There is no way I would take Mayer over anyone coming off our bench!Robert Wilson said:
I may be the only one, but I think we really could've used him. That burst of energy off the bench, his confidence/aggression, his length on defense and rebounding, and occasional scoring explosions when you need them...
BUCANDOIT82 said:There is no way I would take Mayer over anyone coming off our bench!Robert Wilson said:
I may be the only one, but I think we really could've used him. That burst of energy off the bench, his confidence/aggression, his length on defense and rebounding, and occasional scoring explosions when you need them...
He's not even the winningest player ever at Baylor having lost that distinction to Flo.
bear2be2 said:Lohner isn't even a playable player in any capacity but a Mavericks-era Eddie Najera goon role. If we had thought that was the extent of his potential in the Big 12, I am virtually certain we wouldn't have offered.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner's role has been reduced significantly because he's incapable of doing what we thought he would on the offensive end. He's basically a 5-10 minute hustle guy now, which is not what he was billed as when we signed him.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:No offense to Caleb Lohner, who plays really hard, but knowing now how severely limited he is offensively, I wish we would have taken Bridges and waited out Mayer's decision.chorne68 said:
We would be much better this this year had he not left. Maybe national champs again.
We could have found a late-take big that brings what Lohner does, which is size, hustle and little else. But the upgrade Mayer provides over Caleb was well worth the wait. That one simple trade would have raised this team's ceiling considerably.
Like Bridges earlier, CL is learning his role. This team has three players that can actually bang against real bigs: Flo, CL and Big Josh O. And while Josh O will end up the best among the three, he's not fully ready for prime time this year.
That leaves Flo and CL. MM could cover stretch 4s, but he can't cover real interior bigs. He gets bullied.
Our playing style simply means we aren't going to get offensively talented fives. Any five that can play offense doesn't want to be second fiddle to guard heavy offense. CL will get there for what he needs to be. That said, CSD is riding him hard. Especially in the KU game.
I'm glad enough other guys have stepped up enough to allow him to settle into his current role because he's done a fine job in it. But when Cryer was injured and others were struggling, we saw just how limited Caleb Lohner truly is on the offensive end.
If something were to happen again that forced him into bigger minutes, we'd be in trouble.
He played two years at BYU where he averaged 20+ minutes per game. There was plenty of game film. The idea that he is anything other than expected is… odd?
The choice was never MM vs CL. It was Bridges vs MM
FWIW, I was preaching patience on Bridges the whole way and I say the same for CL as long as we understand what he is.
Yes, if you force him into a tough spot it will look ugly. But guess what, our guards didn't look so great at the end of the first half against Arkansas when we were in foul trouble and they had to play big. If you play anybody out of position it will look ugly.
Lohner averaged seven points per game and flashed some offensive skill at BYU, particularly as a freshman. At Baylor, he has looked borderline clueless on the offensive end.
To suggest that we knew Lohner could only be trusted to rebound for eight minutes per game and were happy to add him in that capacity is revisionist history IMO.
Will get where? The guy is a 5-10 minute hustle player at this level. That's his destination.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner isn't even a playable player in any capacity but a Mavericks-era Eddie Najera goon role. If we had thought that was the extent of his potential in the Big 12, I am virtually certain we wouldn't have offered.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner's role has been reduced significantly because he's incapable of doing what we thought he would on the offensive end. He's basically a 5-10 minute hustle guy now, which is not what he was billed as when we signed him.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:No offense to Caleb Lohner, who plays really hard, but knowing now how severely limited he is offensively, I wish we would have taken Bridges and waited out Mayer's decision.chorne68 said:
We would be much better this this year had he not left. Maybe national champs again.
We could have found a late-take big that brings what Lohner does, which is size, hustle and little else. But the upgrade Mayer provides over Caleb was well worth the wait. That one simple trade would have raised this team's ceiling considerably.
Like Bridges earlier, CL is learning his role. This team has three players that can actually bang against real bigs: Flo, CL and Big Josh O. And while Josh O will end up the best among the three, he's not fully ready for prime time this year.
That leaves Flo and CL. MM could cover stretch 4s, but he can't cover real interior bigs. He gets bullied.
Our playing style simply means we aren't going to get offensively talented fives. Any five that can play offense doesn't want to be second fiddle to guard heavy offense. CL will get there for what he needs to be. That said, CSD is riding him hard. Especially in the KU game.
I'm glad enough other guys have stepped up enough to allow him to settle into his current role because he's done a fine job in it. But when Cryer was injured and others were struggling, we saw just how limited Caleb Lohner truly is on the offensive end.
