I am actually encouraged. I was sick last night and fell asleep at half time. Watched the whole game again tonight.

1. Pookie is going to be really good. He can shoot the ball, he's quick, he finds open guys. He will have some rough spots, but he can play. He's not as quick as JJ, but he is a better shooter with a quicker stroke.
2. Trahson can ball. He can score, he shoots the ball well from 3, but can slash as well.
3. Hawkins showed some signs, he knocked down a nice mid range jumper and a 3. He can contribute.
4. Usually, Austin is going to be the best big man on the floor, the more often he touches the ball, the better.
5. Woodson looks like a reliable 3 point shooter. He was fantastic in the first half and probably saved the game.

A few negatives:
1. Nick King made some plays, but he is starting to look like a 6'6" PF. In order to be a really good player, he needs to develop a perimeter game that he evidently either does not have or has not shown.
2. Shaq shows very little in the low post, his scoring opportunities almost always are from offensive rebounds.
3. Kuran. He has skills, u can see them, he doesn't seem to know how to use them. I was encouraged against UNCCentral, he made some bonehead defensive plays, but I thought he played within himself on offense for the most part. He got very little time against SC Upstate, but I'm sure it's fluid. He has big time potential, Josh needs to find a way to bring it out.

Overall, I'm a little encouraged by the progress, especially with Pookie. Frankly, the conference is going to be really terrible, so the record might be decent at the end of the year, but that probably won't result in a tournament bid unless we win the Conference Tournament.

Good observations, and I agree with most of them. King is finding his niche. He's tried a few 3s, I think he's hit a couple (might have been last season, I can't remember), but he's VERY good at rebounding so I don't mind him hanging around the basket. He has made some acrobatic shots from that area, picks up fouls, he'll be fine. Maybe developing a dependable baseline jumper would help his repertoire. But overall I like his game and hustle--except on defense. He loses his man too much on defense. Still needs work there.

Hawkins is an athletic junkyard dog. He could be our equalizer against big bodies if he was satisfied with that role, but he likes to shoot. Sometimes he makes them, sometimes he doesn't. Not consistent enough to be a go-to scorer, but lots of potential.

Godfrey... I dunno. I was hoping he'd come in and be another David Pellom, but that isn't happening. He'll be good for a few spell minutes here and there. And until Johnson gets into better physical shape and gets faster, he's not going to be the Michael Dixon I hoped he'd emulate. He does add a bit of maturity to the floor when he's out there.

I agree with the rest of your evaluation. I don't believe our RPI and SOS is going to be enough to get us an invite after the season, so we'll pretty much have to win the tournament to get in. But I think we can do it. If everything keeps clicking like it seems to be clicking after the last two games, we'll look MUCH better come February and March. And the conference seems wide open this year. Anybody could win it.

(12-18-2014 11:57 PM)NigelTufnel Wrote:  I am actually encouraged. I was sick last night and fell asleep at half time. Watched the whole game again tonight.

1. Pookie is going to be really good. He can shoot the ball, he's quick, he finds open guys. He will have some rough spots, but he can play. He's not as quick as JJ, but he is a better shooter with a quicker stroke.
2. Trahson can ball. He can score, he shoots the ball well from 3, but can slash as well.
3. Hawkins showed some signs, he knocked down a nice mid range jumper and a 3. He can contribute.
4. Usually, Austin is going to be the best big man on the floor, the more often he touches the ball, the better.
5. Woodson looks like a reliable 3 point shooter. He was fantastic in the first half and probably saved the game.

A few negatives:
1. Nick King made some plays, but he is starting to look like a 6'6" PF. In order to be a really good player, he needs to develop a perimeter game that he evidently either does not have or has not shown.
2. Shaq shows very little in the low post, his scoring opportunities almost always are from offensive rebounds.
3. Kuran. He has skills, u can see them, he doesn't seem to know how to use them. I was encouraged against UNCCentral, he made some bonehead defensive plays, but I thought he played within himself on offense for the most part. He got very little time against SC Upstate, but I'm sure it's fluid. He has big time potential, Josh needs to find a way to bring it out.

Overall, I'm a little encouraged by the progress, especially with Pookie. Frankly, the conference is going to be really terrible, so the record might be decent at the end of the year, but that probably won't result in a tournament bid unless we win the Conference Tournament.

1. Pookie also has insane range.
2. Agree
3. Last year Was Kuran's first year with any kind of structure. He has improved a lot and should continue to

It's still brand new for a lot of the players. The players are looking more comfortable running Pastner's offense. They are moving a lot more and getting much better looks.

Nichols still needs more nasty in him..can turn from good to great with that. Yes, if he develops that, he can be the type that dominates a game, as he has streaks of that already.

Better effort and play out of Shaq will help with that.

