(03-15-2014 09:21 AM)TigerBo Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:02 PM)ItsDude Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:44 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:25 PM)Tgrrfan Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:23 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  Kuran is gone. He was gone weeks ago.

So you're saying that he has quit the team?

You got a source?

No. I need one? I've seen enough frustration on his part and the things he's said to speculate he's not happy. My guess is he and Wilson are going to transfer. They want to play. They see seniors pouting and they get to play, while they get buried on the bench. They have talent.

Iverson has the most upside of any player on this team. He's raw but he has tremendous ability. He's not been developed.

I'd leave.

Funny....potential back court next year...Pookie, Damien, Magee, Avery Woodson, Markel, ....I would hope Iverson might think he could find some playing time amongst that group...

Personally, I don't think KI is a backcourt player anyway... He can't handle the ball, he's way too slow and can't shoot. I swear I don't know why some of you think this guy is any kind of guard or wing player. If he can't or doesn't want to play the 4 he needs to transfer.

Not sure what type of player he is. But from what we witnessed when he played, he would have gained any more minutes on any team in the top 50. He might have a lot of potential, but he has a long way to go.

(03-15-2014 09:27 AM)midtowncowboy Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 09:21 AM)TigerBo Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:02 PM)ItsDude Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:44 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:25 PM)Tgrrfan Wrote:  So you're saying that he has quit the team?

You got a source?

No. I need one? I've seen enough frustration on his part and the things he's said to speculate he's not happy. My guess is he and Wilson are going to transfer. They want to play. They see seniors pouting and they get to play, while they get buried on the bench. They have talent.

Iverson has the most upside of any player on this team. He's raw but he has tremendous ability. He's not been developed.

I'd leave.

Funny....potential back court next year...Pookie, Damien, Magee, Avery Woodson, Markel, ....I would hope Iverson might think he could find some playing time amongst that group...

Personally, I don't think KI is a backcourt player anyway... He can't handle the ball, he's way too slow and can't shoot. I swear I don't know why some of you think this guy is any kind of guard or wing player. If he can't or doesn't want to play the 4 he needs to transfer.

Not sure what type of player he is. But from what we witnessed when he played, he would have gained any more minutes on any team in the top 50. He might have a lot of potential, but he has a long way to go.

I believe Kuran is in a catch 22. He's under the mindset that he's a wing yet his skill set is more suited at the 4. He lacks the physicality to play the 4 right now and even if he gets that, he may always lack the mindset/mental toughness to want to bang down low and be effective.

(03-15-2014 09:38 AM)Tigerbluesky Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 09:27 AM)midtowncowboy Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 09:21 AM)TigerBo Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:02 PM)ItsDude Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:44 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  No. I need one? I've seen enough frustration on his part and the things he's said to speculate he's not happy. My guess is he and Wilson are going to transfer. They want to play. They see seniors pouting and they get to play, while they get buried on the bench. They have talent.

Iverson has the most upside of any player on this team. He's raw but he has tremendous ability. He's not been developed.

I'd leave.

Funny....potential back court next year...Pookie, Damien, Magee, Avery Woodson, Markel, ....I would hope Iverson might think he could find some playing time amongst that group...

Personally, I don't think KI is a backcourt player anyway... He can't handle the ball, he's way too slow and can't shoot. I swear I don't know why some of you think this guy is any kind of guard or wing player. If he can't or doesn't want to play the 4 he needs to transfer.

Not sure what type of player he is. But from what we witnessed when he played, he would have gained any more minutes on any team in the top 50. He might have a lot of potential, but he has a long way to go.

I believe Kuran is in a catch 22. He has the mindset that he's a wing yet his skill set is more suited at the 4. He lacks the physicality to play the 4 right now and even if he gets that, he may always lack the mindset/mental toughness to want to bang down low and be effective.

Sean Banks

(03-14-2014 11:00 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:54 PM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:46 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  I don't see it that way at all.

Rotations shorten at the end of the season for every good team.

I don't buy the notion that any player should get playing time to "build confidence." You earn playing time by contributing.

