we are in trouble if we are talking about putting a small forward at the power forward spot again...

we aren't in cusa anymore.

(04-12-2013 12:55 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  we are in trouble if we are talking about putting a small forward at the power forward spot again...

we aren't in cusa anymore.

I agree but would think playing SG & AN at the same time would be planned based upon who we are playing & their productivity. But Iverson could influence that decision and so could SG (in the opposite way) if he doesn't come in ready with some work behind him this summer. And Iverson may well like the idea of playing a PF position if it gets him more PT & can be effective. Spoon never showed he could make the adjustment, especially on defense but I don't think KI & Spoon are cut out of the same mold.

It's interesting about some players, if they can get more PT they begin to show more varied skills.

(04-12-2013 12:55 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  we are in trouble if we are talking about putting a small forward at the power forward spot again...

we aren't in cusa anymore.

Didn't Marquette pretty much play a 4 out, 1 in all season in the Big East this year?

(04-15-2013 10:06 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 12:55 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  we are in trouble if we are talking about putting a small forward at the power forward spot again...

we aren't in cusa anymore.

Didn't Marquette pretty much play a 4 out, 1 in all season in the Big East this year?

Have you seen Marquette's team? They could play football.

(04-12-2013 07:45 AM)ybbodeus Wrote:  I wish Cotton were a monkey.

I use that quote from "the Little Rascals" and people look at me like ive grown a 3rd eye. Glad to see it used!

(04-15-2013 11:09 AM)Reekinhavoc Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 07:45 AM)ybbodeus Wrote:  I wish Cotton were a monkey.

I use that quote from "the Little Rascals" and people look at me like ive grown a 3rd eye. Glad to see it used!

Do you remember yum yum eat em up, the cannibal? or the expanding, exploding cake?

(04-15-2013 11:00 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(04-15-2013 10:06 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 12:55 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  we are in trouble if we are talking about putting a small forward at the power forward spot again...

we aren't in cusa anymore.

Didn't Marquette pretty much play a 4 out, 1 in all season in the Big East this year?

Have you seen Marquette's team? They could play football.

...and that is the difference.

6-11 275 and 6'8 290 is some beef.

Someone say beef?

The original post is now updated reflecting the pending transfer of Antonio Barton.

The Tigers will now have lost 43.1% of the scoring and 51.5% of the rebouning from the 2012-13 team due to graduation, transfers and leaving early for the NBA Draft.

Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

(04-17-2013 05:27 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:27 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

(04-17-2013 05:45 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:27 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

Agreed, it's not like that 43% scoring and 52% rebounding got us very far.. Bring in the new scorers and rebounders..we will all miss dj for sure. Most of the The rest scored and rebounded only by default. Anybody with a pulse can score and rebound by default.

We be ballin'.

(04-17-2013 06:33 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:45 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:27 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

Agreed, it's not like that 43% scoring and 52% rebounding got us very far.. Bring in the new scorers and rebounders..we will all miss dj for sure. Most of the The rest scored and rebounded only by default. Anybody with a pulse can score and rebound by default.

Got us very far? We had a very good season last year. Next year will not be easy. I've said it in a few other threads, but I would not at all be surprised if we were better this past year than next year.

There is just way too much variability at this point to predict how good we will be next year. We could be better, or we could be significantly worse. In fact, the likelihood of us being worse is probably a little higher than the likelihood of us being better (especially if you were to base this on final record, given our new conference).

Also, people quickly forget that, without Black, we lose the St. Mary's game.

Sometimes it's not the numbers, but the bad habits that need replacing.

So, some of this may be addition by subtraction.

However, by his senior year, you would hope that Chris Crawford won't leave his feet to throw an ill-advised crosscourt pass and when it gets picked off hang his head and jog slowly down the court.

(04-18-2013 08:51 AM)MtownTigers916 Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 06:33 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:45 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:27 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  Call me an optimist, but I can't wait to see 45% of our scoring and 53% or our rebounding replaced with eager, first year scholarship players. Net gain? I have no idea. But let's move on to next year's opportunity and collective percentage. I have a suspicion that those numbers and percentages might well be better replaced.

I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

Agreed, it's not like that 43% scoring and 52% rebounding got us very far.. Bring in the new scorers and rebounders..we will all miss dj for sure. Most of the The rest scored and rebounded only by default. Anybody with a pulse can score and rebound by default.

Got us very far? We had a very good season last year. Next year will not be easy. I've said it in a few other threads, but I would not at all be surprised if we were better this past year than next year.

There is just way too much variability at this point to predict how good we will be next year. We could be better, or we could be significantly worse. In fact, the likelihood of us being worse is probably a little higher than the likelihood of us being better (especially if you were to base this on final record, given our new conference).