(12-19-2014 12:15 AM)Hoopla Wrote:  Good observations, and I agree with most of them. King is finding his niche. He's tried a few 3s, I think he's hit a couple (might have been last season, I can't remember), but he's VERY good at rebounding so I don't mind him hanging around the basket. He has made some acrobatic shots from that area, picks up fouls, he'll be fine. Maybe developing a dependable baseline jumper would help his repertoire. But overall I like his game and hustle--except on defense. He loses his man too much on defense. Still needs work there.

Hawkins is an athletic junkyard dog. He could be our equalizer against big bodies if he was satisfied with that role, but he likes to shoot. Sometimes he makes them, sometimes he doesn't. Not consistent enough to be a go-to scorer, but lots of potential.

Godfrey... I dunno. I was hoping he'd come in and be another David Pellom, but that isn't happening. He'll be good for a few spell minutes here and there. And until Johnson gets into better physical shape and gets faster, he's not going to be the Michael Dixon I hoped he'd emulate. He does add a bit of maturity to the floor when he's out there.

I agree with the rest of your evaluation. I don't believe our RPI and SOS is going to be enough to get us an invite after the season, so we'll pretty much have to win the tournament to get in. But I think we can do it. If everything keeps clicking like it seems to be clicking after the last two games, we'll look MUCH better come February and March. And the conference seems wide open this year. Anybody could win it.

(12-19-2014 10:34 AM)Willie Becton Wrote:  

(12-19-2014 12:15 AM)Hoopla Wrote:  Good observations, and I agree with most of them. King is finding his niche. He's tried a few 3s, I think he's hit a couple (might have been last season, I can't remember), but he's VERY good at rebounding so I don't mind him hanging around the basket. He has made some acrobatic shots from that area, picks up fouls, he'll be fine. Maybe developing a dependable baseline jumper would help his repertoire. But overall I like his game and hustle--except on defense. He loses his man too much on defense. Still needs work there.

Hawkins is an athletic junkyard dog. He could be our equalizer against big bodies if he was satisfied with that role, but he likes to shoot. Sometimes he makes them, sometimes he doesn't. Not consistent enough to be a go-to scorer, but lots of potential.

Godfrey... I dunno. I was hoping he'd come in and be another David Pellom, but that isn't happening. He'll be good for a few spell minutes here and there. And until Johnson gets into better physical shape and gets faster, he's not going to be the Michael Dixon I hoped he'd emulate. He does add a bit of maturity to the floor when he's out there.

I agree with the rest of your evaluation. I don't believe our RPI and SOS is going to be enough to get us an invite after the season, so we'll pretty much have to win the tournament to get in. But I think we can do it. If everything keeps clicking like it seems to be clicking after the last two games, we'll look MUCH better come February and March. And the conference seems wide open this year. Anybody could win it.

Thanks for fixing my post.

(12-18-2014 11:57 PM)NigelTufnel Wrote:  I am actually encouraged. I was sick last night and fell asleep at half time. Watched the whole game again tonight.

1. Pookie is going to be really good. He can shoot the ball, he's quick, he finds open guys. He will have some rough spots, but he can play. He's not as quick as JJ, but he is a better shooter with a quicker stroke.
2. Trahson can ball. He can score, he shoots the ball well from 3, but can slash as well.
3. Hawkins showed some signs, he knocked down a nice mid range jumper and a 3. He can contribute.
4. Usually, Austin is going to be the best big man on the floor, the more often he touches the ball, the better.
5. Woodson looks like a reliable 3 point shooter. He was fantastic in the first half and probably saved the game.

A few negatives:
1. Nick King made some plays, but he is starting to look like a 6'6" PF. In order to be a really good player, he needs to develop a perimeter game that he evidently either does not have or has not shown.
2. Shaq shows very little in the low post, his scoring opportunities almost always are from offensive rebounds.
3. Kuran. He has skills, u can see them, he doesn't seem to know how to use them. I was encouraged against UNCCentral, he made some bonehead defensive plays, but I thought he played within himself on offense for the most part. He got very little time against SC Upstate, but I'm sure it's fluid. He has big time potential, Josh needs to find a way to bring it out.

Overall, I'm a little encouraged by the progress, especially with Pookie. Frankly, the conference is going to be really terrible, so the record might be decent at the end of the year, but that probably won't result in a tournament bid unless we win the Conference Tournament.

Just watched the game. I just had a chance to watch the replay, and I agree with a lot of this.

1. Pookie. I tried to tell you guys.

2. Trahson. Really Barton-esque as many people have been saying. I'm a big fan of Nick King, but I have to admit that Burrell needs to be getting the lion's share of the minutes at the 3.

3. Hawkins. Played well, but still a man without a position like Nick King.

4. Austin. Has progressed more than any other Tiger under Pastner in one year, save Will Barton. His game looks so much better this year, especially on defense.

5. Woodson. Makes so much difference on offense when he is hitting shots. It seems to be contagious as well. This is a positive but also a negative as I see it.

