eagle9903 wrote:Can someone clarify for me why the comparison to the JOB elite eight team to right now is apt? I'm not saying it's not, I'm just not really following and it could be because I was in middle school during the Curley era.
Aren't arguably the two best players on the current team a Power Forward(who is our most consistent scorer) and a Center (as opposed to the JOB team where the best players pre-Abrams were a PG and a C)? I'm assuming David Hinton III was a shitty power forward on the 1992(or 93) team who was replaced by Abrams resulting in vast improvement? Is the idea for the comparison that Anderson would be better suited as a SF and you guys want a bigger PF who would be the Abrams for this class?
If that's all it is then wouldn't the idea be more simple stated that we need another go-to type player anywhere on the court?
No, this team clearly needs another forward. And the comparison is to the fact that BC seems to have hit on 4 guys in this class, have a guard coming in that should be an instant impact guy, and what is missing is a power forward that can bang. Just like the 94 class, if it didn't have Hanlon and Rahon coming in.
The idea is that Anderson is a SF. It would be a power 4 replacing Humphreys next year or moving him to the 6th man this year.
Personally, I think there is more potential with Daniels, Jackson, Anderson and Clifford than there was with Eisley, Abrams, Huckaby and Curley, especially when you add Hanlon to the mix and maybe Rahon as a spot up shooter off the bench, but that's just me. Regardless, what was missing in each scenario was the banger.