If something were to happen again that forced him into bigger minutes, we'd be in trouble.
He played two years at BYU where he averaged 20+ minutes per game. There was plenty of game film. The idea that he is anything other than expected is… odd?
The choice was never MM vs CL. It was Bridges vs MM
FWIW, I was preaching patience on Bridges the whole way and I say the same for CL as long as we understand what he is.
Yes, if you force him into a tough spot it will look ugly. But guess what, our guards didn't look so great at the end of the first half against Arkansas when we were in foul trouble and they had to play big. If you play anybody out of position it will look ugly.
Lohner averaged seven points per game and flashed some offensive skill at BYU, particularly as a freshman. At Baylor, he has looked borderline clueless on the offensive end.
To suggest that we knew Lohner could only be trusted to rebound for eight minutes per game and were happy to add him in that capacity is revisionist history IMO.
Come on, man. BYU doesn't have the athletes that we have.
BYU is running a dribble hand off offense with a big in a blocker-motion set where the screens are set INSIDE the three point line. We're running a three-man weave action that sometimes stretches out to the logo searching for favorable ISO's after forcing switches. In other words, whereas BYU is trying to create misdirection in traffic inside the three point line, Baylor is trying to isolate while creating space.
Saying that CL should step out onto the floor and function in the Baylor system because he scored points at BYU is like saying Bryce Petty could step in for Tommy Armstrong in Nebraska's triple option because Petty ran some RPOs at Baylor. Completely different systems and skill sets.
CL will get there. He just needs time and reps.
bear2be2 said:Will get where? The guy is a 5-10 minute hustle player at this level. That's his destination.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner isn't even a playable player in any capacity but a Mavericks-era Eddie Najera goon role. If we had thought that was the extent of his potential in the Big 12, I am virtually certain we wouldn't have offered.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner's role has been reduced significantly because he's incapable of doing what we thought he would on the offensive end. He's basically a 5-10 minute hustle guy now, which is not what he was billed as when we signed him.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:No offense to Caleb Lohner, who plays really hard, but knowing now how severely limited he is offensively, I wish we would have taken Bridges and waited out Mayer's decision.chorne68 said:
We would be much better this this year had he not left. Maybe national champs again.
We could have found a late-take big that brings what Lohner does, which is size, hustle and little else. But the upgrade Mayer provides over Caleb was well worth the wait. That one simple trade would have raised this team's ceiling considerably.
Like Bridges earlier, CL is learning his role. This team has three players that can actually bang against real bigs: Flo, CL and Big Josh O. And while Josh O will end up the best among the three, he's not fully ready for prime time this year.
That leaves Flo and CL. MM could cover stretch 4s, but he can't cover real interior bigs. He gets bullied.
Our playing style simply means we aren't going to get offensively talented fives. Any five that can play offense doesn't want to be second fiddle to guard heavy offense. CL will get there for what he needs to be. That said, CSD is riding him hard. Especially in the KU game.
I'm glad enough other guys have stepped up enough to allow him to settle into his current role because he's done a fine job in it. But when Cryer was injured and others were struggling, we saw just how limited Caleb Lohner truly is on the offensive end.
If something were to happen again that forced him into bigger minutes, we'd be in trouble.
He played two years at BYU where he averaged 20+ minutes per game. There was plenty of game film. The idea that he is anything other than expected is… odd?
The choice was never MM vs CL. It was Bridges vs MM
FWIW, I was preaching patience on Bridges the whole way and I say the same for CL as long as we understand what he is.
Yes, if you force him into a tough spot it will look ugly. But guess what, our guards didn't look so great at the end of the first half against Arkansas when we were in foul trouble and they had to play big. If you play anybody out of position it will look ugly.
Lohner averaged seven points per game and flashed some offensive skill at BYU, particularly as a freshman. At Baylor, he has looked borderline clueless on the offensive end.
To suggest that we knew Lohner could only be trusted to rebound for eight minutes per game and were happy to add him in that capacity is revisionist history IMO.
Come on, man. BYU doesn't have the athletes that we have.
BYU is running a dribble hand off offense with a big in a blocker-motion set where the screens are set INSIDE the three point line. We're running a three-man weave action that sometimes stretches out to the logo searching for favorable ISO's after forcing switches. In other words, whereas BYU is trying to create misdirection in traffic inside the three point line, Baylor is trying to isolate while creating space.
Saying that CL should step out onto the floor and function in the Baylor system because he scored points at BYU is like saying Bryce Petty could step in for Tommy Armstrong in Nebraska's triple option because Petty ran some RPOs at Baylor. Completely different systems and skill sets.