The only negative I don't agree with is Shaq. Although he doesn't have post moves on offense, I don't think he needs them. Shaq and Austin are in a majority of the game together, and we can only dump it to one of them at a time on the low block. We need one that can score with his back to the basket and one to pursue rebounds and put backs. Despite some small lapses to the contrary, Shaq is playing with physicality on both ends of the court. He's rebounding and getting to the foul line (and making them!). A perfect compliment to Austin's finesse game. If I have any criticism of his game so far it's the turnovers; he leads the team.

(12-19-2014 11:31 AM)Hoopla Wrote:  

(12-19-2014 10:34 AM)Willie Becton Wrote:  

(12-19-2014 12:15 AM)Hoopla Wrote:  Good observations, and I agree with most of them. King is finding his niche. He's tried a few 3s, I think he's hit a couple (might have been last season, I can't remember), but he's VERY good at rebounding so I don't mind him hanging around the basket. He has made some acrobatic shots from that area, picks up fouls, he'll be fine. Maybe developing a dependable baseline jumper would help his repertoire. But overall I like his game and hustle--except on defense. He loses his man too much on defense. Still needs work there.

Hawkins is an athletic junkyard dog. He could be our equalizer against big bodies if he was satisfied with that role, but he likes to shoot. Sometimes he makes them, sometimes he doesn't. Not consistent enough to be a go-to scorer, but lots of potential.

Godfrey... I dunno. I was hoping he'd come in and be another David Pellom, but that isn't happening. He'll be good for a few spell minutes here and there. And until Johnson gets into better physical shape and gets faster, he's not going to be the Michael Dixon I hoped he'd emulate. He does add a bit of maturity to the floor when he's out there.

I agree with the rest of your evaluation. I don't believe our RPI and SOS is going to be enough to get us an invite after the season, so we'll pretty much have to win the tournament to get in. But I think we can do it. If everything keeps clicking like it seems to be clicking after the last two games, we'll look MUCH better come February and March. And the conference seems wide open this year. Anybody could win it.

Thanks for fixing my post.

haha

I believe it and cannot WAIT for it!!!!!

A second look at a game with the minute to minute emotion removed usually does look a lot different. Good observations. I'm not sold yet but I've got my fingers crossed that the team can still turn out to be good.....

(12-19-2014 11:46 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(12-18-2014 11:57 PM)NigelTufnel Wrote:  I am actually encouraged. I was sick last night and fell asleep at half time. Watched the whole game again tonight.

1. Pookie is going to be really good. He can shoot the ball, he's quick, he finds open guys. He will have some rough spots, but he can play. He's not as quick as JJ, but he is a better shooter with a quicker stroke.
2. Trahson can ball. He can score, he shoots the ball well from 3, but can slash as well.
3. Hawkins showed some signs, he knocked down a nice mid range jumper and a 3. He can contribute.
4. Usually, Austin is going to be the best big man on the floor, the more often he touches the ball, the better.
5. Woodson looks like a reliable 3 point shooter. He was fantastic in the first half and probably saved the game.

A few negatives:
1. Nick King made some plays, but he is starting to look like a 6'6" PF. In order to be a really good player, he needs to develop a perimeter game that he evidently either does not have or has not shown.
2. Shaq shows very little in the low post, his scoring opportunities almost always are from offensive rebounds.
3. Kuran. He has skills, u can see them, he doesn't seem to know how to use them. I was encouraged against UNCCentral, he made some bonehead defensive plays, but I thought he played within himself on offense for the most part. He got very little time against SC Upstate, but I'm sure it's fluid. He has big time potential, Josh needs to find a way to bring it out.

Overall, I'm a little encouraged by the progress, especially with Pookie. Frankly, the conference is going to be really terrible, so the record might be decent at the end of the year, but that probably won't result in a tournament bid unless we win the Conference Tournament.

Just watched the game. I just had a chance to watch the replay, and I agree with a lot of this.

1. Pookie. I tried to tell you guys.

2. Trahson. Really Barton-esque as many people have been saying. I'm a big fan of Nick King, but I have to admit that Burrell needs to be getting the lion's share of the minutes at the 3.

3. Hawkins. Played well, but still a man without a position like Nick King.

4. Austin. Has progressed more than any other Tiger under Pastner in one year, save Will Barton. His game looks so much better this year, especially on defense.

5. Woodson. Makes so much difference on offense when he is hitting shots. It seems to be contagious as well. This is a positive but also a negative as I see it.

The only negative I don't agree with is Shaq. Although he doesn't have post moves on offense, I don't think he needs them. Shaq and Austin are in a majority of the game together, and we can only dump it to one of them at a time on the low block. We need one that can score with his back to the basket and one to pursue rebounds and put backs. Despite some small lapses to the contrary, Shaq is playing with physicality on both ends of the court. He's rebounding and getting to the foul line (and making them!). A perfect compliment to Austin's finesse game. If I have any criticism of his game so far it's the turnovers; he leads the team.

Shaq does so much better in the high post with Austin down low than visa versa. He needs to hit a few shots from the free throw line or throw in a three like last year.