[Hold My Own]

Man, I had no idea that neither Peter or Jul's was 7 foot...lol...I guess being 10 and 4 feet shorter (not that much has changed) made me always think they must have been.

[paradox]

Trying to keep it on topic, it will be interesting to see if Vander Pol will be a contributor over the next 4-5 years. He appears to have an athletic frame and not just a big body.

I tend to disagree with the quote that Jason Dixon was the most physical center in LU history. He was a good role player, but I would put him at #3 behind Julius & Peter. We can discuss this further if someone wants to start a thread about how the centers from Liberty rank.

Because of the Presence of Aluma, Jason only played the post for about half a season. Once Peter won a starting job, Jason smoothly transitioned to the power forward position, and on the offensive end he played primarily facing the basket. Defensively, he frequently found himself guarding much smaller players, often on the perimeter. He was one of the few players his size we have had who were capable of doing this effectively. It is for this reason I did not include him in the list of post players, although in another era, he could have been a really good one. Like.................... NOW!!

I gotta disagree with ya on Jason's effectiveness as a "true center." Whether he played with his back to the basket as much as Pete or not, who cares? Jason was exclusively an inside scorer, a great inside defender, and a much better rebounder than Aluma. Undervalued--yes. On a shot list of top LU post players----no question about it, as far as I'm concerned.

Here is a stat comparison between Pete & Jay during the two years that Jay was here:

Aluma---------'94 ( 7.6 pts / 4.1.rbs) '95 (15.7 pts / 5.8rbs)
Dixon----------'94 ( 13.7 pts / 7.2.rbs) '95 (12.5 pts / 9.5rbs)

Pete was actually the role guy coming off the bench in the championship year of '04 and Jay was our starting center Jay could play the 4 or 5 and be just as effective, but again, at 6-9 240, he was exclusively an inside player. Keep in mind, Meyer loved his man defenses. Luring one of our big guys out to the perimeter was part of the opposition's strategy, if they wanted to score inside on our twin towers.




FYI: At 35 years of age, Jason Dixon is still playing professionally in China, and has had a nice career over there, playing the center position.


He also played briefly in the CBA after graduation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Juice, Aluma, Dixon, and Brewington are the only Flames that have ever played in the CBA (NBA developmental league)

...

[paradox]

Looks like the young man has been hitting the weight room...nice definition on the arms. I was expecting more of a stringbean.

This kid could end up being a real prospect and nice fit for LU's gaurd-oriented style of play. I've heard that he's deceptively quick for a big-man. And he may still be growing.

If we get a big guy who can play, it will be interesting to see how that strategy plays out. I'm sure that we'll see our share of 5-gaurd rotations either way.

[jcmanson]

Joel is averaging 22.1 ppg, 14.3 rpg, 7.5 bpg, shooting 45% from fg, and 69% from FT line. He has made 22 3's as well.

Vander Pol is a 6'10" long body that runs well and has great footwork. He is agile, but isn't afraid to bang down low and is capable of stepping out and shooting the 3. He should be a nice pick up for a small mid-major program.

Long and thin post prospect with a lot of upside. His strengths at this point are his defensive and rebounding ability. Very good shot blocker who knows how to use his length to his advantage. The same goes for his rebounding on both ends, but could get a little more aggressive at grabbing boards outside of his area. Not sure yet how good he can be offensively but if he continues to grow, work on his ball skills and gets stronger Joel has a very bright future. He should fit in very well and have a great career at division 1 Liberty University following his senior year.

http://www.swflhoops.com/ProfilePage-JoelVanderPol.html

[Fumblerooskies]

Looking at those action shots...it appears he at least has some nice definition in his shoulders and arms...and it appears he has decent-sized calves. That means he SHOULD be able to add and hold quite a bit more lbs of muscle fairly easily once he gets here. Many of the thin guys are thin all the way up and all the way down...and won't be able to add. Adam Earnhardt of UNCA had that lean frame...and was able to at least contribute some size in the paint for Asheville. I think Joel will do just fine, here.

[LUMU11]

Why is everyone on here so hung up on having a back down, plodding post guy? Granted we could use some bigger bodies, in general, but what's the love affair with a 6'9-6'10 250 pounder? We just need to get what fits our system. And the way our guards can get out and go we don't need some wide body. We need guys that are 6'8, 6'9 and can get up and down the floor. Look at the trend in college ball in general, there are not that many times playing with just big bodies. Just about everybody is looking for guys that are long, athletic, and versatile. Besides nobody at this level is going to get a Kevin Love type player because a) there aren't that many, b) anybody with that size and skill level is going to get swiped up by the high majors.

we could go 6'9, 6'9, 6'11, 6'11 inside. Then at the forward Brolin at 6'6, Tre Lee, if he comes is 6'5, but athletic and very, very long. Brolin is 6'5, 6'6 and with his hops plays bigger than that, just like Ant does at 6'4-6'5. Oh and Minaya is 6'5 and long. Not too mention our PG is in the 6'3 range, which is big for a PG. We aren't that small.

[Rooster Cogburn]

Impressive video. Very athletic big kid. I think he'l fit well.

[SuperJon]

We're going to play a very European style of basketball. I've said it for the past year. Looking at these guys, they're mainly guys who can bang on defense, block shots, and take up space, but they're athletic enough on offense to get out and run and all have a mid-range game and possibly even a 3-pt game.

[LUMU11]

Thank you

[LUconn]

Why is everyone on here so hung up on having a back down, plodding post guy? Granted we could use some bigger bodies, in general, but what's the love affair with a 6'9-6'10 250 pounder? We just need to get what fits our system. And the way our guards can get out and go we don't need some wide body. We need guys that are 6'8, 6'9 and can get up and down the floor. Look at the trend in college ball in general, there are not that many times playing with just big bodies. Just about everybody is looking for guys that are long, athletic, and versatile. Besides nobody at this level is going to get a Kevin Love type player because a) there aren't that many, b) anybody with that size and skill level is going to get swiped up by the high majors.

we could go 6'9, 6'9, 6'11, 6'11 inside. Then at the forward Brolin at 6'6, Tre Lee, if he comes is 6'5, but athletic and very, very long. Brolin is 6'5, 6'6 and with his hops plays bigger than that, just like Ant does at 6'4-6'5. Oh and Minaya is 6'5 and long. Not too mention our PG is in the 6'3 range, which is big for a PG. We aren't that small.

Obviously because there's a lot of advantages to this type of player. If you can pound it inside, you get higher percentage shots, you get get the other team in foul trouble, you open up the outside game, the new 3 point line spreads defenders even further away from the middle, etc. And I didn't even mention the defensive end of the floor. Obviously you can run things to compensate for the lack of having this player or players. But to have one makes your team a lot more versatile. It seems odd that I'm having to explain why a skilled center would be advantageous to have.

[LUMU11]

I understand that. I really do. But it doesn't fit our style of play and what we do. Now if we had guys like that would our style change a little bit, most likely. But, personally, I think it suits us better to recruits bigs that can fit into what we're doing and don't contrast what we do. We don't need a 250 pounder to have a presence on the defensive end. Any big guy with athleticism gives us a presence. I'm not talking about a Russell Monroe type. I like Russ, good guy, so i'm not picking on him, but skill wise he was just not there. But if you've got a guy who's long, can stick his body in there and has good timing, or just knows how to use his body then your fine, your covered. I just think that everyone is to hung out up on the "prototypical" big guy. There's plenty of other ways to fill the void. This is all opinion, though, I just prefer versatile big guys. I like a guy who's athletic, can defend, doesn't get caught in mismatches bc he can move and can step out and hit jumpers. I just don't think you need to have the NBA type center to be effective in the post.

[coolhandluke]

and that's where you are wrong. Can we be successful in the BSC with no true post presence? Yes, we are pulling it off right now. But if we ever get to the tournament, we need a post presence to make some noise. When we gave up the 12 point lead over Clemson, it was because Booker was grabbing rebounds and pushing our guards around down low. Booker was dunking all over them and the their guard caught fire because we were so concerned with guarding Booker that we left him open on the perimeter. If you are a starting guard in the ACC, you are going to knock down open 3's. If we had a guy that could bang down low with Booker, we would have been able to still guard the perimeter and we would have held on to that lead and defeated Clemson. And we just didn't have that... That's why we need a big and true center to be successful against the rest of the non Big South competition we play.

[olldflame]

But it does not necessarily take a "wide body" to do that Luke. I think the bigs we have/will have are capable of it. Austin simply wasn't ready for it at the time we played Clemson. I'm sure Booker wasn't the beast he is now when he was an 18 year old Frosh either.

