(09-10-2016 12:43 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Been pretty quiet.
Aren't the coaches allowed some work out time now until Memphis Madness?

Will their even be a madness event???

there have been workouts, reports are pretty good from people who have actually seen them, the people that have seen nothing are the ones complaining...

(09-10-2016 09:19 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 12:43 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Been pretty quiet.
Aren't the coaches allowed some work out time now until Memphis Madness?

Will their even be a madness event???

there have been workouts, reports are pretty good from people who have actually seen them, the people that have seen nothing are the ones complaining...

Link?

(09-09-2016 11:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 12:01 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 11:49 AM)BuccTiger Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 09:36 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 09:26 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  I know it is difficult for some, but use a little logic:

IF Tubby did not care and IF Tubby was looking to just collect a paycheck or get his son a job, he would have stayed at Texas Tech, he was already there, they loved him, they offered him a million dollars per year raise to stay and he could have gone off into the sunset doing very little and collected a paycheck and been appreciated there ..

Instead he came here to compete for a national championship. He may be old and he may not get it done here but to say he does not care or that he came here for the paycheck is lazy and ignorant.

Why don't you use a little logic:

WTH has he done from April 12th until now to add to a roster that had four top 100 players (including a 1st team all conference player) to make them ready to challenge for a conference title. Oh, yeah, with FIVE available scholarships.

I'll wait...

There is a difference between can't and not caring.

Recruiting is sales, Pastner is a salesman, Tubby not so much. Pastner would make a fortune in insurance.

Sales is telling a person what they want to hear. Tubby is selling to 17 year olds, what do you think he is telling them? What is Pastner?

I would bet Tubby doesn't tell them what they want to hear. That would be my guess as to why he's never been a good recruiter.

Well, then the million dollar staff he brought with him should have done more than flip their own 2*, grab a Coppin State grad transfer, and wheel in a guy who has been injured for four years--and leave four scholarships on the table.

Hell, they could have logged in to this board, followed Hoopdreams posts, and gone from there.

Please, if ANYONE can write with a straight face that this staff's recruiting has been even AVERAGE, please explain why or how.

This recruiting has not been average - for either Memphis or for Tubby. If the recruiting is this way next year or the next - we got a problem. But it's actually better than average for a coach's first year at a new school.

Strong candidate for worst post of 2016.

(09-10-2016 01:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-09-2016 11:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 12:01 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 11:49 AM)BuccTiger Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 09:36 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Why don't you use a little logic:

WTH has he done from April 12th until now to add to a roster that had four top 100 players (including a 1st team all conference player) to make them ready to challenge for a conference title. Oh, yeah, with FIVE available scholarships.

I'll wait...

There is a difference between can't and not caring.

Recruiting is sales, Pastner is a salesman, Tubby not so much. Pastner would make a fortune in insurance.

Sales is telling a person what they want to hear. Tubby is selling to 17 year olds, what do you think he is telling them? What is Pastner?

I would bet Tubby doesn't tell them what they want to hear. That would be my guess as to why he's never been a good recruiter.

Well, then the million dollar staff he brought with him should have done more than flip their own 2*, grab a Coppin State grad transfer, and wheel in a guy who has been injured for four years--and leave four scholarships on the table.

Hell, they could have logged in to this board, followed Hoopdreams posts, and gone from there.

Please, if ANYONE can write with a straight face that this staff's recruiting has been even AVERAGE, please explain why or how.

This recruiting has not been average - for either Memphis or for Tubby. If the recruiting is this way next year or the next - we got a problem. But it's actually better than average for a coach's first year at a new school.

Strong candidate for worst post of 2016.

He's had a bunch of nominees lol

(09-10-2016 09:19 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 12:43 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Been pretty quiet.
Aren't the coaches allowed some work out time now until Memphis Madness?

Will their even be a madness event???

there have been workouts, reports are pretty good from people who have actually seen them, the people that have seen nothing are the ones complaining...

Ah, like that folks that would report that Modibo was looking strong at the Finch and would be a double-double guy or that Pellom was killing it in Bluff City and might take PT away from Austin or Shaq. Or that DBHooper made em all in practice.

Gotcha.

(09-10-2016 01:36 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 09:19 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 12:43 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Been pretty quiet.
Aren't the coaches allowed some work out time now until Memphis Madness?

Will their even be a madness event???

there have been workouts, reports are pretty good from people who have actually seen them, the people that have seen nothing are the ones complaining...

Ah, like that folks that would report that Modibo was looking strong at the Finch and would be a double-double guy or that Pellom was killing it in Bluff City and might take PT away from Austin or Shaq. Or that DBHooper made em all in practice.

Gotcha.

Then there was Stan "Olajuwon" Simpson

(09-10-2016 01:44 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:36 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 09:19 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 12:43 AM)dfwtxtiger Wrote:  Been pretty quiet.
Aren't the coaches allowed some work out time now until Memphis Madness?

Will their even be a madness event???

there have been workouts, reports are pretty good from people who have actually seen them, the people that have seen nothing are the ones complaining...

