Depth Problem?
- Thread starter mbra
- Start date
I can't say knew. but there are some that at least thought the depth issue was over blown and someone could fill some minutes withou effin it up to bad.
Ashton ended up playing more minutes (19) than Burton (16). He essentially played all of Cooke's minutes plus 8-10 or so from what Nader usually plays. I don't know if it was just the type of defense/offense we were playing today, but it will be interesting to see if he gets more minutes than Burton in any future games.
To answer the original question.......yes we still have a depth problem, especially inside. Case is still very much out on Burton. Some offensive talent, spotty shooter,,not a good defender at all. I give CSP a lot of credit for this win. I posted a week ago I thought he had gone overboard letting the players run the team. He stepped up this week, and made some changes. We played much smarter basketball. I do not think we will, or should, play all zone and slow it down. But it is about score, time and situation. We do not have players that are good man to man defenders, so we need a zone option. I would expect us to play mostly man the rest of the year, but be able to mix it up as the opponent and situation dictate. I just thought we played much more in control yesterday, better shot selection and used the clock effectively on the road.
I thought Ashton looked like he should have been playing all year. Looked better as an all around player then Cooke to me. Longer, Better defender.
I don't why people keep bringing up Carter. No theories needed, just not ready. As for Ashton, his minutes were more due to Cooke suspension and Nader foul trouble, otherwise he doesn't get 19 minutes but would have gotten some. If it leads to more confidence in playing him, then cool. So, yes, we still have a depth problem -Point guard back-up and front court. Burton hurts us defensively and you never know what spurt of offense you'll get from him. As the KState poster indicated in the other thread, that his observation was that even though he thought we dominated most of that game, we look dead tired many times. Those thinking we don't have a depth problem either enjoy or hope that several fatigued guys can make all the right plays in down-to-the-wire challenging big12 games or just assume we can throw anyone out there and give up runs to get breathers. Pretty sure our bigger lead went down to 7 in the first half when Monte came out a couple minutes. Monte 45 minutes, Tues., 37 yesterday, and now has to come back on 1 day rest for perhaps our biggest game of the year to date.
I feel like a lot of people underestimate Carter and Ashton. Are either going to consistently give us big minutes like Ashton did yesterday? No of course not. They can however spell us a couple minutes. Ashton is better too but Carter isn't bad offensively now and we can hide him on defense. Also if he gets beat he doesn't have to worry about fouls.
Our problems are artificial. Now do I think we should play them more? No probably not but it isn't like we can't.
And in his first major minutes- he can play better. Imo he has the type of outside shooting to go 7-10 when hot, and he is competent enough otherwise to be out there enough to get those 10 shots.
Cooke has a better handle and can be an asset too. I don't think we have seen the best from either. Imo we need Ashton's scholarship next year, but both are good bench guys if they buy in.
Actually it can. I don't know if you noticed but Niang played the point for a few minutes to give Monte' a rest. That is easier to do with five on the floor than four. Being able to bring in a long guard to play the 3 allows you to shift Nader to the four and rest Niang. Imagine how tired Niang and Monte' would have been if everyone would have had to play the rest of the first half without a single sub when Nader picked up his second six minutes into the first half.
Right now ISU may lack the depth to make a serious run at the conference championship. That injury killed us. But when you are playing your best players most of the game in something like the NCAA tourney, we stack up there with the best. Bench would help, but our guys will also be used to playing those minutes. I see a deep run coming.
Why? If Ashton comes in for Nader, gives Nader a rest, then rested Nader comes in to spell Georges, then Georges comes back for Ashton.
We can go small, we've done it before. I can just imagine now, the seizures that will occur if we go small and give up some offensive rebounding, though.
Cause we can already do all that with Cooke and Burton, we just don't much because Coach obviously doesn't feel confident taking Niang and especially Morris out for anymore than he absolutely has to. Ashton doesn't change that.
Agree. Another 3P-shooting guard with enough length to play the wing gives us more of the ability to play small-ball. Hopefully one of Cooke or Ashton are "on" enough to go three guards. This allows Nader or Burton to sub in more at the four resting Georges, and the extra guard also helps facilitate Georges playing the point. I even think you could sneak a few possessions of Cooke at the point if he is getting help two other guards (Thomas and Ashton) and Georges and Nader, (resting Monte).
We have a depth issue, but another guard alongside the change in game plan can help fabricate some rest for guys. You have to be willing to get creative, and hopefully the KSU game is a sign Coach Prohm is.
Another 3P shooting guard, particularly one longer and better on defense than Cooke or Burton respectfully, gives us a significantly better ability to play small-ball. An extra guy is also huge as not everyone will be "on" every night. If Cooke or Thomas or Nader were off in the past, we had no flexibility. It also allows coach to use all of Burton's fouls in the post.
Keep in mind we are talking about getting Monte and Georges just a few more minutes of rest. An extra sub can gain you a few minutes, which is tangible. Ashton is not as redundant as you think.
Last edited:
