forums

Transfer C Lynn Kidd signs with Miami

View as article
txcanes said:
No what sucks is the instant negativity from our fans. Gets real old ya know? Smdh
Click to expand...
How about this...I'm so overly positive that I want you to kindly copulate yourself with the largest wooden phallic prosthesis that can be found, perpetually. I wish that for you in perpetuity with all positivity!!!!!!!!!!! ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

Adam Sandler Reaction GIF


If you can't handle someone being critical as a fan within reason on a message board then you sir/madam are the one with issues. I see you snitch reacting and then sniping with comments like this...that's freaking juvenile.
 
Advertisement
BWCD said:
You've got a bunch of cognitive dissonance going on in this post compared to others you've made in this thread. You say we don't need depth, but we just got done with a season where we had next to no depth and got nailed with injuries and look where that got us. Also, just a few posts down from this one you say:


So...depth is overrated but "obviously it'd be great to have more depth". Which is it? You're contradicting yourself within the span of 2 posts.

No one is saying AT ALL that we need to go 8-10 deep with a team of JAG's. I'm not asking Coach L to play 8-10 *for the sake* of playing 8-10. I'm asking him to recruit better thru the portal and HS ranks, develop his guys better, and build a rotation *with the goal* of getting to that 8-10 depth level with QUALITY. Yes, you're gonna have 3-4 real dudes on a team if you're good...but you can't just play all of those guys 35-40 mins a night and expect to hold up during a season w/o any quality behind them. The best teams *have quality* behind their front line stars, you dope.

You missed my point and went off on a massive tangent trying to pooh-pooh depth because of some inane claim of "that's not how CBB is today" kind of thing. That wasn't even the conversation.

Where I will vehemently disagree, regardless of Lance's numbers, is that the 4 guys you mentioned in bullet points are ones we can ride to prominence next year without any depth behind them. We can't just play 2-3 more bodies for break minutes and rely on major assumptions like:

- Bethea being an absolute dog from day one...might take him some time. He's super highly rated but he'll still be a Freshman and will have growing pains.
- Omier returning - we don't even know if he's coming back yet.
- Pack being consistently more of what we saw in the 22-23 season versus this past year.
- Kidd being a plug-and-play starter at the 5 and being as good as he was at VT (I hope he is, but we can't *count* on that).

We still have TONS of questions. All I'm asking Coach L to do is build on those "what ifs" and keep adding talent/depth to this roster. I'm not asking him to find 8-10 Clingnan/DJ Burns/RJ Davis/etc kind of guys. I'm just asking him to build towards having 8-10 capable bodies so we don't have a repeat of this past season with getting screwed over by injuries. If you can't agree with that assertion at the very least, regardless of "how CBB is today", then not sure we've got much more to discuss.
Click to expand...
How is that cognitive dissonance? Obviously, more good players > fewer good players. But teams generally win if their few good players are really good. 5 players scored for Purdue yesterday; 6 for Alabama on Saturday; 7 for NC St yesterday.

The reason we stunk this year wasn't because our bench stunk (although that obviously didn't help). It's because our starters stunk.

Our 5th best guy can't be Djobet next year. I don't think anyone believes that. But Djobet can be our 8th or 9th best player and we can get to the Final 4.
 
ALLoverCANE said:
How is that cognitive dissonance? Obviously, more good players > fewer good players. But teams generally win if their few good players are really good. 5 players scored for Purdue yesterday; 6 for Alabama on Saturday; 7 for NC St yesterday.

The reason we stunk this year wasn't because our bench stunk (although that obviously didn't help). It's because our starters stunk.

Our 5th best guy can't be Djobet next year. I don't think anyone believes that. But Djobet can be our 8th or 9th best player and we can get to the Final 4.
Click to expand...
It's cognitive dissonance because you contracticted yourself in the span of 2 posts...lol. Or maybe it's just shaping your argument to fit the responses you're getting...I dunno. Either way...

Yes...you can win with a few good players, but building a program up who's been to an Elite 8 and a Final Four 2 out of the last 3 seasons...the goal ought to be getting to that 8-10 guys that can play competent/quality minutes. Not all of them have to be stars (maybe only 2-3), but the supporting cast cannot be Casey/Watson/Robinson level players. Again - I never asked for 8-10 McD's AA's. Would be nice, but that's a pipe dream, next to no one has that on their roster.

I think we're in the same ballpark of saying the same things but talking past each other because you think when I (and others) say "depth", we want 8-10 *stars*...but that's asinine and not a bar anyone else in this thread has been trying to set.

Let's just agree that 1) we need some stars to lead us, for sure, and 2) that we need quality/competent depth behind it to give quality minutes for us to have the best shot at winning. Fair enough? I don't see how that's some outrageous stance to take.
 
JZCane0825 said:
Pack
Bethea
Transfer 3/Cleveland
Transfer 4/Norchad
Kidd

Swartz is a top 50 player nationally and someone I'd expect to give us 12-15 MPG out of the gate. Djobet should be able give us 15 solid MPG as a sophomore. Both aren't huge asks. Beverly put up those numbers in 31 MPG for a mid-major Wichita State team that went 15-19. He averaged 12 MPG at Miami last year. Bensley was at 20 MPG in '22-23. We continue to recruit transfer guards that I expect to fill those minutes in the aggregate.

Between our starters, Swartz, Djobet, Johnson-Arigu, a transfer guard and perhaps a late prep signee, we can 100% have a solid 8 man rotation. We're also over 7 months away from next season.
Click to expand...
If Omier leaves, we'll badly need another big man. Hopefully, at Kidd's level or better. Hope the Canes Connection wallet is wide open.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
TwentySix said:
Yeah, I agree. Just wishful thinking lol
Click to expand...
We 100% need a 3rd, rotational big regardless of what happens with Omier. Johnson-Arigu, to me, is a 3 that can sometimes play the 4, but we really need a big that can give us 15 solid minutes off the bench.
 
Not the biggest basketball guy and haven't kept up with the portal much but thinking about the Kidd addition.. unless he's playing off the bench 20+ min which obviously not the expectation and not what he's coming here for.. that means Omier is playing the 4. Seems logical and seems like a better fit for him in a very narrow lense. Matches up size-wise (on paper) much better and we would obviously be significantly better rebounding.

But on the flip side of that, he's so effective as a 5 because of his quickness compared to most bigs. That was his strength in offense, defense, and rebounding. Only the true bigs gave him issues as a 5. I don't like him at all as a 4 and don't really think I want to watch him and Kidd on the floor at the same time. He's athletic, sure, and we can keep a good pace on offense which is usually the down side of a team with 2 "bigs".

The questions/concerns I have are... 1. Todays best teams have the stretch 4 that shoots the 3 ball. Omier can't do that. Sure, he can spend his offseason developing it and that's best for him as far as any hope at the next level. 2. You're taking his strength, quickness and being more agile than everyone he's matched up on playing the 5, and making it a weakness or being neutral to most team's 4. Could he guard Karaban on the perimeter right now? No.

We'll be a drastically different looking offensive team from the 21/22 and 22/23 teams with both on the floor. Maybe better when teams try to slow us down and control the clock. We might have a shot against the UVA play style. That's about it.
 
JayCane20 said:
Not the biggest basketball guy and haven't kept up with the portal much but thinking about the Kidd addition.. unless he's playing off the bench 20+ min which obviously not the expectation and not what he's coming here for.. that means Omier is playing the 4. Seems logical and seems like a better fit for him in a very narrow lense. Matches up size-wise (on paper) much better and we would obviously be significantly better rebounding.

But on the flip side of that, he's so effective as a 5 because of his quickness compared to most bigs. That was his strength in offense, defense, and rebounding. Only the true bigs gave him issues as a 5. I don't like him at all as a 4 and don't really think I want to watch him and Kidd on the floor at the same time. He's athletic, sure, and we can keep a good pace on offense which is usually the down side of a team with 2 "bigs".

The questions/concerns I have are... 1. Todays best teams have the stretch 4 that shoots the 3 ball. Omier can't do that. Sure, he can spend his offseason developing it and that's best for him as far as any hope at the next level. 2. You're taking his strength, quickness and being more agile than everyone he's matched up on playing the 5, and making it a weakness or being neutral to most team's 4. Could he guard Karaban on the perimeter right now? No.

We'll be a drastically different looking offensive team from the 21/22 and 22/23 teams with both on the floor. Maybe better when teams try to slow us down and control the clock. We might have a shot against the UVA play style. That's about it.
Click to expand...
Yeah but have you seen his advanced stats
 
JayCane20 said:
Not the biggest basketball guy and haven't kept up with the portal much but thinking about the Kidd addition.. unless he's playing off the bench 20+ min which obviously not the expectation and not what he's coming here for.. that means Omier is playing the 4. Seems logical and seems like a better fit for him in a very narrow lense. Matches up size-wise (on paper) much better and we would obviously be significantly better rebounding.

But on the flip side of that, he's so effective as a 5 because of his quickness compared to most bigs. That was his strength in offense, defense, and rebounding. Only the true bigs gave him issues as a 5. I don't like him at all as a 4 and don't really think I want to watch him and Kidd on the floor at the same time. He's athletic, sure, and we can keep a good pace on offense which is usually the down side of a team with 2 "bigs".

The questions/concerns I have are... 1. Todays best teams have the stretch 4 that shoots the 3 ball. Omier can't do that. Sure, he can spend his offseason developing it and that's best for him as far as any hope at the next level. 2. You're taking his strength, quickness and being more agile than everyone he's matched up on playing the 5, and making it a weakness or being neutral to most team's 4. Could he guard Karaban on the perimeter right now? No.

We'll be a drastically different looking offensive team from the 21/22 and 22/23 teams with both on the floor. Maybe better when teams try to slow us down and control the clock. We might have a shot against the UVA play style. That's about it.
Click to expand...
I think he'll struggle to guard quicker 4s.

But I think we'd dominate the glass with Omier at the 4. He also greatly improved as a shooter last year and has always had good touch at the line, so I'm not worried about that part.
 
Advertisement
ALLoverCANE said:
I think he'll struggle to guard quicker 4s.

But I think we'd dominate the glass with Omier at the 4. He also greatly improved as a shooter last year and has always had good touch at the line, so I'm not worried about that part.
Click to expand...
He improved as a shooter but it was pretty much only wide open top of the key 3s from centers not being able to get out to contest without his quickness putting them in a bad spot because he could take them off the dribble. That’s not going to be the case with him playing the 4, his advantage there will be down low. Which is also where Kidd will operate.

Some people (not saying you, just a lot of the discourse) seem to think becoming more than a wide open shooter is just an easy thing, you see it every year with the draft “If he can just knock down 36% of his threes he’ll be incredible.” It’s the most valuable skill in basketball, if it were easy everyone would do it.
 
TwentySix said:
He improved as a shooter but it was pretty much only wide open top of the key 3s from centers not being able to get out to contest without his quickness putting them in a bad spot because he could take them off the dribble. That’s not going to be the case with him playing the 4, his advantage there will be down low. Which is also where Kidd will operate.

Some people (not saying you, just a lot of the discourse) seem to think becoming more than a wide open shooter is just an easy thing, you see it every year with the draft “If he can just knock down 36% of his threes he’ll be incredible.” It’s the most valuable skill in basketball, if it were easy everyone would do it.
Click to expand...
No, it's not easy. But he has already taken a big step forward. You're talking about him like he's Anthony Walker or Harland Beverly. It's not reasonable to expect guys that have not shown anything from outside (or from the line) to suddenly become a shooting threat. It's an entirely different matter to expect a guy with Omier's trajectory to take another small step forward.

I guess you want a big PF who can also shoot and handle lol. Great. So does everyone else. A PF who is a beast on the boards and has a decent 3pt shot is pretty **** good.
 
ALLoverCANE said:
No, it's not easy. But he has already taken a big step forward. You're talking about him like he's Anthony Walker or Harland Beverly. It's not reasonable to expect guys that have not shown anything from outside (or from the line) to suddenly become a shooting threat. It's an entirely different matter to expect a guy with Omier's trajectory to take another small step forward.

I guess you want a big PF who can also shoot and handle lol. Great. So does everyone else. A PF who is a beast on the boards and has a decent 3pt shot is pretty **** good.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about him like he’s anyone. He doesn’t shoot off the dribble. He doesn’t shoot contested 3s. His release is slow which worked this year because he had agility advantages over 5 men so his 3s were coming when nobody was within 5 feet of him. I genuinely don’t know what about that is controversial or negative, but it will absolutely impact the spacing of our offense. Going from shooting wide open set 3s to what he’ll be doing in the 4 spot is not a “small step”

And I said nothing about what I want, of course everyone wants that but it has nothing to do with what I’m saying. Omier is great. But while he’s a sort of stretch 5, he is not a stretch 4. And two non-stretch bigs in modern basketball is a tough style, especially when one of them is 6’5.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
TwentySix said:
I’m not talking about him like he’s anyone. He doesn’t shoot off the dribble. He doesn’t shoot contested 3s. His release is slow which worked this year because he had agility advantages over 5 men so his 3s were coming when nobody was within 5 feet of him. I genuinely don’t know what about that is controversial or negative, but it will absolutely impact the spacing of our offense.