Ah, like that folks that would report that Modibo was looking strong at the Finch and would be a double-double guy or that Pellom was killing it in Bluff City and might take PT away from Austin or Shaq. Or that DBHooper made em all in practice.

Gotcha.

Then there was Stan "Olajuwon" Simpson

Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

Don't forget the unguardable drew Barton.

(09-10-2016 01:49 PM)holyterror Wrote:  Don't forget the unguardable drew Barton.

DBHooper

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Oh my

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

P.S.

After you "stat it up" let us all know what you find. Since, you know, you like statistical analysis.

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

Dayum

(09-10-2016 03:12 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

Dayum

Saloogied

ehh..so whut. People change--or they don't.
I've seen both happen with my own eyeballs.

I'm ready to see what Tubby can do and cannot do for us!

eff the rest of you turds. said with love ! lol

Ok that was too harsh. The rest of you turds* can wallow in whatevah. lol
still said with love!

(09-10-2016 02:27 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

P.S.

After you "stat it up" let us all know what you find. Since, you know, you like statistical analysis.

So, that's what you mean when you say things like "every statistical guideline?" LOL, still not sure what that phrase even means!

Tell you what -- before I waste any time on your methodology, why don't you validate it by posting the last three years' worth of predictions that it's made for players in those same spots and the ensuing correlation coefficient so we'll all know how much confidence to put in your statistical "guidelines?" OK?

I mean, I'm sure you've hit on the most accurate scoring and rebounding predictor -- what number a particular rating service ranks a kid -- rather than a bunch of irrelevant stuff like whether he starts or doesn't see the floor for the team that signs him, whether he plays point guard or center, what he's done previously -- you know, drivel like that. But I'd still like to see the numbers, so again, why don't you post them?

(09-10-2016 05:19 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:27 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

P.S.

After you "stat it up" let us all know what you find. Since, you know, you like statistical analysis.

So, that's what you mean when you say things like "every statistical guideline?" LOL, still not sure what that phrase even means!

Tell you what -- before I waste any time on your methodology, why don't you validate it by posting the last three years' worth of predictions that it's made for players in those same spots and the ensuing correlation coefficient so we'll all know how much confidence to put in your statistical "guidelines?" OK?

I mean, I'm sure you've hit on the most accurate scoring and rebounding predictor -- what number a particular rating service ranks a kid -- rather than a bunch of irrelevant stuff like whether he starts or doesn't see the floor for the team that signs him, whether he plays point guard or center, what he's done previously -- you know, drivel like that. But I'd still like to see the numbers, so again, why don't you post them?

So that's a lot of words without saying anything worthwhile.

(09-10-2016 05:19 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:27 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:47 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Apparently Jonah Jordan (?) is saying Clergeot is gonna be an immediate impact player. That will be cool, but every statistical guideline would indicate he would project to be a 4 and 2 type player for a regular team.

I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

P.S.

After you "stat it up" let us all know what you find. Since, you know, you like statistical analysis.

So, that's what you mean when you say things like "every statistical guideline?" LOL, still not sure what that phrase even means!

Tell you what -- before I waste any time on your methodology, why don't you validate it by posting the last three years' worth of predictions that it's made for players in those same spots and the ensuing correlation coefficient so we'll all know how much confidence to put in your statistical "guidelines?" OK?

I mean, I'm sure you've hit on the most accurate scoring and rebounding predictor -- what number a particular rating service ranks a kid -- rather than a bunch of irrelevant stuff like whether he starts or doesn't see the floor for the team that signs him, whether he plays point guard or center, what he's done previously -- you know, drivel like that. But I'd still like to see the numbers, so again, why don't you post them?

Does the term "glutton for punishment" mean anything to you?

(09-11-2016 08:13 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 05:19 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:27 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 02:26 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-10-2016 01:57 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  I like statistical analysis. Why don't you post your calculations. I'm sure they're quite robust. How many turnovers will he have -- statistically speaking?

Well, since you like it, you can do it yourself.

I'll help you with the process:

Find Clergeot's recruiting ranking.

Then go to the previous three years of recruiting rankings and look at the frosh averages of all the guys five spots above and below that ranking.

Take the median number and that will give you an idea of what to expect from Clergeot.

And don't think this is some anti-Tubby thing. I had to help a Temple fan with this a few years ago and, of course, I was correct in my assessment.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-627812-post-920...pid9200920

P.S.

After you "stat it up" let us all know what you find. Since, you know, you like statistical analysis.

So, that's what you mean when you say things like "every statistical guideline?" LOL, still not sure what that phrase even means!

Tell you what -- before I waste any time on your methodology, why don't you validate it by posting the last three years' worth of predictions that it's made for players in those same spots and the ensuing correlation coefficient so we'll all know how much confidence to put in your statistical "guidelines?" OK?

I mean, I'm sure you've hit on the most accurate scoring and rebounding predictor -- what number a particular rating service ranks a kid -- rather than a bunch of irrelevant stuff like whether he starts or doesn't see the floor for the team that signs him, whether he plays point guard or center, what he's done previously -- you know, drivel like that. But I'd still like to see the numbers, so again, why don't you post them?

Does the term "glutton for punishment" mean anything to you?

Yea! Your 43,608 posts and reply's.