(05-15-2015 01:43 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 12:45 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

Being an afterthought behind a lottery pick is regressing?

When he got more minutes and a more defined role he excelled.

I am not blaming Bill Self for that like you are.

You are blaming Tarik for being on the same team with a lottery pick. I am not blaming bill self for anything

(05-15-2015 05:39 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  This debate could go on for about 50 more years because there is no alternate universe to know what would have happened if......


Shoot I remember when he was gonna try out for the Packers 'cuz of Aaron Rogers


I'm glad he's doing well. He always seemed like a good kid to rep Memphis.

We should stop using him as ammo. He is his own person.

The residual disgust is more about how he left, I believe, than the fact that he left. But yeah, water under the bridge, I'll drop it from here on out.

(05-15-2015 10:57 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 01:43 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 12:45 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

Being an afterthought behind a lottery pick is regressing?

When he got more minutes and a more defined role he excelled.

I am not blaming Bill Self for that like you are.

You are blaming Tarik for being on the same team with a lottery pick. I am not blaming bill self for anything

Buddy, you just said that he needed more minutes and a defined role. That only happened when Embiid got injured. Again, I'm not blaming Self like you are.

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

He was playing behind a top 5 pick. He started the season, and played decently for a player not only adjusting to a new team, but to the new defensive rules. By the end of the season, it's not a stretch to say that he was dominating in a top 3 conference. I don't need to take anyone's word on that, I watched probably 80% of Black's games that season, and I've his season stats support my claim.

(05-16-2015 07:37 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

He was playing behind a top 5 pick. He started the season, and played decently for a player not only adjusting to a new team, but to the new defensive rules. By the end of the season, it's not a stretch to say that he was dominating in a top 3 conference. I don't need to take anyone's word on that, I watched probably 80% of Black's games that season, and I've his season stats support my claim.

Why was he not a drafted based on those accomplishments? That's what I always wondered. He's Big and Bigs are at a premium and NBA doesn't call fouls the same. It seemed to me he had to make his own way in Summer League and get noticed there. The announcer was extremely high on Tarik in Summer League.

(05-16-2015 11:16 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 07:37 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

He was playing behind a top 5 pick. He started the season, and played decently for a player not only adjusting to a new team, but to the new defensive rules. By the end of the season, it's not a stretch to say that he was dominating in a top 3 conference. I don't need to take anyone's word on that, I watched probably 80% of Black's games that season, and I've his season stats support my claim.

Why was he not a drafted based on those accomplishments? That's what I always wondered. He's Big and Bigs are at a premium and NBA doesn't call fouls the same. It seemed to me he had to make his own way in Summer League and get noticed there. The announcer was extremely high on Tarik in Summer League.

He wasn't drafted because he's a 6-9 260 lb 5 man. Teams are looking for more perimeter players now. More shooters. Same reason Stokes was a 2nd rounder. Same reason Shaq Goodwin and Austin Nichols are still at Memphis.

Good point. NBA has its needs. I'm not sure I like NBA bb.

(05-16-2015 11:37 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  Good point. NBA has its needs. I'm not sure I like NBA bb.

I can't stand it. Love the Grizz but I had my fill after they suspended Zbo for game 7 last year. Haven't been to a game since.

(05-16-2015 07:37 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

He was playing behind a top 5 pick. He started the season, and played decently for a player not only adjusting to a new team, but to the new defensive rules. By the end of the season, it's not a stretch to say that he was dominating in a top 3 conference. I don't need to take anyone's word on that, I watched probably 80% of Black's games that season, and I've his season stats support my claim.

I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

Funny...I clicked on last page to see latest on Pookie and it's all about Tarik Black.......

(05-16-2015 11:16 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 07:37 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 07:14 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Black had the best season of his life at Kansas, aside from his sophomore season here. I don't agree that he regressed. As for Wilson and Barton, more minutes usually equals lower shooting % across the board. When you're being asked to handle the scoring load more, you have to take more shots than just the odd wide-open jumper and layup. There just aren't enough of those to go around. That means taking more slightly lower percentage shots.

Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

He was playing behind a top 5 pick. He started the season, and played decently for a player not only adjusting to a new team, but to the new defensive rules. By the end of the season, it's not a stretch to say that he was dominating in a top 3 conference. I don't need to take anyone's word on that, I watched probably 80% of Black's games that season, and I've his season stats support my claim.

Why was he not a drafted based on those accomplishments? That's what I always wondered. He's Big and Bigs are at a premium and NBA doesn't call fouls the same. It seemed to me he had to make his own way in Summer League and get noticed there. The announcer was extremely high on Tarik in Summer League.

Because he didn't play like a draft pick. He never really had. All I'm saying is that his senior season was almost his best (edged by his soph season), I never said he was good enough to get drafted.

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

Thats really you argument?

I say Tarik improved because in the last game he ever played for KU in an NCAA tourney game he played better than he ever did at Memphis.

Your saying if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle.

Usually when people start their sentences with if in argumentable fashion they can't admit their wrong.

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

"Ifs" are really only an effective arguing points when debating the future. When you are arguing past results with "well, if xyz had(nt) happened then abc would not have occurred" then you have probably already lost the debate. "Ifs" do not change what has already occurred...

(05-18-2015 02:47 AM)dgold38 Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

Thats really you argument?

I say Tarik improved because in the last game he ever played for KU in an NCAA tourney game he played better than he ever did at Memphis.

Your saying if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle.

Usually when people start their sentences with if in argumentable fashion they can't admit their wrong.

That makes a lot of sense. I guess you would argue that if Austin isn't injured, that Godfrey would have played 33,32 and 28 minutes the last 3 games; correct?

(05-18-2015 06:50 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

"Ifs" are really only an effective arguing points when debating the future. When you are arguing past results with "well, if xyz had(nt) happened then abc would not have occurred" then you have probably already lost the debate. "Ifs" do not change what has already occurred...

That makes a lot of sense. I guess you would argue that if Austin isn't injured, that Godfrey would have played 33,32 and 28 minutes the last 3 games; correct?

(05-18-2015 09:10 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 06:50 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 09:55 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I would rather look at the facts. He picked his spots and shot very well, and rebounded well for the minutes he played. but again, before Embiid was injured, Black was an afterthought with little to no production. He had resigned himself to that based on the fact that in his last 5 games before Embiid was injured, he was committing fouls at the rate of 1 every 3.4 minutes.

To put that into perspective, at that rate he would have fouled out after 17 minutes in every game. Embiid's injury opened the door and Black played out of his mind. You have to give him credit for that. Without Embiid's injury, Black's season would have been 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game.

He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

"Ifs" are really only an effective arguing points when debating the future. When you are arguing past results with "well, if xyz had(nt) happened then abc would not have occurred" then you have probably already lost the debate. "Ifs" do not change what has already occurred...

That makes a lot of sense. I guess you would argue that if Austin isn't injured, that Godfrey would have played 33,32 and 28 minutes the last 3 games; correct?

No, I would argue that it is irrelevant to argue "if" since we know the "if" did (not) and will not ever occur and thus does not change what actually occurred. What "if" Michael Jordan never picked up a basketball or what "if" Josh Pastner had never been hired or what "if" Black had stayed here and played the lion share of minutes at center his senior year... You can play that game all day long but it is totally irrelevant to what actually occurred and is thus a hollow argument.

So, to specifically address your question. No, if Austin stays healthy then of course Godfrey plays less minutes. But my question, is how does that change the fact that Austin did get hurt and thus Godfrey did play the minutes. You are trying to minimize Blacks end of year success by claiming it should have never occurred if not for an injury, but the injury did occur, so the "if" that could have prevented it, happened and did not prevent it. Thus, making your argument no more than a silly distraction from the reality that occurred regardless of the circumstances that lead to it. Again, your point is hollow and void of the reality that happened, which makes it rather pointless...

(05-18-2015 09:40 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 09:10 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 06:50 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 11:41 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-17-2015 10:20 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  He's always shot well. Black started the season, how was he an afterthought before Embiid's injury? Embiid came on just like everybody envisioned and took over the starting job. That was to be expected. Furthermore, that doesn't change that he played really well in the second half of the season.

