Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

from MacMallard1, on eDuck:

"You asked about Brett's Defense, etc. ...
Friends at the tournament said he wasn't able to get any lift on his jumper ... he was doubtful earlier in the week. His ankle is swollen, big time, and discolored ...

The good news on all that, though is this: He was able to get up 20 three's against a defense that was designed, first and foremost to limiting BRETT KINGMA'S SHOTS !!!

Now, DEFENSIVELY:

He's aggressive; he's very good laterally. He has very quick hands; no trouble at all keeping his man in front of him, even quick-quick PGs, such as he has encountered, on the AAU circuit. He has a great understanding of the passing lanes; he gets his hands on a lot of balls; he is a pick-pocket, on-the-ball defender. He is alert and engaged. He doesn't take rests, on defense. He gets a lot of steals. He is not the physically biggest, strongest player in the gym. I suppose (if a team were ever to do this, which is rarer than rare, by the way) that he could be posted up, in 'Man,' by a big, powerful PG, such as a Tony Wroten, BUT ... how often does DA go "Man?!" This is not a concern. I know he's been described on this website as "skinny," but if I may suggest replacing the word "skinny," with "wiry," because there are tons of highly successful basketball players, including in the NBA, with Brett's kind of "wiry" basketball body. He packs quite a bit of explosion in those wiry legs ... He dunks easily at "6-1" ... he is no more "skinny" than Aaron Brooks, for instance, to bring it home to where Duck fans can relate.

He's got excellent anticipation and outstanding reflexes; can and does beat people to spots, and is very clever. He always knows where the ball is, and is good in the team's defensive rotations; even willing and able to take a charge under the basket area, if the situation dictates ...

So, defensively, he'll be just fine ... (Broken Record Alert), ESPECIALLY if he has an ERASER TYPE IN BACK OF HIM !!! Which we need DESPERATELY, anyway, right !!!!!!!"

Sounds like a guy DA can work with.

Can't wait to get him in. I think that Altman will go man-to-man once he has some bodies to use.

nice analysis.... by a complete homer

Athletically I haven't seen anything that suggest he compares to Aaron Brooks

And the real concern is not teams posting him up. It's that opposing pac12 shooting guards will be able to get any shot they want over him.

Have you gone and watched him in person? Mac actually knows what he is talking about, not only has he seen him play a bunch this year he actually played at UO back in the day. I've never seen him sugar coat something and he will usally call it like he sees it.

Boom wrote:nice analysis.... by a complete homer

Athletically I haven't seen anything that suggest he compares to Aaron Brooks

And the real concern is not teams posting him up. It's that opposing pac12 shooting guards will be able to get any shot they want over him.

I don't think you understand how basketball works.

Though I do agree on the silly Aaron Brooks comparison.

The Brooks reference was a comparison of their relative physiques, not their talent/skills. Both are guys with little body fat and wiry musculature.

oregontrack wrote:

Boom wrote:nice analysis.... by a complete homer

Athletically I haven't seen anything that suggest he compares to Aaron Brooks

And the real concern is not teams posting him up. It's that opposing pac12 shooting guards will be able to get any shot they want over him.

I don't think you understand how basketball works.

Though I do agree on the silly Aaron Brooks comparison.

well I don't think you understand how basketball works....




When was the last time you saw a college guard take a kid into the post? and how often does that happen!?

Not often...

Instead you see that guard take one or two dribbles and rise up and shoot over the kid.

Kingma is 6'1, but the way you worry about players shooting over him you'd think he was 5'1. Has the Pac-10 been been infused with a plethora of 6'8 Kobe Bryant-sized SGs? Or are the majority of Pac-10 2-guards all about 6'1-6'4? I'd wager it's the latter. Our two Elite Eight teams had backcourts of 6'2 and 6'2 (Rid/Jones) and 6'0 and 5'6 (AB and Tajuan). It really doesn't matter. If you can D up, being two inches shorter than most of the guys you're guarding makes no difference.

