Brooks McKowen needs to see some pine

[Newsbreaker]

How did we go 21-4 our first 25 games? Wasn't Brooks playing for those games? Why didn't we have the same "problems" up until that point?

If we had anybody on the team that could hit the ocean from the outside we would be fine.

You're sticking your head in the sand Gonzo...you're a smarter guy then that.

We went 21-4 for various reasons. The major one, to me, is that teams are now exposing our deficency at PG, playing us much tighter defensively, and therefore really pressing us on that specific issue.

You know, if a baseball pitcher goes 5-0 to start the year, then gets lit up like a Christmas tree, it does you no good 13 losses later to say "Don't change anything, he was 5-0!"

We can pigheadedly continue to do what we've been doing, but our season is going to be 2 more games long if we do.

[GonzoCat]

We went 21-4 for various reasons. The major one, to me, is that teams are now exposing our deficency at PG, playing us much tighter defensively, and therefore really pressing us on that specific issue.

And it took them the better part of 3 seasons to recognize this deficiency? Doesn't say much for the other Valley coaches, or of course for Mac for playing him.

We can pigheadedly continue to do what we've been doing, but our season is going to be 2 more games long if we do.

I agree with this, I just don't agree BM is the problem. But hey, I hope we make some change, and if that change is pulling Brooks and we start winning again I'll reassess my position.

[Newsbreaker]

Gonzo, then I will give you an opportunity to intelligently defend yourself, rather then just refuting individual phrases.

Show me, in some way, that BM has done a good job accomplishing the goals and utilizing the skills of a point guard. TC showed us some very good information about his assist to turnover ratio, and how completely unacceptable it is.

Point Guard is a very important position in any offense...so display to me somehow, other then overall record (as many things can overcome a deficiency at a single position, leading to wins), to show that Brooks can do what needs to be done at that position.

I will say again, I believe Brooks is capable of sparking the team with some timely shooting, and could be a tremendous player coming off the bench. I also believe he is the best point guard this team has, but that at this time, maybe that doesn't matter any longer.

So, please Gonzo, defend your position.

[Sex Panther...]

sigh

the struggle continues
the finger pointing continues...all at one individual

If we get a stop with 13 seconds to go all the talk is about what a gutty, hard fought come from behind win UNI was able to pull off.

instead more of this bs

[DRAKELAWPANTHER]

This is a little off-topic, but I'm curious: what is the general feeling about how the Panthers will be next year??? Obviously we return Coleman, Stout, and McKowen. Who do we have coming up to replace Benny, EC, and Little?

I know that the Haak kid that was red-shirted is a good shooter - I went to the same high school as he did. (Although I graduated about 6 years before him.) The entire Haak clan (3 brothers) lit it up in high school when it came to pure shooting.

Any other big talent coming up???

[MGLD Panther]

sigh

the struggle continues
the finger pointing continues...all at one individual

If we get a stop with 13 seconds to go all the talk is about what a gutty, hard fought come from behind win UNI was able to pull off.

instead more of this bs

The point guard is pretty important. Does Mac feel a little pressure playing Brooks because he has been there for so long?

[Sex Panther...]

The point guard is pretty important. Does Mac feel a little pressure playing Brooks because he has been there for so long?

Why do you care? According to your post on the other thread we need to shoot this team and put it out of YOUR misery. If we have a coach who makes personnel decisions out of loyalty and "pressure" then I think we need to look elsewhere. Pretty sure that isn't the case here, but I won't be surprised if you find some geniuses on here who agree with you.

[Newsbreaker]

It's less a case of finger pointing, more a case of 'something has to change' and that is the most obvious switch.

[Sex Panther...]

It's less a case of finger pointing, more a case of 'something has to change' and that is the most obvious switch.

I have no willpower. I said I wasn't going to do this, but what the hell. "Something has to change" you say, your suggestion is sit Brooks and start EC and JLit? or start Josten? I assume it is one or the other. If we do that where does Brooks fit into the mix? Does he play? What does our rotation look like? Everybody wants to point a finger at Brooks and say he is the reason we aren't winning...what combination of people on the floor makes us better pray tell?

I want you or someone else to explain to me in detail how a lineup change that involves Brooks being on the floor less makes us a better team. I'm going to venture a guess that our coaching staff has explored this option and many others ad nauseum over the course of the past 8 games. To this date a change hasn't been made. I trust it is because they think along the same lines that I do. If a change is made and it works great...my support for Brooks is enveloped by my support for this team. I guarantee you he is giving 100% and you won't find a tougher competitor on the floor.

Sorry but responses like "he's not a true PG" or "we just need to make change" or my personal favorite "he sucks" aren't gonna cut it. Someone, anyone present an in depth rotation that makes us a better team. I'm a reasonable guy, I'll listen with an open mind. I'm not saying Brooks hasn't struggled in some aspects, but if we shake the lineup up and put other individuals on the court for more minutes I am guessing more glaring weaknesses than Brooks' will be exposed. I choose to trust the coaching staff. Put up or SHUT UP.

[UNIAlum95]

I have no willpower. I said I wasn't going to do this, but what the hell. "Something has to change" you say, your suggestion is sit Brooks and start EC and JLit? or start Josten? I assume it is one or the other. If we do that where does Brooks fit into the mix? Does he play? What does our rotation look like? Everybody wants to point a finger at Brooks and say he is the reason we aren't winning...what combination of people on the floor makes us better pray tell?

I want you or someone else to explain to me in detail how a lineup change that involves Brooks being on the floor less makes us a better team. I'm going to venture a guess that our coaching staff has explored this option and many others ad nauseum over the course of the past 8 games. To this date a change hasn't been made. I trust it is because they think along the same lines that I do. If a change is made and it works great...my support for Brooks is enveloped by my support for this team. I guarantee you he is giving 100% and you won't find a tougher competitor on the floor.