I agree, but it is hard to contribute by just being a cheerleader on the pine. Maybe it is different in the practices. But these newbies need some floor time, and they didn't get any at the beginning of the season while CJP was trying to figure out how to play all of the "senior talent".

Nichols and King are "newbies" and got plenty of run. They contributed, played hard, played within the flow of the offense and hustled on D.

Yeah...they got time because Nichols and King weren't going to steal minutes from the seniors.

(03-14-2014 08:25 PM)jgardne Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:23 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  Kuran is gone. He was gone weeks ago.

If true, who could blame him. Highly recruited freshman and Pastner just buried him early in the year so we could make sure all the seniors got their minutes to try to audition for the NBA.

How'd that work out for everyone?

Wait. Did you ever watch Kuran play? Wasn't one time he was on the floor that he was a net positive for this team.

You have to let players work through there problems, it is part of the development process. JP was forced to play Nichols extended minutes and he has started blossoming. King has gotten better and better with more minutes. As a coach, you have to find ways to steal 4 or 5 minutes a half to let young guys get some run and develop, or extended minutes against bad teams. Part of our problem this year was the fact that we did not blow out teams that we should have and thus we had to keep starters in for far longer than we should have had to.

(03-14-2014 10:54 PM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 10:46 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  I don't see it that way at all.

Rotations shorten at the end of the season for every good team.

I don't buy the notion that any player should get playing time to "build confidence." You earn playing time by contributing.

I agree, but it is hard to contribute by just being a cheerleader on the pine. Maybe it is different in the practices. But these newbies need some floor time, and they didn't get any at the beginning of the season while CJP was trying to figure out how to play all of the "senior talent".

21.5% of our minutes have been played by Freshman. 1380 minutes so far. It's not like we aren't playing freshmen a good chunk of time.

See your point would make more sense if any of our freshmen played point or shooting guard at all. But none of them do. They are all 3's, 4's, or 5's. 40% of our minutes are straight away not going to be played by freshmen. Take that 40% away and almost a third of available floor time goes to freshmen.

To me, that is pretty good.

Facts are a stubborn thing.

Nichols accounts for most of the freshman time played. Which is great, because he is by far the best recruit Josh has had so far. I am concerned for next year, since the starting PG (who ever it may be) will have little or no experience at this level.

If Josh has recruited some tougher players, and they are able to play against UConn and Cincy next year, without the team getting blown out, then I think we will have improved.

Those 2 teams, along with SMU, will probably be at the top tier of the conference. I expect the Tigers to be in the middle, unless some defensive miracle happens and everyone clicks.

What's really amazing is all the HYPE that was given to him. Some said he was the "BEST" player on our team and should be playing to create mismatches against the other teams. All the lies that were applied in the name of posting. I had my ass handed to me on several occasions, because I question the sanity of the statements made about him. The eye test was the best test and I said it on a couple occasions. The Blue Kool-Aid was passed around on this player and I didn't know what I was talking about A few months later, some of those same ones are now questioning his ability. You know who you are and maybe sometimes it's best to let people see things as they are, instead of the BS! That way, they won't expect so much and you won't look like you don't know so much. It's not K. Iverson fault, potential will only ride so far before you're expected to produce and He Is What He Is

(03-15-2014 09:45 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:25 PM)jgardne Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:23 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  Kuran is gone. He was gone weeks ago.

If true, who could blame him. Highly recruited freshman and Pastner just buried him early in the year so we could make sure all the seniors got their minutes to try to audition for the NBA.

How'd that work out for everyone?

Wait. Did you ever watch Kuran play? Wasn't one time he was on the floor that he was a net positive for this team.

Well to be fair he really didn't play enough to make a difference either way. I guess he proved he wasn't a point guard during garbage time, but that was about it.

(03-14-2014 10:03 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 09:44 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:25 PM)jgardne Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 08:23 PM)Chi-TownTiger Wrote:  Kuran is gone. He was gone weeks ago.

If true, who could blame him. Highly recruited freshman and Pastner just buried him early in the year so we could make sure all the seniors got their minutes to try to audition for the NBA.

How'd that work out for everyone?

I just can't see it this way.

He had chances.