CL will get there. He just needs time and reps.
Like Jordan Turner and Zach Loveday, he was a recruiting miss. It is what it is. Just get whatever utility you can out of him and move on.
Mark Vital was elite defensive player. In fact, he was good at everything but shooting. Lohner isn't good at anything but rebounding.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Will get where? The guy is a 5-10 minute hustle player at this level. That's his destination.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner isn't even a playable player in any capacity but a Mavericks-era Eddie Najera goon role. If we had thought that was the extent of his potential in the Big 12, I am virtually certain we wouldn't have offered.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:Lohner's role has been reduced significantly because he's incapable of doing what we thought he would on the offensive end. He's basically a 5-10 minute hustle guy now, which is not what he was billed as when we signed him.DallasBear9902 said:bear2be2 said:No offense to Caleb Lohner, who plays really hard, but knowing now how severely limited he is offensively, I wish we would have taken Bridges and waited out Mayer's decision.chorne68 said:
We would be much better this this year had he not left. Maybe national champs again.
We could have found a late-take big that brings what Lohner does, which is size, hustle and little else. But the upgrade Mayer provides over Caleb was well worth the wait. That one simple trade would have raised this team's ceiling considerably.
Like Bridges earlier, CL is learning his role. This team has three players that can actually bang against real bigs: Flo, CL and Big Josh O. And while Josh O will end up the best among the three, he's not fully ready for prime time this year.
That leaves Flo and CL. MM could cover stretch 4s, but he can't cover real interior bigs. He gets bullied.
Our playing style simply means we aren't going to get offensively talented fives. Any five that can play offense doesn't want to be second fiddle to guard heavy offense. CL will get there for what he needs to be. That said, CSD is riding him hard. Especially in the KU game.
I'm glad enough other guys have stepped up enough to allow him to settle into his current role because he's done a fine job in it. But when Cryer was injured and others were struggling, we saw just how limited Caleb Lohner truly is on the offensive end.
If something were to happen again that forced him into bigger minutes, we'd be in trouble.
He played two years at BYU where he averaged 20+ minutes per game. There was plenty of game film. The idea that he is anything other than expected is… odd?
The choice was never MM vs CL. It was Bridges vs MM
FWIW, I was preaching patience on Bridges the whole way and I say the same for CL as long as we understand what he is.
Yes, if you force him into a tough spot it will look ugly. But guess what, our guards didn't look so great at the end of the first half against Arkansas when we were in foul trouble and they had to play big. If you play anybody out of position it will look ugly.
Lohner averaged seven points per game and flashed some offensive skill at BYU, particularly as a freshman. At Baylor, he has looked borderline clueless on the offensive end.
To suggest that we knew Lohner could only be trusted to rebound for eight minutes per game and were happy to add him in that capacity is revisionist history IMO.
Come on, man. BYU doesn't have the athletes that we have.
BYU is running a dribble hand off offense with a big in a blocker-motion set where the screens are set INSIDE the three point line. We're running a three-man weave action that sometimes stretches out to the logo searching for favorable ISO's after forcing switches. In other words, whereas BYU is trying to create misdirection in traffic inside the three point line, Baylor is trying to isolate while creating space.
Saying that CL should step out onto the floor and function in the Baylor system because he scored points at BYU is like saying Bryce Petty could step in for Tommy Armstrong in Nebraska's triple option because Petty ran some RPOs at Baylor. Completely different systems and skill sets.
CL will get there. He just needs time and reps.
Like Jordan Turner and Zach Loveday, he was a recruiting miss. It is what it is. Just get whatever utility you can out of him and move on.
Goodness. We won a national championship because some bulky, athletic guy named Mark Vital allowed us maximum flexibility on defense while being limited to a screen setter/offensive rebounding role on the other end of the floor.
I'm not saying CL is the second Mark Vital but it's worth finding out what he will become as he gets used to running the Baylor system. Drew has a very long history of taking bigs that look rough for us at first and then they do great by the time they are done at Baylor.
Why are you so hellbent on writing him off after around 200 minutes of game action?
BearlyBeloved said:DallasBear9902 said:
Our playing style simply means we aren't going to get offensively talented fives. Any five that can play offense doesn't want to be second fiddle to guard heavy offense. CL will get there for what he needs to be. That said, CSD is riding him hard. Especially in the KU game.
Can't a super-talented big guy be persuaded that signing with CSD means he will be the finishing touch to guarantee we win another natty??
Teaming them with guards like ours means opponents are flummoxed because we then have no weakness to exploit.
