2013-14 Utah Basketball Starting Lineup Note

[Hoyos Revenge]

This was something I saw Tony Jones from the Tribune. He said that Wright will likely be the PG next year and we'll use Van Dyke as a bit more of a two because he's the better shooter. With the goal being to get Loveridge to the 3, my guess is a line up that we'll see a great deal of...

1. Wright
2. Van Dyke
3. Loveridge
4 and 5 Jeremy Olsen combined with whichever of the bigs, Lenz, Bach, Kovacavic, someone else is the most serviceable.

Thoughts.

[SeattleUte]

This was something I saw Tony Jones from the Tribune. He said that Wright will likely be the PG next year and we'll use Van Dyke as a bit more of a two because he's the better shooter. With the goal being to get Loveridge to the 3, my guess is a line up that we'll see a great deal of...

1. Wright
2. Van Dyke
3. Loveridge
4 and 5 Jeremy Olsen combined with whichever of the bigs, Lenz, Bach, Kovacavic, someone else is the most serviceable.

Thoughts.

I think Taylor will start at PG next season.

[UBlender]

This was something I saw Tony Jones from the Tribune. He said that Wright will likely be the PG next year and we'll use Van Dyke as a bit more of a two because he's the better shooter. With the goal being to get Loveridge to the 3, my guess is a line up that we'll see a great deal of...

1. Wright
2. Van Dyke
3. Loveridge
4 and 5 Jeremy Olsen combined with whichever of the bigs, Lenz, Bach, Kovacavic, someone else is the most serviceable.

Thoughts.

If Loveridge is not our starting 4 next season then that guy is not on our current roster. I don't think Olsen can play the 4 full time and Lenz isn't the answer.

[SoCalPat]

I think Taylor will start at PG next season.

There are worse alternatives, but if Taylor is our backup PG next year, we're poised for a solid leap. We need some size in the backcourt, and you're basketball savvy is wide-ranging enough to know what a tall PG could do for us on both ends of the floor.

[SeattleUte]

There are worse alternatives, but if Taylor is our backup PG next year, we're poised for a solid leap. We need some size in the backcourt, and you're basketball savvy is wide-ranging enough to know what a tall PG could do for us on both ends of the floor.

Taylor with a big 2 might work. People said John Stockton was too small for the NBA. Taylore is 18 and already making an impact in the Pac 12. Yes, however, if his progress continues on the current trajectory and he's nevertheless beaten out by someone else, that will mean we're getting better. I'm just glad we finally have a real point guard. He is 100x better than Dean.

[SoCalPat]

Taylor with a big 2 might work. People said John Stockton was too small for the NBA. Taylore is 18 and already making an impact in the Pac 12. Yes, however, if his progress continues on the current trajectory and he's nevertheless beaten out by someone else, that will mean we're getting better. I'm just glad we finally have a real point guard. He is 100x better than Dean.

That's fine, but I love the idea of Taylor against back-up 2s and second units more. He can definitely hold his own against most Pac-12 starters, but his size is a liability defensively.

[U-Ute]

That's fine, but I love the idea of Taylor against back-up 2s and second units more. He can definitely hold his own against most Pac-12 starters, but his size is a liability defensively.

I wouldn't write off Taylor so fast. He brings two major positives on the offensive end (in order of importance):



He does a fantastic job of keeping the ball moving
His ability to hit the 3

[Scratch]

I'd be very surprised if Taylor isn't starting (and getting most of the minutes) at the point and Loveridge isn't starting (and getting most of the minutes) at the 4. Here's my prediction:

1. Taylor
2. Wright
3. Dotson (if he's here and healthy), if not, then Tucker
4. Loveridge
5. Olsen

[SeattleUte]

I'd be very surprised if Taylor isn't starting (and getting most of the minutes) at the point and Loveridge isn't starting (and getting most of the minutes) at the 4. Here's my prediction:

1. Taylor
2. Wright
3. Dotson (if he's here and healthy), if not, then Tucker
4. Loveridge
5. Olsen

I agree. And I predict Olsen will be a double figures scorer.

Is it true that Utah's ability to get a med redshirt for Dotson depends on beating USC?

[crazyute]

here is what i see.

PG- taylor, van dyke
SG- wright, seymour, dotson
SF- loveridge, tucker, dotson
PF- olsen, lenz
C- misha, baszynski

i think that dean see's the writing on the wall and transfers. i think dotson could as well. if dean stays he will be fighting for the back up spot at both PG and SG.

this frees up another schollie atleast. maybe we can find a diamond in the rough big?

[UtahsMrSports]

Since being given the load of the pg minutes against WSU, Taylor has averaged 9.6 points, 3.4 assists and 1.1 steals per game, with a 1.33/1 a/to ratio. Not out of this world, but for a freshman, i'll take that.

I also don't see the argument that he is a defensive liability. Yes, he is short, but from what I can see, he plays passing lanes very well. He pressures his man constantly. Its not like folks are taking him down to the low block and scoring.

To me,

Its

1. Taylor
2. Wright
3. Tucker
4. Loveridge
5. Olsen

[U-Ute]

I agree. And I predict Olsen will be a double figures scorer.

Is it true that Utah's ability to get a med redshirt for Dotson depends on beating USC?

I haven't heard this, but it could be true. IIRC, you can get it if an injury forces you to miss more than 75% of the games in a season. For 31 games (which they will be at after USC), 25% is 7.75 games. A 32nd game rounds that out to 8 games. I can imagine that he's played in 7 games, and not 8.

[SeattleUte]

I haven't heard this, but it could be true. IIRC, you can get it if an injury forces you to miss more than 75% of the games in a season. For 31 games (which they will be at after USC), 25% is 7.75 games. A 32nd game rounds that out to 8 games. I can imagine that he's played in 7 games, and not 8.

I read he's played in 10 and the maximum is 30%. The Utes have played 30 games. I guess 10/32 does it 10/31 is not close enough. But this was just in a Tribune blog. So TIFWIW.