Game Ten: Beauty and Danger
Excuse me while I overwrite…
Three types of players currently get minutes for your Gonzaga Bulldogs. Type One is the guy who works within the offense (and occaisionally, the defense), shoots when he’s open, gets his points when they come. He’s generally consistent but doesn’t do much more than is taught in a Early Basketball for Dummies (now with less peach baskets!) book. He’s obviously very skilled at the game of basketball, but he’s also obviously unable to attack the basket, to play above the rim, to take a game over. He plays completely within himself, but also without any of the athletic grace that separates basketball from the other spectator sports. Of course, he makes up basically the entire roster and is thus the reason the Zags will win far more games than they will lose this season, but won’t do much more than that. He’s vanilla, and that makes him the perfect player for a vanilla coach like Mark Few and a vanilla program like Gonzaga.
Type Two, on the other hand, can create his own shot with a series of spin moves in the post, fairly quick first steps from the wing, and a game that lives a little further above the rim than Type One can get even with a jet pack. He attacks the rim like few players we’ve seen in a Gonzaga uniform, and he does it all with a strange efficiency that makes him a wonder to watch. His movements on the court are completely controlled, almost tempered. It’s as if he’s aware of the limitations of his own athleticism, but also aware that that athleticism is pretty tough to beat when combined with his size and strength. Type Two is, of course, Elias Harris. When he’s on, Harris is the best player on the team by far, but not entirely unusual, especially in Gonzaga history. Dan Dickau, Blake Stepp, even Adam Morrison were all Type Twos. Great non-vanilla players, could win a game when it counted, but also played in a way that spoke to the limitations of the human body.
Type Three is something totally different. He plays basketball like it’s played in Space Jam by the Monstars, which is to say, completely outside the realm of human capabilities. People can’t do the things Type Three can, at least not ones who aren’t cartoon aliens. Whereas Type One plays within the offense and Type Two plays within his own athleticism, Type Three plays as if his own body were just a ball and chain keeping him from the basket. When he has the ball, his every movement on the court screams “Move out of my way!” Type Three personifies basketball, at least in my mind. He wants to score (scoring is the object, after all), but not in silly, give-me-the-ball-when-I’m-open-and-I’ll-try-my-best-to-score kind of way. No, for Type Three, jump shots are a waste of movement. Watch a Type Three player take free throws and notice how uncomfortable he looks. He looks like Tom Sawyer in his church clothes. He just wants to get to the basket and to get there now. This mindset lets him move quicker and with more purpose than anyone else on the court. His game is both beauty and danger and it is a thrill to watch. Gonzaga hasn’t had many players like him. Maybe Ronny Turiaf. At times Erroll Knight, but at least not since Jeremy Pargo. Many will (and most likely do) look at Type Three and call him an incomplete basketball player and wish he played more like Types One or Two. That would be to judge him on the same lines as Types One and Two, though, and that would be a mistake. Those other players can only dream of playing Type Three’s brand of basketball.
Of course, Type Three is Guy Landry Edi (GLE). Also of course, GLE played only one more minute (eleven) yesterday than he did the game before. In his short time on the court, though, he took six shots, including two threes and two shots that followed lightning quick drives past hapless defenders. I’ll be the first to admit that he needs to chose his shots a little better, but I’ll also say that Gonzaga basketball hasn’t been as fun as when GLE is on the court in a long time. He takes initiative, attacks the basket, and wants to kill the rim like no player since Jeremy Pargo. Him just having the ball opens things up for everyone else, and if GU is ever going to get where I think it wants to go as a program, it will need GLE in order to do so. And it sure as shit won’t get there by having him average 10.5 minutes per game
Go Zags. And free Guy Landry Edi.
December 21, 2011 at 10:25 am
I don’t get Mike Hart one bit. Not when we have Guy. As far as the eye test goes, Guy is better than Hart in every single aspect of the game. He even took more charges yesterday, I believe, which is one of the most “zag-material” things you can do and has been Hart’s calim to fame.
GLE wasn’t great last night, but I can’t argue with you that he is going to have to log some more minutes if he is going to reach his potential.
Everything I said in this comment should be totally obvious to anyone who has watched this season. Free Guy.
December 21, 2011 at 11:14 am
My guess is that it will be a cold day in hell before GLE starts over Mike Hart.
December 22, 2011 at 9:17 am
GLE is an exciting player and we are better with him in the rotation, but based on the following observations I saw from sitting 2 rows behind the Butler bench, he’s should not immediately take all the minutes away from Hart (by the way, I would be in the camp of having Hoff take some of Hart’s minutes, but that is another discussion):
1) GLE was lost offensively. At times, he was standing still and looked very confused. Other players were trying to tell him where to go and when.
2) He seems to have a desire to play defense, which is great, but his aggression is going to get him in foul trouble. Aggressive defense is one thing but fould defense is another. Against Butler he could have been called numerous times that weren’t and even when he took the charge that was debatable.
3) At this time, I think Mike Hart is a better defender, a better rebounder, and knows the offense infinitely better. This is why Hart will continue to get minutes. It is not Hart’s fault that he does these things better than GLE (and Hoff for that matter). The problem with Hart is offense, and I hate playing 4 on 5, so lets hope GLE can improve throughout the season and grab more minutes.
Slow down on the Free Guy stuff.
December 22, 2011 at 9:31 am
ESPN should dedicate an entire game to pointing a camera at GLE so we can follow his every move. Seriously though, El Cazador’s comments are noted and I’ll be watching these things a little more closely tonight.
I’m not sure I agree that Hart is better at all those things. We are only looking at 20 minutes of GLE so far, which admittedly isn’t much.
December 22, 2011 at 2:41 pm
I’m not sure I agree either. I followed GLE all game vs. Arizona and he was, to me, the player I described even then. For my money, he already does all the things Hart does to make people all gushy, but he does them better. (I’m especially confused by the rebounding comparison, as I think GLE was our second best one per minute and Hart is way overrated in that category.)
December 23, 2011 at 9:13 am
Listen. I don’t want to defend Hart’s minutes. There is no way a walk on should be getting the minutes he is. I think it says more about the alternatives and their effort, toughness, and intelligence than it does about Hart who seems to excel in all 3 of those areas. Can we agree that Few has more information than we do? Can we agree that Few wants to win every game? Can we agree that Few plays the players he thinks give him the best opportunity to win? If so, that doesn’t mean he is always right, but it is hilarious to me the gushing over a junior college transfer that was kind of a role player on his junior college team.
January 4, 2012 at 8:19 am
Like the breakdown, I might add Micah to that 3rd list, if he ever got more rope..