He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

If we're going to focus on facts, then let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured. Nobody knows that. What we do know is that Tarik shot almost 70% from the field and had his best rebounding year of his career (efficiency wise).

Quote:He fouled like crazy here too, and that was before the defensive changes.

You think he fouled like crazy here, but he really didn't. He fouled almost twice as much at Kansas. Here he committed 1 foul every 7 minutes. At Kansas he committed a foul every 4.7 minutes. That isn't speculation. The last 5 games before Embiid was injured his role was so marginalized that he was committing fouls at an average of ever 3.4 minutes. At that rate he fouls out of every game in 17 minutes. His season rate at Kansas was 8.5 fouls per 40 minutes. In the 5 games before Embiid's injury, when his role was completely marginalized, he was fouling at a rate of 11.8 per 40 minutes. Again, none of these numbers are speculation.

Quote:let's not speculate as to what would've happened had Embiid not become injured

If Embiid isn't injured you think that he would have averaged more than 11 minutes, 4 points and 3 rebounds per game? I don't, Kansas fans don't, and there is nothing speculative about that.

If Embiid isn't injured. Black's legacy at Kansas is as a failure; end of story.

"Ifs" are really only an effective arguing points when debating the future. When you are arguing past results with "well, if xyz had(nt) happened then abc would not have occurred" then you have probably already lost the debate. "Ifs" do not change what has already occurred...

That makes a lot of sense. I guess you would argue that if Austin isn't injured, that Godfrey would have played 33,32 and 28 minutes the last 3 games; correct?

No, I would argue that it is irrelevant to argue "if" since we know the "if" did (not) and will not ever occur and thus does not change what actually occurred. What "if" Michael Jordan never picked up a basketball or what "if" Josh Pastner had never been hired or what "if" Black had stayed here and played the lion share of minutes at center his senior year... You can play that game all day long but it is totally irrelevant to what actually occurred and is thus a hollow argument.

So, to specifically address your question. No, if Austin stays healthy then of course Godfrey plays less minutes. But my question, is how does that change the fact that Austin did get hurt and thus Godfrey did play the minutes. You are trying to minimize Blacks end of year success by claiming it should have never occurred if not for an injury, but the injury did occur, so the "if" that could have prevented it, happened and did not prevent it. Thus, making your argument no more than a silly distraction from the reality that occurred regardless of the circumstances that lead to it. Again, your point is hollow and void of the reality that happened, which makes it rather pointless...

I just read the first part and ignored the rest of the nonsense. Glad you agree with me.

(05-16-2015 02:01 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 10:57 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 01:43 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 12:45 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 08:50 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Black got lucky when Embiid was injured. Before that...

27 games
11.3 minutes
4.3 points
3.1 rebounds
66.1% field goal
57.5% free throw
1 foul every 4.3 minutes

He was an afterthought, with next to no production. To put this into perspective, Niles averaged 5.2 and 5.2 for us his last season. Black also committed 5 fouls for every 21.4 minutes played. The season was a complete disaster before Embiid got injured. You don't have to take my word for it. Go onto the Kansas boards and do a search on him. The stuff Kansas fans were saying about him was 10X worse than the stuff here his last season. They sure weren't defending him like the usual bunch here was.

Give him credit for playing out of his mind after that. He shot 75.0% from the field and 66.7% from the free throw line.

Being an afterthought behind a lottery pick is regressing?

When he got more minutes and a more defined role he excelled.

I am not blaming Bill Self for that like you are.

You are blaming Tarik for being on the same team with a lottery pick. I am not blaming bill self for anything

Buddy, you just said that he needed more minutes and a defined role. That only happened when Embiid got injured. Again, I'm not blaming Self like you are.

I said he didn't regress, he just didn't get time, big difference.

You are saying he regressed because he was not playing which is clearly false. Tarik didn't get better magically when Embiid got hurt, he just got an opportunity. Regressing would imply his skills were less than they were when he was at Memphis which is not true. Black was what he was all year long.

Your argument is akin to saying Joey Dorsey became less of a player when Dwight Howard came back from injury