Maybe Atwood is down to FSU & Iowa

I don't use social media, but it is obvious that twitter, facebook, etc are important aspects in the lives of a lot of people. Taking it away is just stupid in my opinion, and I thought Coach McCaffery erred in doing so last season.
 
Atwood sees himself as a 3. Iowa looked at him more as a 4 who could swing to the 3 if needed. White was an all-conference 3 last year; Utoff is still too thin for the 4, and Fran may prefer Jok as a guard. Atwood was looked at as a 4 -- and not a guaranteed starter, because it's possible that Fran may have envisioned White at the 4, Utoff at the 3, then Atwood+Uhl off the bench as combo forwards.

He doesn't want to play the 4 -- understandably, because he's undersized for the position, and would get pushed around a bit in the physical Big Ten. He wanted to play in the PAC 12, and he wanted to go where he would be a 3. ASU.
 
Atwood sees himself as a 3. Iowa looked at him more as a 4 who could swing to the 3 if needed. White was an all-conference 3 last year; Utoff is still too thin for the 4, and Fran may prefer Jok as a guard. Atwood was looked at as a 4 -- and not a guaranteed starter, because it's possible that Fran may have envisioned White at the 4, Utoff at the 3, then Atwood+Uhl off the bench as combo forwards.

He doesn't want to play the 4 -- understandably, because he's undersized for the position, and would get pushed around a bit in the physical Big Ten. He wanted to play in the PAC 12, and he wanted to go where he would be a 3. ASU.

Atwood is 6'8". Same as White. Yet people keep saying White belongs at the 4...
 
Because White doesn't have a jump shot and has a poor handle. It's not just height.

White is a combo forward, insofar as he's too thin for the 4 and doesn't have the ball skills or shot for the 3. He can be effective at either position because of his court sense and ability to get to the line, but his limitations at the 4 are less than his limitations at the 3.
 

Latest posts

Top