And I said nothing about what I want, of course everyone wants that but it has nothing to do with what I’m saying. Omier is great. But while he’s a sort of stretch 5, he is not a stretch 4. And two non-stretch bigs in modern basketball is a tough style, especially when one of them is 6’5.
Click to expand...
It's hard to tell if you're making a good faith argument, or are so entrenched in your priors that you've lost whatever point you're trying to make.

Omier was in no way a stretch 5 last year, and was extremely effective even at 6' 5". Acting like he's your typical overmatched undersized 4 is disingenuous. He's going to physically overpower the small 4s that can cover him out to the 3pt line.
 
ALLoverCANE said:
It's hard to tell if you're making a good faith argument, or are so entrenched in your priors that you've lost whatever point you're trying to make.

Omier was in no way a stretch 5 last year, and was extremely effective even at 6' 5". Acting like he's your typical overmatched undersized 4 is disingenuous. He's going to physically overpower the small 4s that can cover him out to the 3pt line.
Click to expand...
He was effective in small lineups as a 5. That is my entire point that everyone seems to think won’t matter. With Kidd at the 5 and Omier at the 4, the entire geometry of the defense changes. There will be more defenders in the paint. Omier won’t be going 1 on 1 in the paint, there will be help coming from Kidd’s man who is already in the lane and doesn’t have to stick anyone outside of it.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they’re making a bad faith argument. But half this board was clamoring for more Omier/Nwoko lineups all year despite them being terrible, and the reason for that was there was no. spacing.
 
TwentySix said:
He was effective in small lineups as a 5. That is my entire point that everyone seems to think won’t matter. With Kidd at the 5 and Omier at the 4, the entire geometry of the defense changes. There will be more defenders in the paint. Omier won’t be going 1 on 1 in the paint, there will be help coming from Kidd’s man who is already in the lane and doesn’t have to stick anyone outside of it.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they’re making a bad faith argument. But half this board was clamoring for more Omier/Nwoko lineups all year despite them being terrible, and the reason for that was there was no. spacing.
Click to expand...
It seems disingenuous because this is what fans have been clamoring for since the final whistle blew against UConn.

Yes, the spacing is going to get a little more cramped. That's the tradeoff. We're also going to dominate the glass at both ends. And if Omier takes another step forward as a shooter - which is entirely reasonable given that he's already shown he can improve - then the spacing won't suffer as much as you say.

Small ball worked great for 2 years when we had Jordan Miller at the 4. It's pie in the sky to think we're going to get bigger and not losing any spacing on offense. But if the defensive rebounding improves and we get extra possessions on offense, it should be worth it.
 
ALLoverCANE said:
It seems disingenuous because this is what fans have been clamoring for since the final whistle blew against UConn.

Yes, the spacing is going to get a little more cramped. That's the tradeoff. We're also going to dominate the glass at both ends. And if Omier takes another step forward as a shooter - which is entirely reasonable given that he's already shown he can improve - then the spacing won't suffer as much as you say.

Small ball worked great for 2 years when we had Jordan Miller at the 4. It's pie in the sky to think we're going to get bigger and not losing any spacing on offense. But if the defensive rebounding improves and we get extra possessions on offense, it should be worth it.
Click to expand...
I was never one of those clamoring for more size, but considering that has been the overwhelming majority that’s totally fair. My issue with the Kidd pickup has just been I think it’s going to have a negative impact on Omier’s offensive efficiency more than it will help our rebounding. I may be dead wrong on that. I hope I am.

I’ve always felt unless you have a truly dominant big man, it’s a guard’s game and I’m all for creating space and playing the perimeter game. People trying to act like losing to UConn necessitated a complete identity shift from what led to our best seasons ever just didn’t make sense to me, they’re such an outlier right now with their size across the board to go along with skill.

We did get really lucky with Miller, and it’s a tough piece to replace. But I’d rather try to piece a bunch of switchable guys together than throw a big out there that teams can hunt if they have a great ball handler, which just gets more prevalent year to year.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top