(05-05-2021 11:04 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: FWIW, Saluki missed big time with his projected algorithm of Parks' stats. At the time, he pegged him as well under a top 100 frosh.
Actually, I had Parks at 4 and 3 (which is about what one should expect from a 100-125 frosh big)...essentially 50% of his JUCO #'s.
He outperformed them (8 and 5) mostly due to the fact that this was the worst Memphis team this century.
The next season, under Penny, his minutes declined as Penny went to smaller lineups and he went for 5 and 3 for an NIT team.
So, had I said..."If Parks is playing 20 minutes a game then this team is in trouble..." would have been a true statement.
Quote:He outperformed them (8 and 5) mostly due to the fact that this was the worst Memphis team this century.
You keep admitting that your argument makes no sense, and then keep arguing that it does.
How can you say this with a straight face and then turn around and say that Sam would play the same 3 minutes per game if he was playing behind Wise, Massie, Barron and Barclay? According to you, Shaq would be expected to average 6 and 4 on THIS team just because that is some weird number you plug in with him as a freshman. Your one size fits all makes no sense at all.
Interesting that in that thread, you projected that the Juco players would produce less points comparatively to the lower ranked freshman. Now you are swearing up and down that Jucos rated in the 300's should expect to perform just as well as freshmen in the 70's, just because they are older.
You predicted 6 and 4 for Shaq. He had to split minutes with Black who was a junior. He would get 12 and 8 on this team competing against Dandridge. Sam would play 3 minutes for the 2002 team. Competing against only Dandridge, he will get many more minutes unless he is really bad. The bizarre statement about Jucos ranked in the 300's takes the cake.
None what you are saying makes any sense.
No sh!t Sherlock.
He was a fugging McDonald's All American and a top 30 player, not a 100+ project who hasn't played competitive ball since 2019-20.
But get this...even as a top 30 All American who played 20+ minutes a game, Shaq only went for 7 and 4.
But somehow this dude's gonna roll in, play 20 and do 6 and 4.
Cool.
And for the last time...NONE of this has anything to do with JUCOs.
(05-05-2021 11:04 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: FWIW, Saluki missed big time with his projected algorithm of Parks' stats. At the time, he pegged him as well under a top 100 frosh.
Actually, I had Parks at 4 and 3 (which is about what one should expect from a 100-125 frosh big)...essentially 50% of his JUCO #'s.
He outperformed them (8 and 5) mostly due to the fact that this was the worst Memphis team this century.
The next season, under Penny, his minutes declined as Penny went to smaller lineups and he went for 5 and 3 for an NIT team.
So, had I said..."If Parks is playing 20 minutes a game then this team is in trouble..." would have been a true statement.
Quote:He outperformed them (8 and 5) mostly due to the fact that this was the worst Memphis team this century.
You keep admitting that your argument makes no sense, and then keep arguing that it does.
How can you say this with a straight face and then turn around and say that Sam would play the same 3 minutes per game if he was playing behind Wise, Massie, Barron and Barclay? According to you, Shaq would be expected to average 6 and 4 on THIS team just because that is some weird number you plug in with him as a freshman. Your one size fits all makes no sense at all.
Interesting that in that thread, you projected that the Juco players would produce less points comparatively to the lower ranked freshman. Now you are swearing up and down that Jucos rated in the 300's should expect to perform just as well as freshmen in the 70's, just because they are older.
You predicted 6 and 4 for Shaq. He had to split minutes with Black who was a junior. He would get 12 and 8 on this team competing against Dandridge. Sam would play 3 minutes for the 2002 team. Competing against only Dandridge, he will get many more minutes unless he is really bad. The bizarre statement about Jucos ranked in the 300's takes the cake.
None what you are saying makes any sense.
No sh!t Sherlock.
He was a fugging McDonald's All American and a top 30 player, not a 100+ project who hasn't played competitive ball since 2019-20.
But get this...even as a top 30 All American who played 20+ minutes a game, Shaq only went for 7 and 4.
But somehow this dude's gonna roll in, play 20 and do 6 and 4.
Cool.
And for the last time...NONE of this has anything to do with JUCOs.
None.
Of course it does, you are doubling down on nonsense. If your weird claim made any sense, teams would be recruiting Jucos in the 100-300's because according to you, they produce better than high school seniors.
But I don't mind playing along...
Here is a list of freshmen that have done it the last 3 years. I only went up to 200, and didn't check on players that didn't play for the team that originally signed them. I'm sure I missed a few, and I didn't even include all those who didn't do 4 and 4, but whose numbers added up to more than 8 total.