To my recollection, nearly every time he'd go in, we'd give up a bucket or a run, or he'd put up an ill-advised shot.

His talent is immense and undeniable. But it would be hard for anyone to say he was "ready for prime time" this season, with a straight face, based on his performance in the games.

Again, lots of talent, lots of gifts, lots of potential. But he was not ready THIS season to help a high-level team.

If we're willing to let seniors go one on three fast breaks, launch ridiculous three pointers with 25 seconds on the shot clock, not play defense, then why should a kid with more talent than all of them not get a chance to develop?

Sorry but I think we screwed the pooch on this one. This kid has way too much talent to be made an example of. Bad examples have been set.

When you have a team that quit like they did last night, the best example you could have set was to sit the starters and let the kids play their guts out.

Iverson may have a stupid basketball IQ at this part of his development(coaches are responsible for that too), but he looked like he was trying when he was in there. If you want to set an example to the entire team then let the kids who play their guts out play. Especially on a team that seems to play when they feel like it.

Agree completely. You have to play talented freshmen and let them make some mistakes to figure it out. Our seniors certainly made their share of boneheaded plays and poor effort outings this year. Iverson doesn't have to play 25 minutes a game, but he should be able to get 8 minutes/game in 2 4 minute bursts

(03-15-2014 09:45 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  You have to let players work through there problems, it is part of the development process. JP was forced to play Nichols extended minutes and he has started blossoming. King has gotten better and better with more minutes. As a coach, you have to find ways to steal 4 or 5 minutes a half to let young guys get some run and develop, or extended minutes against bad teams. Part of our problem this year was the fact that we did not blow out teams that we should have and thus we had to keep starters in for far longer than we should have had to.

+1

(03-15-2014 10:07 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Nichols accounts for most of the freshman time played. Which is great, because he is by far the best recruit Josh has had so far. I am concerned for next year, since the starting PG (who ever it may be) will have little or no experience at this level.

If Josh has recruited some tougher players, and they are able to play against UConn and Cincy next year, without the team getting blown out, then I think we will have improved.

Those 2 teams, along with SMU, will probably be at the top tier of the conference. I expect the Tigers to be in the middle, unless some defensive miracle happens and everyone clicks.

Nick King's Min% is 27.3. (353 out of 1290min)
Kuran's is 13.1%. (169 out of 1290 min)
Dominic's is 10.5%. (136 out of 1290 min)

As I said earlier, none of those players or Austin are playing the 1 or the 2. So the only minutes are at the 3, 4, or 5. Would you play Kuran or Dominic over Shaq? Would you play them consistently over Pellom(especially before he got hurt early in the season)?

I don't see what the complaint is. There are only so many minutes on the court. Perhaps Nick King could've played more at the 3 based on his performance on the court. But neither Dom or Kuran showed they could be trusted on the court for long stretches of time in comparison to Shaq, Austin, or Pellom.

I know a popular thing is to trash players. You know, especially players with a lot of hype.
The truth is, Iverson has far more natural ability than anyone on the Tiger roster(save maybe Nichols-but I still think he does).
His lack of playing time is not due to getting "lost" on the floor as so many say. "Doesn't know what he's doing"- this is said a lot too.
There just seems a disconnect between him and Josh somewhere. We've played plenty of games in which Josh could have played Iverson at the 3. He didn't have to shoot.
I guarantee(though of course can't prove) that most coaches would have found time for Iverson.
Seriously, we're a 9 loss team, so get over your elitist selves. We've had 4 year seniors-and others- that have played worse than Iverson could possibly have. AND in a large % of our games.
We're not even close to being as good as we and Josh thought we were. He should have been playing Iverson since January. And, really, he should have been giving him more minutes in Nov. and Dec. too.
Now, we(for a minute more anyway) have a guy with serious pro potential that was handled rather shabbily.
Yes, I'm starting to lose my Josh love.
I like a lot of what he does; but I'm over the sickeningly sweet, rah-rah goody 2 shoes crap.
I want to see Josh get tough. And, yes, that means much tougher than anything anyone has exampled as him being a tough guy.
I want to see him lose it-and not just privately in his office with someone.
Even when he was "held back" from going after the refs once or twice, he looked like nothing more than a nerd that got tired of getting his lunch money taken away.
It was laughable.
Get a mohawk. Get a nose ring. Buy a gold grill. Get mean. Get tough.
Stop this namby pamby crap.