[LUMU11]

Luke, I understand that point, it's legitimate, you'd like to have a guy that can defend that. But that was my point, at a low-major and even mid-major school very rarely are you going to be able to find a guy that hang with an elite big man. Booker is an elite big man, he's got the height and the girth to be a force inside, but he's also extremely athletic to go along with it and he's got nice skills to boot. The problem with Booker isn't as much his size as his athleticism to go with that size and the point is that those kind of guys almost always go to big schools. It is very, very, very difficult to get that kind of quality big guy to play in the BSC, bc a guy like that is going to always have high major offers bc they are rare. If you look around though not many people are defending Booker very well, it wasn't just us. Also, my next point would be to say take a look at the mid-majors that are having success against the big boys. They all play a unique style and have players that have unique skill sets and understand their roles. Recruiting wise mid-majors cannot get those kinds of bigs so they have to find a way around it. Davidson is doing it, obviously Steph helps the cause. Gonzaga has done it for years, GMU did it, VCU, Belmont hangs tough bc they have kids that no how to play, they aren't big. Butler, is the same way, they've got some bodies, but they have players with unique size, skills and they know how to mold all that into a style that gives them the opportunity to compete with the big boys.

[vabigpoppa]

It's not like there's a bunch of 6'10" 280 lb guys on the low-mid d1 level out there. There's not that many guys like that period.

Are there guys out there who are 6'10 280 who can play and will come to LU? I believe there will be in the near future, and I'm pretty sure McKay and co. will welcome them with open arms. In the mean time I have a strong feeling we will get a lot more production out of McMasters and Smith than we did from Winters and Jones.

hey guys, we scooped up a 6'11 260 center in our 08 class at RU, im sure you guys can/will land one too.

Note the words in yellow poppa.

I wonder what the over/under will be on whether this guy plays more minutes in his career than Russell Monroe did?
Hey , I know it's a new staff and it looks like Greenburg is doing a good job, but hasn't Radford had a couple of 7 footers in the past few years who produced bupkus?

If he's half as good as Lynch-Flore, you've got something.

i guess art has turned out ok so far

but i agree w/ the people who want a true big man.....the big south is getting bigger. next year we will at times run a line up of 6'5, 6'6, 6'8, 6'8, and 6'11..... besides big art, everyone else is athletic enough to guard the perimeter. height isn't everything, but it helps.

[TDDance234]

I'll take a 6'6 wing who can box out correctly any day of the week. Yes, it would be nice to have a 6'10 guy with skills but if you can teach a team of wings to box out and be strong with the basketball, you can be just as successful.

[olldflame]

I was wondering if you would ever get around to calling me on that one poppa.

Parakhouski certainly has been a stud for you guys, and he gave us fits. I will still say that at this level you will have 4 or 5 Russell Monroes for every Art Parakhouski. I'm a big believer in recruiting based on what a player can do, not what they look like. To use a couple of Al McGuire expressions; I'll take an aircraft carrier if I can get him, but I don't care if I have an all-airport team.

[LUMU11]

Look, i'm not arguing the idea that a big man would help us. I'm just saying I don't think everybody needs to get hung up on having a certain type of big guy. I mean we all see what a difference Austin could make if he could continue to play quality minutes. What i'm saying is that is type of guy that fits our system and what we do. I'm not saying even Austin or Carter is the next big thing, just their skill sets. They can get up the floor, they can change shots on defense, and Austin, in particular, can bang a little bit. Are they true back to the basket big guys? Not really, but Austin has shown the ability to post up as well as face up and that's a nice thing to have.

My main point, is I believe at this level you get the best players you can get and then play to their strengths. We were able to get several guys this year who were good players they just happened to play the same couple positions. So what? If you can play you can play. I don't like to get hung up on specific positions and you need to have this and that. At our level you need to get the best players you can get regardless of position. If we can ever get a guy that's 6'10, 270 and can play, then i'm all for it, but I don't think it's worth our time lamenting over the fact we don't have one. Fortunately our style of play seems to indicate when can be flexible and interchangeable.

[SuperJon]

The kid from Radford (it's easier to type that than his name) didn't kill us underneath and in the low post. Where he absolutely killed us was hitting that jump shot from the elbow and around the free throw line. He got some buckets in the low post, but that was to be expected. It was that jumper that killed us.

And that's what all our bigs next year will have in their arsenal.

[vabigpoppa]

The kid from Radford (it's easier to type that than his name) didn't kill us underneath and in the low post. Where he absolutely killed us was hitting that jump shot from the elbow and around the free throw line. He got some buckets in the low post, but that was to be expected. It was that jumper that killed us.

And that's what all our bigs next year will have in their arsenal.

he also had 16 boards, 6 blocks, and who knows how many shots he might have altered.....something a guard wont get you, but a big man will.

[SuperJon]

Right, and I agree with that.

I just don't think a big bruiser on offense is needed. The guys we'll have next year (Austin, Tyler, Carter, Van Der Pol) will be tall guys who can rebound and block or alter shots on defense. The only thing is they're not your prototypical back to the basket bangers.

