the coach concedes power to the players on the floor. Now there are a lot of variations and you can emphasis what you want. Ex: some are mostly cuts & some emphasis picks. You can let anyone or no one pick the ball. I had a handful of quick hitters designed to get specific people specific shots (coach K's motion) that if nothing materialized immediately you are then making motion reads. Based on a scouting report you can do certain actions that lead to defensive reactions that allows you to get what you want. Mac will run at least 50 plays a year at Creighton but everyone of them will have shots taken from the same specific spots such as the corner 3. His teams then practice from these spots over & over. He then has much control over what happens on the floor & it is hard to go through 50 plays in a scouting report. Everyone has their own ideas & priorities. I always thought it was better to teach kids to play than to teach them plays but each style has its own strengths & weaknesses.

The first half of that sentence makes your avatar selection kind of puzzling. Really? The fact that I dig the heck out of their burgers and fries (the chili is pretty tasty, and I used to live on their chicken sandwiches) and they have a tie-in (or at least used to have one) with the basketball team I cheer for based on that team's success (that was poorly worded, I know) means it's puzzling for me to have the Runza logo as an avatar? If I loved Valentino's lasagna but couldn't stand their pizza would that make it puzzling for me to wear a Valentino's shirt? Hmm... Maybe if I had a pic of one of the ovenstuff'd sandwiches I could see your point. Its more that the name of the restaurant just so happens to be synonymous with the name of their famous sandwich and most people would assume if youre talking about Runza that you like the Runza. Most people dont go around touting a steakhouse for their salad which may be their #2 item on the menu when their steak is what they were made famous for and I think thats why hes saying that. My thoughts exactlyIt must be July, 8 responses to whether or nott someone likes Runzas

Your post would take on a whole new meaning if it had come from Kidney.

I don't get the gut feeling thing. I know he is known as a players's coach but most of his players say he is the best x & o coach they have everes played for.

I wasn't trying to start another now vs then debate, I was just stating my opinion that this years draft combine scores as a group were the highest comparing the exact same tests that they've used every year. My point being that this is not the worst draft class ever in my opinion. Now comparing eras, I think vs the champions of the 80's & 90's the Heat would struggle to get to a game 5 before being sent hone. Actually, I dont think as they are constituted today that they make it to the finals. Now that is simply my opinion & is as valid as anyone else's. So unless someone on the board creates a time machine it is always going to be impossible to ever say there is one right answer to that question.

Yep there will be surprises without a doubt. The main difference is that there aren't the high probabilities of large success at the top of the draft. Makes sense on the athletic testing. People continue to become more athletic as time goes on. That is why the nba is better than ever right now.I of course don't think the NBA Is better now than ever. With 7 more teams in the league there is a logical diluting of talent. So even if you think the top players are better now (which I don't) the teams were deeper and IMO better.

Of course there is more to basketball than athletic ability but this year's group is the most athletic in testing in the history if the draft combine. Cody Zeller's numbers crushes what Dwight Howard put up at the.combine. I think there are some people in this year's group that are going to surprise a lot of people.

Tell that to Oregon

The most beautiful place I have ever played a pick up game at was at Kitsilano beach. Water at one basket & the mountains going the other way.

If you are an educator then you should know better than to talk about national rankings of test scores. The US is basically the only nation that mainstreames everyone into the same classrooms. Everyone else track into vocational & college track schools. So not surprisingly all of our students average scores ate lowing than other countries best students. Also countries like Singapore who have some of the highest math scores also have the fewest percentage of students that go into math centered careers because they all hate math. So as we move to more standardized testing, many Aisian countries are requiring fewer & less stringent math classes & greatly scaling back on the testing. SAT used to stand for scholastic aptitude test until it was proven that they are no indication whatsoever of anyone's scholastic aptitude. By court order SAT now stands for SAT. The only thing that and the ACT test measure is how well students take those particular tests. So I don't understand why we use those test that have been proven to messure nothing as such an important factor in determining college admittance & scholarships. By taking test prep classes students can get better at taking these paeticular tests and can considerably raise their scores. The most acurate indicator of how well a student will do on these two tests is their parent's income & that has lots if statistical evidence to support that. They should have no place in the entrance process.

We are going to have to disagree. Wade doesn't drop 40 on Scott. He would be guarded by Scott, Worthy, & Cooper mostly & they wear him down. Definitely more depth with so many fewer teams back then... if the league was the same size, depth couldn't be an argument. I get your point though. My last response because you are not going to convince me and I'm pretty sure I'm not going to conviince you. All you youngn's have no idea ho good of a defender michael cooper was. Worthy runs with Wade all day & they have no one who can guard him in the post. I think Chris Anderson could guard Worthy, and run with him. I don't think Worthy or any Lakers had the quickness to guard Wade. Kobe couldn't even guard Wade in his prime, and until Lebron came along as the greatest athletic specimen in history, Kobe was the closest we had to Jordan's athleticism. Chris Anderson couldn't hold Worthy's jock. James is way too quick and the Birdman should hope that Worthy beats him down the floor because it would be embarassing what would happen to him in the post. I can't care how big you are, if you get in the air & someone hits you, you go down. It goes both ways. It's not like Lebron is afraid of confrontation. He would punk those skinny boys. Wade at 6'4" weighs as much as Worthy did at 6'9". Lebron weighs more than Kareem did. It does go both ways but those boys were used to it and prepared to handle it. I have never been impressed with Labron's mental toughness. Great frame and ability but I think they get in his head. & your confused about those guys playing with Jordan, they didn't. I may not be old, but I can do research. Oakley played for Chicago from 85-88. Woolridge played for Chicago from 81-86. Gervin played for Chicago from 85-86. So, actually, MJ had them all ON THE SAME TEAM at one point and still couldn't get anywhere in the playoffs. I didn't researh. I know Oakey was there early with MJ, I sort of remember Woolridge and Gervin's best years were in the ABA, he was done by the time he got to Chicago. But I think that is evidence that Jordan was not the greatest. & I don't think Jordan was the greatest ever. I don't see what criteria you can use to justify that. Who is the greatest? I think it's Lebron. Until the next big thing comes along. I think everyone has way too short of a memory. By what criteria do you want to use? Best scorer is Wilt & Jabar, biggest winner is Russel, best overall statistically is the Big O but now we are trying to compare era's again. But that's another discussion. But Jordan has Labron in tears before game 3 in my opinion that is. Jordan couldn't guard Lebron. He'd get destroyed in the post. Pippen--who was a better defender--would've given Lebron more trouble, but still couldn't handle his weight. Jordan would shut down Wade though. I really like Wade but even though bigger, no better than Joe Dumars. I think part of what made Michael great was he was an ass, completely subjective but Labron is so immature Jordan would kill him size and all, but the Bulls would probably put Rodman on him anyway.