It's not like he is TP short, if you know what I mean.

oregontrack wrote:Kingma is 6'1, but the way you worry about players shooting over him you'd think he was 5'1. Has the Pac-10 been been infused with a plethora of 6'8 Kobe Bryant-sized SGs? Or are the majority of Pac-10 2-guards all about 6'1-6'4? I'd wager it's the latter. Our two Elite Eight teams had backcourts of 6'2 and 6'2 (Rid/Jones) and 6'0 and 5'6 (AB and Tajuan). It really doesn't matter. If you can D up, being two inches shorter than most of the guys you're guarding makes no difference.

You don't have to be 6-8

I think most of SG's in '08 were in the 6-5 range and the TP/GS combo got killed almost every night.

Out of those 4 players you listed Ridnour is the only one that could be comparable and he wasn't matched up against SG's.

Boom wrote:You don't have to be 6-8

You about have to be to make any sort of difference. Worrying yourself away about how a 6'1 2-guard is going to be able to guard a 6'3 SG is pointless. This is about as big of a non-issue as I've ever seen you bring up, and I've seen you fret about some pretty big non-issues before. 5'10 Jay-R freaking Strowbridge is a better on-ball defender than 6'4 Teondre super-athletic-freak Williams. Let that one sink in for awhile.

I think most of SG's in '08 were in the 6-5 range and the TP/GS combo got killed almost every night.

Hmm. No, I don't think so. Fun fact, we were undersized at every position in '07 (which I assume you were talking about), and finished with a nearly identical defensive FG % as UCLA, the conference champ and Final Four participant, who's entire claim to fame during their Final Four runs was defense.

Defense is all about desire. I'm fairly certain we were significantly worse defensively the following year ('08, where the Pac-10 was nowhere near as talented as it was in '07) even though we had a taller line-up (including a 6'5 SG!), because nobody gave a damn.

oregontrack wrote:

Boom wrote:You don't have to be 6-8

You about have to be to make any sort of difference. Worrying yourself away about how a 6'1 2-guard is going to be able to guard a 6'3 SG is pointless. This is about as big of a non-issue as I've ever seen you bring up, and I've seen you fret about some pretty big non-issues before. 5'10 Jay-R freaking Strowbridge is a better on-ball defender than 6'4 Teondre super-athletic-freak Williams. Let that one sink in for awhile.

I think most of SG's in '08 were in the 6-5 range and the TP/GS combo got killed almost every night.

Hmm. No, I don't think so. Fun fact, we were undersized at every position in '07 (which I assume you were talking about), and finished with a nearly identical defensive FG % as UCLA, the conference champ and Final Four participant, who's entire claim to fame during their Final Four runs was defense.

No I was referring to '08-'09 with Porter & Sim. They gave up 49.5% shooting

Defense is all about desire. I'm fairly certain we were significantly worse defensively the following year ('08, where the Pac-10 was nowhere near as talented as it was in '07) even though we had a taller line-up (including a 6'5 SG!), because nobody gave a damn.

Not really sure what your referring to, but the 06-07 team was almost identical to the 07-08 team..... minus an NBA PG. Both teams had similar defensive outputs and the league was stacked that year.

I do agree that desire/effort is a very big part to playing good defense (or anything for that matter)

But having the size/athleticism to match up is equally important.

Boom wrote: No I was referring to '08-'09 with Porter & Sim. They gave up 49.5% shooting

So you're just picking random seasons where we were poor defensively? Wasn't '08-'09 the 8-23 season? We were bad at EVERYTHING that year. Besides, that year should hardly be classified as the "Porter and Sim" backcourt, Sim played a lot of point and plenty of 2-guard minutes went to Odia, Humphries, and Teondre. Longmire, too, I believe, in certain occasions. All of them had adequate height.

Not really sure what your referring to, but the 06-07 team was almost identical to the 07-08 team..... minus an NBA PG. Both teams had similar defensive outputs and the league was stacked that year.

We were taller in '08, replacing 6'0 AB with 6'6 Catron in the starting 5. Bryce played the 3 in '07, then slid back to the 2-guard in '08. And that was my point, we had a 6'5 SG that year and we were worse defensively.

If you really want to use the phrase' stacked', '07 would be the year to use it. That was the year the Pac-10 broke the conference record for teams invited to the Dance, and everybody said we were the best conference in the country. '08 was a good year, certainly better than the crappy current state of things, but it wasn't anywhere as good as it was the year before.

But having the size/athleticism to match up is equally important

And luckily, having a 6'1 2-guard isn't going to hurt us.