It really is unfortunate that Brooks is pretty much useless on offense. He's shown some very nice things defensively, especially on the perimeter. He gets squished by bigs inside, but he's pretty impressive in space for a young guy.
Defense is horrible
- Thread starter drose10
- Start date
Brooks is very sound defensively. As a freshman, he’s arguably our best defender. He is rarely out of position, defends the high ball screen better than guys who are in their 3rd year, and boxes out nicely in the defensive end. Call it harsh, but outside of getting an offensive rebound and putting up a layup, he is garbage on the offensive end. His best move is the power dribble, fake to the right shoulder, then straight right hand jump hook directly into the defender that we’ve seen get blocked 100% of the time. I’m telling you guys, we are in serious serious trouble if we don’t get at least 2 elite bigs in the next 2 recruiting classes.
C'mon man. I don't see anything instructive calling one of our guys "garbage" on offense. His problems there are with the traditional inside moves from the post triangle. He indeed has a long ways to go as a back-to-the-basket Big. He has, however, showed a nice face-up game. As I've said before, Garrison is eventually going to be a 4 with Stretch abilities.
In fact, the reason he is getting PT out of position now is the aforementioned defensive prowess. He is no rim-protector by any means, but as you said, he does a lot of things very well for his age outside of the post triangle. Sterling Manley --- maybe as soon as next season --- will be a force to reckoned with as a traditional 5, and Garrison will be an effective 4.
How can you say Brooks is going to be a stretch 4 when he has not shown an outside shot?
Can't speak for Gary, but I think he will be a stretch 4 by year 3 in the aspect that he can put the ball on the floor. While he might not have the range yet, there's still time. Hansbrough had ZERO range his freshman year (save for his dookie dagger in Durham) and by his senior year, he had developed a nice mid-range game all the way out to 3. Brooks can do the same and has better footwork than any of our other freshman bigs. Give him time to develop and I think you will be delightfully surprised.
I know I'm risking self-parody here, but...
Hansbrough was a strong FT shooter for a big even in his first year (and ultimately a great one). So it's not surprising he eventually translated that touch into shooting from the field.
Brooks is a bad FT shooter who has showed basically no aptitude for shooting in college or in HS. He's young and can certainly develop, but there's no reason to think he'll ever be a shooter. The face-up game I can see, though.
E: his FT percentages from HS are a good bit better (~70%), so that gives me a bit more hope about his shooting potential. His form needs work, though - he doesn't shoot from a good base.
Last edited:
Because he displayed that ability in HS and AAU, and he actually has already shown a nice face-up jumper from 17-in this season. Given the opportunity he can certainly be an effective face-up shooter during his career here.
That is an utterly false statement, but hey, at least you're right about the self-parody.
Oh well...
That is an utterly false statement, but hey, at least you're right about the self-parody.
Oh well...
3-19 from 3 as a HS senior, and the made mid-range jumpers on his HS highlights don't look good at all (at least one hits basically all of the rim before going in - not sure why that clip was selected). Perhaps he showed mid-range skill in games that didn't make his HS & AAU highlights, but that would be weird clip selection. If that is indeed the case and you watched him play a lot in HS and AAU, I'm happy to yield here. I'm just judging based on the info I have.
Apparently you never saw him play in HS or AAU. And you watch a clip?
Garrison has a nice stroke (which one should be able to recognize just from what we've seen at UNC) that should continue to improve in its consistency. Honestly it's really not that hard to see.
Seriously, why do you keep making silly statements like these? SMH
While I don't see him as a stretch 4, kid does have a solid mid range game but he is a freshman, give him a break. Brice didn't show a lot of that mid range as a freshman, few of our bigs have and yet it is seen as a strength by their Jr seasons.
Really SMH at the ball touch3ed all of the rim before it went in being used as a negative toward the kid, the freakin ball went in, NUFF SAID!
If we shoot 40% from 3 we win and everybody is fat and happy. Our foot speed is horrible and when our O is bad we lose. Teams get hot from 3, and you cant stop them from shooting 3s.
This is a glaring stat line that can't be ignored! I agree with the earlier post about Dean and in game multiple defenses and I also feel that this could keep teams from getting in a healthy rhythm on the offensive end.Right now I'm willing to give anything a try on the defensive end!
Every player that has played for the Heels has stated they clamp down on the penetration first leaving wide open shooters.... But Guess what we now have a big big problem, the Golden State warriors have changed how a kid sees things... What used to be awesome watching a 7 foot guy with an 8ft wing span jump a whopping 12 inches to flush a nice dunk has turned into high IQ kids realizing that three is not hard to hit and its worth more points..
Stuck in your ways is one thing, but changing with the times is a must, don't leave your man, just suffer through the 2 point attempt...
Where we get in to the weeds isn't really on the straight help, it is more over helping. When we converge 4 guys on the penetration there just are going to be multiple options to kick back out to. Now our guards don't do a great job of staying in front up top but the ball screens would force help even if our guards were able to stay in front more. I really think a solid 2/3 zone would ease that and while it would give some room for the treys those treys would be more contested because the zone does not force your guards to help so deep. It also covers up some lacking in inexperienced bigs where our man is so dependent on really solid rotations from your bigs that inexperience guys struggle with.
On offense, I look at 2 guys that just have to step up, Kenny and Cam. Those 2 fellas stepping up loosens things up for Joel, allows us more floor balance. When they are not hitting we know Theo is not the jump shooting threat, it kinda becomes the Joel & luke show, 2 on 5 and that isn't gonna win you a ton of games. Really like to see Kenny drive more rather than just pass and not apply pressure on the defense to rotate. I would absolutely bring Cam off the bench, our movement and attacking nature has kinda jammed up since he came back.
The other issue I see is Luke really needs help on both ends from another big man, he is not Meeks, Hicks, or even Bradley as a sole big in a small ball look. Kid gives all he has but he just has limitations that makes it hard for him to be the only big in the game.
On offense, I look at 2 guys that just have to step up, Kenny and Cam. Those 2 fellas stepping up loosens things up for Joel, allows us more floor balance. When they are not hitting we know Theo is not the jump shooting threat, it kinda becomes the Joel & luke show, 2 on 5 and that isn't gonna win you a ton of games. Really like to see Kenny drive more rather than just pass and not apply pressure on the defense to rotate. I would absolutely bring Cam off the bench, our movement and attacking nature has kinda jammed up since he came back.
The other issue I see is Luke really needs help on both ends from another big man, he is not Meeks, Hicks, or even Bradley as a sole big in a small ball look. Kid gives all he has but he just has limitations that makes it hard for him to be the only big in the game.
Not disagreeing with you, but I'll offer this counter. Meeks was also a bad FT shooter his freshman year. His mid-range game was above average by his senior year.