Sanogo - UConn
Hugley - Pitt
Kalkbrenner - Creighton
Kopriva - FSU
Mitchell - UMass
Akok - UConn
Disu - Vandy
Eason - Cincinnati
Mennenga - Davidson
Key - Ohio State
Alexander Moncrieffe - Oklahoma State
Bradford - Kansas State
Walker - Colorado
Coles - Butler
Murphy - Kansas State
Freemantle - Xavier
Wahab - Georgetown
Gordon - St. Louis
Norris - Oregon
Culver - West Virginia
Bates - NC State
Burns - UT
Chaney - Arkansas
Williams - Purdue
Likekele - Oklahoma State
There were roughly 90 recruits that qualified, with around 30 not making it to campus, redshirting or only playing a few games because of injury. So there is literally nothing to what you are saying that adds up in any way.
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2021 03:44 PM by Stammers.)
(05-05-2021 11:04 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: FWIW, Saluki missed big time with his projected algorithm of Parks' stats. At the time, he pegged him as well under a top 100 frosh.
Actually, I had Parks at 4 and 3 (which is about what one should expect from a 100-125 frosh big)...essentially 50% of his JUCO #'s.
He outperformed them (8 and 5) mostly due to the fact that this was the worst Memphis team this century.
The next season, under Penny, his minutes declined as Penny went to smaller lineups and he went for 5 and 3 for an NIT team.
So, had I said..."If Parks is playing 20 minutes a game then this team is in trouble..." would have been a true statement.
The team wasn't terrible because Parks was playing 20 minutes a game.
The team was terrible because Brewton, Parks, Jimario, Jamal Johnson and Thorton were playing 20 minutes a game. And even with that the team went 21-13.
Keep Parks and replace the other four with Lester, Deandre, Timberlake and Nolley...That is a tourney team even with Parks playing 20 minutes. Hell that is a preferred seed with Martin at the point.
Surely you cant disagree with that.
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2021 09:44 AM by macgar32.)
(05-03-2021 10:41 AM)salukiblue Wrote: Cisse was really good for a frosh.
Then take into account:
He reclassed from a small school to college.
He only turned 18 last June.
Because of Covid, he didn't get a full summer practicing and working out with other Tigers.
Cisse showed a lot of improvement as the season went on. His hands were always of issue, but so much of that seemed to be issues with pass location (too low) or trying to weave in bullets at a short distance. Guys like Nolley had little rapport with Cisse in terms of have a feel for lob vs. regular pass, etc.
Ideally that would have been remedied over the summer with the opportunity for those guys to play more and know where guys go to spots were.
Very much like Brady and Coxie 2018 vs. 2019. They didn't really have a great connection then the summer of 2019 they worked together on unspoken signals, knowing where to expect passes and where to best get the ball.
Cisse never played AAU or elementary school ball and didn’t even hold a basketball until he was in middle school.
(05-03-2021 10:06 AM)salukiblue Wrote: One was ranked top 10 in his class, one outside the top 100.
Please don't let this thread be a new "stupid expectations from empty posters."
You've been here for almost 17 years and you expect differently?
They're all superstars and headed for the NBA.
Dude logged 4:01 vs. a division II team, playing 8 more seconds than walkon Tadarius Jacobs.
But yeah, he was going to be good for 20 minutes a game.
SMH.
I think I said 8-10 minutes, and I think most of us were there - rather than 20 minutes.
He did look lost yesterday.
But you gotta admit that Duren & Bates are game changers, when it comes to last May's minutes projections.
(05-03-2021 10:06 AM)salukiblue Wrote: One was ranked top 10 in his class, one outside the top 100.
Please don't let this thread be a new "stupid expectations from empty posters."
You've been here for almost 17 years and you expect differently?
They're all superstars and headed for the NBA.
Dude logged 4:01 vs. a division II team, playing 8 more seconds than walkon Tadarius Jacobs.
But yeah, he was going to be good for 20 minutes a game.
SMH.
I think I said 8-10 minutes, and I think most of us were there - rather than 20 minutes.
He did look lost yesterday. But you gotta admit that Duren & Bates are game changers, when it comes to last May's minutes projections.
100%
However, it's pretty telling that he's literally coming in the same time as the two walkons.
Sad to say, believing alone does not make it happen unless, of course, it's fairies. When Tinkerbell was dying, she got saved that way ....and it was good stuff
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2021 01:39 PM by snowtiger.)
/
I believe in Sam Onu
