CO_Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,109
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 10:57:15 GMT -5
Post by CO_Hoya on Apr 7, 2009 10:57:15 GMT -5
and can shoot like DaJuan. Say what you will about Summers, he is an excellent shooter for his size. I think it's an enormous leap of faith (and unfair) to assume that Lubick is anywhere near as adept a shooter right now. If there are stats to back up that Lubick is a great shooter, I'll be happy to see them.
|
|
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 11:47:14 GMT -5
Post by tpk3 on Apr 7, 2009 11:47:14 GMT -5
Nate is not nearly as consistent with his shot as dajuan. his range is also not as deep as dajuan's-- those "perimeter jumpers" were probably near the foul line/elbow area. nate's shot is more a work in progress. No knock on Nate b/c by the end of his collegiate career i thought dajuan was a great shooter. Also, nate does have some hops and can get up but he shows flashes of it. he does not play above the rim consistently like a david lee type guy. also he's not as quick to change directions and needs to work on lateral quickness/defense. nate is a type of guy who kind of lumbers up and down the court but then will show this occasional explosion to the basket when his mind is set on it-- i think that is why people say his explosiveness is deceptive. Nate is a good get for us. 4 yr player who will work well in our system-- cerebral, good passer/team player, moves well w/o ball. also, he gets after it and is not afraid of contact. i don't see him as an immediate starter but he will be a nice body who will give us depth down low. Re: nate's body--he is built like a bruising 4 man. he's 6'8 but kind of plays hunched over so bigs can shoot over him. also nate is not athletic/explosive enough to get alot of height on standing jumps so that is another reason bigs can shoot over him. but he will be tough to use power moves against. i also like nate's coachability--his dad has coached him well and he plays for a tough minded AAU coach. I expect nate to be a very valuable role player for us.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 12:15:08 GMT -5
Post by EasyEd on Apr 7, 2009 12:15:08 GMT -5
Nate is not nearly as consistent with his shot as dajuan. his range is also not as deep as dajuan's-- those "perimeter jumpers" were probably near the foul line/elbow area. nate's shot is more a work in progress. No knock on Nate b/c by the end of his collegiate career i thought dajuan was a great shooter. Also, nate does have some hops and can get up but he shows flashes of it. he does not play above the rim consistently like a david lee type guy. also he's not as quick to change directions and needs to work on lateral quickness/defense. nate is a type of guy who kind of lumbers up and down the court but then will show this occasional explosion to the basket when his mind is set on it-- i think that is why people say his explosiveness is deceptive. Nate is a good get for us. 4 yr player who will work well in our system-- cerebral, good passer/team player, moves well w/o ball. also, he gets after it and is not afraid of contact. i don't see him as an immediate starter but he will be a nice body who will give us depth down low. Re: nate's body--he is built like a bruising 4 man. he's 6'8 but kind of plays hunched over so bigs can shoot over him. also nate is not athletic/explosive enough to get alot of height on standing jumps so that is another reason bigs can shoot over him. but he will be tough to use power moves against. i also like nate's coachability--his dad has coached him well and he plays for a tough minded AAU coach. I expect nate to be a very valuable role player for us. Typical resume of a white guy.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,212
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 12:24:52 GMT -5
Post by hoyarooter on Apr 7, 2009 12:24:52 GMT -5
I really like what I hear out of Lubick. He's got DaJuan's size -- if no one noticed. That's Summers' junior year of college size -- and can shoot like DaJuan. But is a big more of a banger. I think our '10 class has the potential to be monster. We've got our PG of the future and a PF who can bang inside and still draw defenders out of the paint. Now we need a scoring (and defending wing) as well as another big to my mind. In '10 we'll have Vaughn as a senior and Sims as a junior and Lubick -- that's still a bit thin. Somewhere in '09 and '10 we need another big. Riley would have let us focus on wings (2/3) in '10; now we need someone to come in and provide depth early on and bigger contributions as Sims and Vaughn graduate. Latavious from 09 is still a possibility for the big.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,366
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 12:42:23 GMT -5
Post by hoyaboya on Apr 7, 2009 12:42:23 GMT -5
I'd like to see JT III take a look at Philip Jackson of Chicago in the class of 2010. 6'8" power forward with tremendous run/jump capabilities, lots of upside.
Also, the big kid from Indianapolis Lawrence North, Dominique Ferguson is back on the board after Gillispie's firing. Top 10 prospect in the class of 2010, hope the Hoyas are at least making some inquiries. Could offer the opportunity to step right in and start with Monroe leaving.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 13:16:30 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 7, 2009 13:16:30 GMT -5
and can shoot like DaJuan. Say what you will about Summers, he is an excellent shooter for his size. I think it's an enormous leap of faith (and unfair) to assume that Lubick is anywhere near as adept a shooter right now. If there are stats to back up that Lubick is a great shooter, I'll be happy to see them. I'm sure you're right Nate as HS Junior v DaJuan as a college junior. I didn't really mean it as an immediate comparison (though I see it reads that way), more as a general flow of career thing. He's a four you won't mind jump shooting. Summers wasn't very accurate until this year, either, but hsi stroke was good enough to be considered a PF who could shoot. Point taken that Nate won't start at 38% on threes or necessarily even get there. But I think he'll be enough of a threat to draw a man out.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 13:45:29 GMT -5
Post by SirSaxa on Apr 7, 2009 13:45:29 GMT -5
The thing about Lubick vs. Summers. Nate wants to be a PF. DaJuan never wanted to. At least, he never played like a PF -- on O or D.