Also, people quickly forget that, without Black, we lose the St. Mary's game.

With Black we didn't make the second weekend of the tournament, which also makes it not a "very" good season. Just to reiterate bring in the new rebounders and scorers. Worst case scenario is status quo and half a decade since playing in the second weekend.

(04-18-2013 08:20 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-18-2013 08:51 AM)MtownTigers916 Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 06:33 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:45 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

Agreed, it's not like that 43% scoring and 52% rebounding got us very far.. Bring in the new scorers and rebounders..we will all miss dj for sure. Most of the The rest scored and rebounded only by default. Anybody with a pulse can score and rebound by default.

Got us very far? We had a very good season last year. Next year will not be easy. I've said it in a few other threads, but I would not at all be surprised if we were better this past year than next year.

There is just way too much variability at this point to predict how good we will be next year. We could be better, or we could be significantly worse. In fact, the likelihood of us being worse is probably a little higher than the likelihood of us being better (especially if you were to base this on final record, given our new conference).

Also, people quickly forget that, without Black, we lose the St. Mary's game.

With Black we didn't make the second weekend of the tournament, which also makes it not a "very" good season. Just to reiterate bring in the new rebounders and scorers. Worst case scenario is status quo and half a decade since playing in the second weekend.

It wasn’t Black’s fault the team shot 29% in that game. Shoot like that and you’re not going to win against anyone especially a top team. As for the new rebounders & scorers they have yet to play a single second of D1 ball.

If the past is any indication they will not progress at the same speed, so I will wait and see. Cal had the #2 class and couldn’t get past the first round of the NIT. I hope we'll do much better than that.

(04-18-2013 08:20 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-18-2013 08:51 AM)MtownTigers916 Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 06:33 PM)hopeum Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:45 PM)QuitoTiger Wrote:  

(04-17-2013 05:36 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I expect Joe, Chris and Geron to all increase their averages as well.

Absolutely! I'm admittedly prejudiced, but with all those returning, I some how see C.C. having a season to mark all seasons. I hope J.J., Geron, Shaq and company have an exceptional year, but I've had C.C. with a high roof/potential from the get go.

All that logorrhea aside, JMS, your stats and input remain to be a drawing card, compass, and magnet for any intelligent comment regarding the Tigers' program. Not patronizing, I simply appreciate your work.

Agreed, it's not like that 43% scoring and 52% rebounding got us very far.. Bring in the new scorers and rebounders..we will all miss dj for sure. Most of the The rest scored and rebounded only by default. Anybody with a pulse can score and rebound by default.

Got us very far? We had a very good season last year. Next year will not be easy. I've said it in a few other threads, but I would not at all be surprised if we were better this past year than next year.

There is just way too much variability at this point to predict how good we will be next year. We could be better, or we could be significantly worse. In fact, the likelihood of us being worse is probably a little higher than the likelihood of us being better (especially if you were to base this on final record, given our new conference).

Also, people quickly forget that, without Black, we lose the St. Mary's game.

With Black we didn't make the second weekend of the tournament, which also makes it not a "very" good season. Just to reiterate bring in the new rebounders and scorers. Worst case scenario is status quo and half a decade since playing in the second weekend.

That's your opinion, to which you are entitled. I disagree with it completely and am glad that my view of athletics is enough that 31-5 is 'Very' Good in my world; 1-1 in the NCAA is 'Very' Good in my world; Having the #3 recruiting class in the nation is 'Very' Good in your world. By your standards, anything in someone's life less than CEO of a major company or at the top of one's field must represent extreme disappointment. You have a complete right to that world view, I simply do not share it. For me, happiness is easier to come by.

(04-18-2013 10:31 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  Sometimes it's not the numbers, but the bad habits that need replacing.

So, some of this may be addition by subtraction.

However, by his senior year, you would hope that Chris Crawford won't leave his feet to throw an ill-advised crosscourt pass and when it gets picked off hang his head and jog slowly down the court.

IMO, you can look at Crawford and get a good snapshot of the good and the bad of the program.

Crawford worked hard at the end of the season, and notwithstanding the NCAA tournament; had a phenomenal end to the season. On one hand, it was obvious to the naked eye, that he was working a lot harder, and his decision making and performance were very good. On the other hand, when it came down to crunch time in the tournament, you could see that he wasn't able to keep up with the intensity level and is a 1/4 step slower than an elite 2 guard.

I don't know if he can possibly work any harder, nor am I confident that he can be trusted to give it everything he has in every game. I just don't think it's in his DNA. I do think that he improved quite a bit in all phases and I do think that Pastner is getting as much as he possibly can out of him.