We can disagree. I don't think they had better players then but I don't think the athletic ability is that much better today. What I do think is the number of quality big men was off the charts compared to today.

We are going to have to disagree. Wade doesn't drop 40 on Scott. He would be guarded by Scott, Worthy, & Cooper mostly & they wear him down. Worthy runs with Wade all day & they have no one who can guard him in the post. I can't care how big you are, if you get in the air & someone hits you, you go down. & your confused about those guys playing with Jordan, they didn't. & I don't think Jordan was the greatest ever. I don't see what criteria you can use to justify that. But that's another discussion. But Jordan has Labron in tears before game 3 in my opinion that is.

I feel somehow you are unable to grow your evaluation with the way the game has changed for the better this day and age. Such a far more athletic game now. That is why people are less "skilled" as many believe. It has proven over time good athletes and defense win. In the end that is how the Heat won tonight. Great swarming athletes led by Bron, Wade and Bosh. They would completely overwhelm these clubs you are talking about. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean I can't grow my opinion. Those two are great ' very good but Bosh is an average big man in the 80's at best and Norris Cole? He's not good enough to play on any championship team in that decade. Teams were so much deeper than. I don't think Scott, Worthy, Green, Woolridge, Nixon et al need to take an athletic back seat to anyone playing today. The Piston's of the 90's swarm the Heat not the other way around. Lets see, Norris Cole or Joe Dumars & Vinnie Johnson? Not a tough choice.

That's what I meant by James not being mentally tough enough to compete for titles against those teams.

Those who say there is no comparison between athletes then and now either are too young or have short memories. Let's look at the Lakers. Magic played mostly around the 260 mark. Bryon Scott was an athlete, James Worthy - athlete and his quickness would set him apart. Michael Cooper was skinny but an athletic freak. Orlando Woolridge was older when he played with the Lakers and he could still dunk the ball 11 x's in 10 seconds. Jabar was a 7'2 athlete. Let's say you put Labron on Magic and Scott & Wade cancle each other out. The Heat have no one who could run with Worthy and deal with him in the post. AC Green was basically a slightly shorter Bosh & Kareem averages 30 in a short series. Plus you don't want to go to the second unit. Expansion has had an affect. Depending on the year the Lakers bring on Mychael Thompson or Bob MacAdoo, both are head and shoulders better than anyone the Heat can put on to start the game. I personaly think the Spurs team of Moore, Gillmore, & Gervin with the Bruise Brothers who never won a title in the 80's win multiple today. What they said about Gervin was right, you can't stop him you can only hope to cantain him. Who guards the 7'4 athlete & Moore is so under appreciated. He put up quadruple doubles. The difference in the eras are in the post. There is no comparison between the number of quality big men then and now. How do the Heat deal with Malone and Hakeem? They don't. I don't see how anyone who can be objective will refuse to admit that the Heat struggle against good big men and there were so many more or them then. Now you can argue this, but I don't think James has the mentality to compete against that era. Bird made Magic and vice versa. The first time Labron goes to the basket against McFithy & McNasty he gets a rude awakening. I think those teams that were so much deeper than today's teams beat the hell out of him first physically & then mentally. I don't think he could mentally take getting taken down time & time again. He still has an excuse for everything. He is a great player but not the class. The teams of the 80's and 90's swarm them, run them and then most importantly kill them in the post.

Badly mistaken is an opinion if I'm not mistake. The Heat are struggling with Hibbert imagine how the Chief & McHale tear them apart. Jabar, Worthy, MacAdoo & even Magic tear them up inside. No way they handle the Admiral & the young Tim Duncon. My opinion which is only an opinion but I don't think this Heat team would have had any chance at a title in the '80's or '90's.

Country - no thanks. Canned Heat, John Lee Hooker and the Howling Wolf - please.

baby #2's sex should be known in a couple weeks. Hoping for another boy. Connie can use a tall player or two if that it goes that way. Looks like it will be Connie, Or Cook getting baby #2. congratulations

I still think most of you have missed the point I was trying to make so it must be my fault. Players leave early on the best teams and they never get to be as good of a team as they might have. NCAA takes away practice time and teams never get to be as good as they might have. It does take more time to become a cohesive offensive unit than it does defensive. There are more skills that have to fit together. My focus was on the teams inability to maintain continuity and be given the practice time to develop to their full offensive capabilities. I've been trying to stay away from the officiating angle because I didn't want to set anyone off when I said something like, "For those of you who are complaining about that extra step after the hop - if you actually read how the rule is written, the officials were wrong when they called you for traveling and as the rule is written it is correct when they don't call it today." Good thing I didn't mention that huh?