But regardless, DaJuan is gone. He spent three years at GU and was part of some great successes. Let's try to remember him for that.
Meanwhile, GU needs more bigs. Nate is a good one. But he needs company. Monroe Sims Vaughan
All three of those guys need to have a serious role next year. As of right now, they are the only three who can trade off at the 4/5 slots. All three kids need to make major progress in their games between now and Nov. and all three need to deliver for our Hoyas next year. Now if we can add Latavious to the mix (or someone else?) so much the better.
|
|
DudeSlade
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I got through the Esherick years. I can get through anything.
Posts: 1,209
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 15:21:55 GMT -5
Post by DudeSlade on Apr 7, 2009 15:21:55 GMT -5
From the sounds of it, and I may be way off here, Lubick sounds like he could be a DaJuan Blair type of player down the line. He will have to crash the boards big time to make that comparison work, but Blair is around the same height, is not a good jumper, has a big thick body that he moves people around with, is fairly cerebral (that's where his boxing out comes from in addition to that thick body) and plays with a ton of passion.
Differences: Blair is a much better rebounder right now and Lubick is a better shooter. But I'm just wondering if Lubick put on another 30 pounds of muscle by his soph/junior year of college (not out of the question), if he couldn't be fairly comparable. Perhaps, I just have Blair on my mind cuz of how good he was this year and it was easy to try to make a comparison there even though there wasn't. Thoughts?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
10
Apr 7, 2009 15:41:27 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 7, 2009 15:41:27 GMT -5
Blair was a historically dominant offensive rebounder. Like once every ten years or more type of guy.
Any comparison of Lubick to a first team All American as a sophomore is looking way too far ahead. Plus, Blair has about 40-50 pounds on Lubick with pretty good athleticism. That's a HUGE difference.
Lubick's size is similar to Summers -- not Blair.
|
|
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 8:03:17 GMT -5
Post by hoyamel on Apr 8, 2009 8:03:17 GMT -5
Graeagle: Not sure your description is accurate. You at definitely on about some points but way off on others.
DeJuan Blair? Have you guys seen a picture of Nate? His body is pretty much exactly the oppostie of Blair's. No way he will ever get to 260.
If you think he will be a role player, which is fine, I think you will be pleasantly surprised. Will he be as good a shooter as DaJaun was as a junior, I think so. I am guessing at the same point in high school Nate is a better shooter. Comparison's are really tough, especially when people refuse to compare white and black players. I think it may be best not to try and compare.
|
|
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 9:06:11 GMT -5
Post by tpk3 on Apr 8, 2009 9:06:11 GMT -5
hoyamel- i never compared nate's body to blair's. i said his body is more of a bruising 4 man's. and he will fill it out more. but Blair is a unique talent. life SF said- one in a decade type player for this conference. i also agree it is silly to compare nate to dajuan blair.
regarding nate's shooting it is improved but to compare it dajuan's is silly. by the end of his career dajuan was our best outside shooter and had NBA type range. very smooth stroke-- really it is the one skill that dajuan is relying on to separate himself. and as we have all seen dajuan was NOT a PF but more of a perimeter player. Nate is not this type of player. i've seen nate 4-5 times and he does not take too many 3pters at the HS level--dajuan too ALOT of 3 pointers in college. Also in the games i saw nate had a nice looking stroke but the ball was not always falling. also dajuan and nate's shooting stroke/mechanics are different. not saying the kid can not develop his shot but really dajuan is a very different player than nate. but i last saw nate last december so maybe he has greatly improved.
i agree it is silly to compare players sometimes. i just did not want people to get the wrong idea about nate.... b/c i think comparing him to dajuan summers and dajuan blair is way off. i mean summers and blair are nowhere close hahaha. nate;s dimensions are closer to dajuan summers than dajuan blair's...but all 3 games are very different.
mel- just curious what i was way off on with nate? i meant role player in a good way--usually a team has 2 stars(3 if they are lucky) ad then the other parts around them-- i don't see nate as a star- at least not in the first 2 years. but i see him as a contributor from day 1. sounds like u see him alot. i wold love if i was misinformed re: nate's weaknesses. it does sound like nate is improving and that is the most important thing.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 10:41:00 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 8, 2009 10:41:00 GMT -5
I started the Summers comparisons and got us off track. My main point was that he seems to be a real four in the sense that he's got the size and will bang, but that he fits us well because he's talented on the perimeter as well, which a lot of fours that can bang can't do.