Sorry but responses like "he's not a true PG" or "we just need to make change" or my personal favorite "he sucks" aren't gonna cut it. Someone, anyone present an in depth rotation that makes us a better team. I'm a reasonable guy, I'll listen with an open mind. I'm not saying Brooks hasn't struggled in some aspects, but if we shake the lineup up and put other individuals on the court for more minutes I am guessing more glaring weaknesses than Brooks' will be exposed. I choose to trust the coaching staff. Put up or SHUT UP.

Hadn't seen this posted anywhere else but JLit started in front of Erik today. I was a little surprised at that. What this team truely needs is to get its confidence back in their ability to shoot the rock from outside.

[MediaPanther]

I'm just taking a stab at a rotation I would like to see. Obviously I'm nothing close to Mac and I'm not pretending to be. I'm just throwing this out there.

Starting 5
Ben, Erik, Eric, Grant, Jared

Ben, Erik, and Grant need to play over 30 mins each
Coleman needs to see around 30
Josten at least 25 with Little off the bench for 20
McKowen and Brown off the bench for around 15 a piece

That's equal to just over 200 mins which is the amount of time available.

[5panthers]

I believe that Coach Mac said on his postgame show that JLit started over Crawford due to the condition of (and still pain in) Erik's foot.

[Sex Panther...]

I'm just taking a stab at a rotation I would like to see. Obviously I'm nothing close to Mac and I'm not pretending to be. I'm just throwing this out there.

Starting 5
Ben, Erik, Eric, Grant, Jared

Ben, Erik, and Grant need to play over 30 mins each
Coleman needs to see around 30
Josten at least 25 with Little off the bench for 20
McKowen and Brown off the bench for around 15 a piece

That's equal to just over 200 mins which is the amount of time available.

Good math, but you forgot the WHY portion of the question. What have you seen in Josten's play that says to you he needs 25 minutes on the floor? Crawford isn't quite ready to play 30+ minutes yet. We are going to struggle defensively with your suggested rotation in my opinion. People will argue with you that JLit's empty 38 minutes offensively are offset by his defensive contributions.

[Newsbreaker]

Sex Panther, this has been discussed in detail in about 14 different places on here.

First, something has to change. Anyone who can't see this is, for whatever reason, unable to discuss this issue with any clarity.

Second, the issue is only partially Brooks. He's been placed, through nobody's fault, in an impossible situation. He simply does not possess the skill set to be a first-rate point guard at this level of basketball. Does that mean we can't win with him at the position? No. Does that me he wouldn't be an extremely effective PG in a 'lesser' league? No.

Does any of that matter right now? No.

So let's break it down, since you see to be unable to do so yourself. I appreciate you asking me to really beat up on the kid now...he doesn't desrerve it, but if I have one real character flaw, it's the inability to pass up a discussion/argument.

A point guard must posses several key skills. The first is ball handing ability. As has previously been discussed, Brooks is slightly deficient in this aspect. Facing pressure, it's back the ball up the court using his backside against even a token press. I don't think he's hopeless here, but for whatever reason he lacks confidence. Picking up the ball into a trap at almost dead center court...that's a lack of confidence. The relatively high number of turnovers with little production is a big problem here.

The second key ability is the ability to create for fellow teammates. His number of assists, which approaches zero, is all you need to see here. If you need more evidence, everytime the shot clock runs down, who pilot's the offense? Not Brooks. Why? Because if we ask him to set someone else up, or create his own shot in a tight situation, he can't.

Third...a PG has to be able to drive the lane for a quick, catch the defense sleeping layup, as well as hit the occasional outside jumper. Brooks is an amazing scorer, as his HS records display. He is, however, a rhythm scorer. He will never get the chance to shoot into a rhythm in our offense.

Finally...a PG has to be the quarterback on the court. He has to direct the offense and point the team in the right direction. I think he normally does a pretty good job of this, however the opinion above about late shot clock situations shows some problems here. This is, in my opinion, the least of our worries here.

Again, we have, and in a better situation, can win with Brooks at the PG. He's a good defender, and as displayed in the Bucknell game, has a high basketball IQ. He understands the game, and is a very good ballplayer.

So why make a change? If we have nobody who can accomplish the above, fi we're not going to have a PG create assists, if we're gonna turn the ball over, and if other players are going to have to create for themselves, we might as well get another scorer in the starting lineup. If it's a 4 or 5 point difference in a game...for us, that's the difference between winning and losing right now.

Where does Brooks fit in? He's the 2nd guy off the bench for me, and he plays probably 10 - 14 minutes. I think he can spark the team, and provide a really neccesary boost at key times. We simply will not go far without key contributions from Brooks, and I believe in a better role, we will get them. It's not fair to a very good ballplayer that he's taken the roll of scapegoat here, and please understand....my comments above are not meant to belittle his considerable contributions nor ability, nor give anyone the idea that I believe, nor that I accept the position, that Brooks is the cause of us losing basketball games. I simply believe he can contribute, and the team will be better, if he's in a different roll.

If one of the mods believes I've beat up unfairly on someone, they have my blessing to delete this post, and it is not my intention to 'attack' someone. I believe I have merely presented a reasonable position.

It's not your fault Brooks...sometimes the best service you can provide to a team is to find a different roll. Sometimes the best way to do more, is to do less. I belive you in man.

[NEIOWABB]

I agree, give Josten a run at it and see what he can do. Nobody knows because he has never played more than 5-6 minutes at a time.