[coolhandluke]

Recruiting wise mid-majors cannot get those kinds of bigs so they have to find a way around it. Davidson is doing it, obviously Steph helps the cause. Gonzaga has done it for years, GMU did it, VCU, Belmont hangs tough bc they have kids that no how to play, they aren't big. Butler, is the same way, they've got some bodies, but they have players with unique size, skills and they know how to mold all that into a style that gives them the opportunity to compete with the big boys.

That's where you are wrong, again!

Davidson has a Legit Big Man. Lovedale is averaging 12 points and 9 rebounds a game! He's 6'8" but his a post player. And Lance Thomas at Duke is 6'8" and he is still posting up with the best big men in the country.

Gonzaga has a big man. Austin Daye. 6'11". Averaging 13 points and 7 rebounds and 2 or more blocks a game. They also have a 7 footer that sees time at the 5 for them.

Mason has Daryl Monroe, 6'7" 260 pounds. And even though he's a short post, he's still a banger down low. 10 points 8 rebounds a game.

VCU has Larry Sanders 6'9" with 10 points and 7 rebounds a game.

Belmont is the one team you mentioned with guys who aren't true posts. Although the do have a kid that is 6'8" averaging almost 14 points and 5 rebounds a game, but he's only 220 and not really a big banger down low I don't think. But Belmont is also 3rd in their conference behind two teams who have big men.

If we are going to make some noise in the tourney, we need a solid post presence. Look at Davidson and Mason and VCU. All three made noise as mid-majors and all three had post players down low to at least contend with the post players at the big schools.

[jcmanson]

Luke, Duke is not a mid major. Lovedale is no more of a big than Austin Smith, and hopefully Austin will continually to develop. If he does he can be just as productive as Lovedale is by his senior year. Austin Daye is alot like Carter. Yes, he’s 6’11”, but if he wasn’t he would be playing on the wing and he doesn’t play the 5 for Gonzaga he plays the 4 and sometimes the 3. Monroe is a true big. When VCU beat Duke it was because of some point named Eric Maynor, yeah he’s pretty good. Their next top 2 players were guards – Jesse Pellot Rosa and B.A. Walker.

[TDDance234]

Let's not confuse Lance Thomas with a big man. He's 5'9, stuck in a 6'8 body.

[LUMU11]

Alright, this is getting stupid. If you think Austin Daye is a post player you either a) don't know anything about basketball or b) haven't seen Gonzaga play much. I'm a nice guy so i'll say you haven't seen them play much. Daye goes about 6'11, 200. Hardly a back to the basket guy. Oh and Daye is known for his VERSATILITY, his ability to post up and then square and also play on the wing. He is a SF with C height. Lance Thomas is hardly a back to the basket player and I know bc I follow Duke. He also fits the bill of a 6'8 athletic guy that is a presence on DEFENSE, he is not a consistent back the basket scorer. Andrew Lovedale is a decent example. However, he does not score without Steph stretching the D. He's another example of a long, lean, athlete at 6'9. And your talking about a guy who's been in a program for 4 years and has learned the game and how to play. Like TD said, that could be Austin or Carter for us in a few years, but they are 18 year old kids, they are still learning! I don't know much about VCU so I won't argue that. But your still missing the point. Don't you see that all these guys are in the 6'8, 6'9 range and are athletic? They aren't 250 pound bangers. Just about every guy you mentioned has a faceup game. Which goes back to what I was saying about us. I think those are the kind of guys that fit us and what we do, not the 6'10, 270 pounder that everybody was talking about before. If your going to talk about these guys you might as well throw Kyle Singler into the mix bc he's the same player as them. Long, athletic, versatile, has the ability to post up and make a move, but not gonna bang you around. There's a difference between a "banger" and these guys. When's the last time you saw Andrew Lovedale absolutely bully some guy around from an ACC team? Doesn't happen, he uses his ATHLETICISM. In the SoCon he uses his size, but not against the bigger schools. Uses athleticism and intelligence, and the intelligence comes from being a seasoned veteran, something we don't have.

Belmont is struggling a bit this year, but they took Duke to the wire last year and have been in the tourney consistently. They also took Tennessee to the buzzer this year. That's the reason I used them. They've had sustained success, so they fit the mold of a VCU, GMU, Gonzaga, Davidson, etc. Except they definitely aren't as good as those squads.

But once again if you look at it. Look at VCU, had a star guard in Eric Maynor as well as another very good guard that year they beat Duke. Davidson obviously had great guard play last year with Richards and Curry, Gonzaga has Pargo, Matt Boldin, Micah Downs who at 6'7 is basically another guard. Belmont always has great guard play. GMU is the most balanced of the group bc the year they made their run they had very good guards, but they also had serviceable big men. They weren't absolute studs, but they had a collective group of guys that could do some work under there.