(03-15-2014 10:58 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 10:07 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Nichols accounts for most of the freshman time played. Which is great, because he is by far the best recruit Josh has had so far. I am concerned for next year, since the starting PG (who ever it may be) will have little or no experience at this level.

If Josh has recruited some tougher players, and they are able to play against UConn and Cincy next year, without the team getting blown out, then I think we will have improved.

Those 2 teams, along with SMU, will probably be at the top tier of the conference. I expect the Tigers to be in the middle, unless some defensive miracle happens and everyone clicks.

Nick King's Min% is 27.3. (353 out of 1290min)
Kuran's is 13.1%. (169 out of 1290 min)
Dominic's is 10.5%. (136 out of 1290 min)

As I said earlier, none of those players or Austin are playing the 1 or the 2. So the only minutes are at the 3, 4, or 5. Would you play Kuran or Dominic over Shaq? Would you play them consistently over Pellom(especially before he got hurt early in the season)?

I don't see what the complaint is. There are only so many minutes on the court. Perhaps Nick King could've played more at the 3 based on his performance on the court. But neither Dom or Kuran showed they could be trusted on the court for long stretches of time in comparison to Shaq, Austin, or Pellom.

I would have let him run point with the other starters. Then, I would have him guarding the small primary ball handlers. I would've made him be all over them-even he was playing 3, he'd be on the point guard.

(03-15-2014 10:58 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 10:07 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Nichols accounts for most of the freshman time played. Which is great, because he is by far the best recruit Josh has had so far. I am concerned for next year, since the starting PG (who ever it may be) will have little or no experience at this level.

If Josh has recruited some tougher players, and they are able to play against UConn and Cincy next year, without the team getting blown out, then I think we will have improved.

Those 2 teams, along with SMU, will probably be at the top tier of the conference. I expect the Tigers to be in the middle, unless some defensive miracle happens and everyone clicks.

Nick King's Min% is 27.3. (353 out of 1290min)
Kuran's is 13.1%. (169 out of 1290 min)
Dominic's is 10.5%. (136 out of 1290 min)

As I said earlier, none of those players or Austin are playing the 1 or the 2. So the only minutes are at the 3, 4, or 5. Would you play Kuran or Dominic over Shaq? Would you play them consistently over Pellom(especially before he got hurt early in the season)?

I don't see what the complaint is. There are only so many minutes on the court. Perhaps Nick King could've played more at the 3 based on his performance on the court. But neither Dom or Kuran showed they could be trusted on the court for long stretches of time in comparison to Shaq, Austin, or Pellom.

I could see Nick, Iverson and/or Wilson playing the 3 with some play at the 4 when we went small. Of course I'm not a big fan of Pellom, especially a hobbled Pellom. Of course it's too late for that now. We are what we are at this point.

TBF, no one could've played worse than Iverson.

40% from the Field
38% from the line
11% from 3.

The only players with a lower PER are McDowell and Draper.

The only players with a lower eFG% are Draper, Cole, and McDowell.

He has the highest TO% on the team.....by far.

He has an 81.0 offensive rating(3rd lowest on the team ahead of McDowell and Draper). Compare that to Pellom(123.4), Dixon(119), King(113), Nichols(113), Shaq(111), Crawford(106), Geron(98), Dominic(90).

His Win Share per 40 minutes is next to last on the team.


Iverson has been an utter train wreck on the court.

Pastner was just giving him playing time to appease him because he didn't really have a clue when he got on the court. Be interesting to see if he plays in the tourney. If not, the writing may be on the wall.

Atta boy .Get 'em! You post those stats like they belong to a player that actually played. Like they matter. Sic 'em boy!
Good show.

Atta boy. Get 'em! You post those stats like they belong to a player that actually played. Like they matter. Sic 'em boy!
Good show.