It's way too early to project Nate in my mind. He's very good right now, obviously.
|
|
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 12:27:07 GMT -5
Post by tpk3 on Apr 8, 2009 12:27:07 GMT -5
i agree SF- nate is definitely more of a 4 man than dajuan. we wanted to dajuan to embrace playing down low more but unfortunately he did not. won't have that problem with nate. dajuan was a perimeter guy throughout his career. for now i don't see nate on perimeter--especially on defensive end. he's just not quick enough to guard collegiate wings. but offensively yes i believe he has the potential/capability of pulling bigs away from the basket with his shot. still don't think he has consistent 3 pt range just yet though.
re: how nate will translate to the next level....we'll just wait and see. u never know how kids will adjust. we got a good one though.
|
|
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 14:25:45 GMT -5
Post by hoyamel on Apr 8, 2009 14:25:45 GMT -5
Graeagle: The blair thing was not directed at you. I made it a different paragraph hoping you would realize it was a different train of thought and it was directed at whoever brought that comparison up. I think you are dead on with the lack of lateral quickness. That is an the top priority along with getting stronger whole body in the offseason. Nate will never be quick side to side but he needs to maximize what he has and really perfect angles.
The 2 points I thought you were off were the shooting and above the rim. I have seen nate play more than anyone except his father, this year down the stretch he finished everything with dunks. Ask Greg Monroe. I would bet as long as he plays he will be in the top 2 in terms of dunks every year. I agree you can't compare DaJuan and Nate's shooting. If you haven't seen Nate in a while he has worked really hard on his mechanics. He moved his release point and made some other adjustments. he shot the ball much better in the last 15 games this year than the first 15. Now unfortunately his AAu coach won't let him shoot 3's but he has really worked and in terms of basketball that will be his number 1 priority over the summer.
I would agree he will not be the star but lets see what he does next year. He has played on a loaded high school team his whole career, and although next year they will still be loaded, lets see how he handles being the man.
As of right now I think it is fair to say you are getting a face up power forward. He will dunk everything around the rim, is an above average passer, good shooter and good ball handler for that position with a great basketball IQ, almost too good. He will need to guard better at the college level, which can be said about most high school players. He also brings great intangibles to the table.
Gra: I hope I didn't offend.
|
|
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 15:32:59 GMT -5
Post by tpk3 on Apr 8, 2009 15:32:59 GMT -5
mel- no offense taken at all. you've seen him the most and would know the most. my point about nate's shooting is that he does not have dajuan's range or consistency yet. but no doubt he CAN get there...but i still don't see him shooting alot of 3 pointers for us. glad he's working on his mechanics and release point-- the release point did bother me last yr.
re: "above the rim" players. For me an "above the rim" player is a guy like lil patrick- a 6'7 guy who could guard centers if need be and seemed to just fly above the basket throughout the entire game. Nate CAN play above the rim but he does not LIVE there consistently. in watching a full game i would not describe him as that type of player. i know i made another comparison here but it was just meant to compare what an "above the rim player" not to compare their overall games.
mel- totally agree on your last paragraph describing nate's game. looking forward to your updates on nate throughout the summer and his senior season.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 17:47:28 GMT -5
Post by sleepy on Apr 8, 2009 17:47:28 GMT -5
I personally am going to take it as a positive that you don't expect a future 6'8" power forward to shoot as many threes as Dajuan did.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 17:48:13 GMT -5
Post by IDenj on Apr 8, 2009 17:48:13 GMT -5
sounds like his game is improving. has he stopped growing? is he a legit 6'8"?
|
|
DudeSlade
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I got through the Esherick years. I can get through anything.
Posts: 1,209
|
10
Apr 8, 2009 17:54:26 GMT -5
Post by DudeSlade on Apr 8, 2009 17:54:26 GMT -5
The Blair comparison was my bad. When I hear of a slightly under-sized PF who plays under the rim, has sneaky explosiveness, and is tenacious and plays with passion, the first guy I think of is Blair. That's why I said I could be way off, because I've never seen him play and was asking just based on the reports. So blame me.
As far as his size though, he could definitely mature in 3 years and add 35 pounds, which is what it would take to reach Blair's size (of course, Blair looks much bigger than his listed 265, but then again he could just be shorter than his listed 6'7" and therefore look bigger). I would love to see a 4-year player like Lubick supposedly is add enough strength to reach the 250+ range when he graduates -- he'd be a beast to move around in the post at that size with the tweener forwards in college.
|
|
|
10
Apr 9, 2009 7:13:58 GMT -5
Post by harwoodhoya on Apr 9, 2009 7:13:58 GMT -5
hoopmagicsa.com is the website.
|
|
idhoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,177
|
10
Apr 9, 2009 9:25:32 GMT -5
Post by idhoya on Apr 9, 2009 9:25:32 GMT -5
hoop magic is all over the country.
|
|