(03-14-2022 08:28 AM)Hernando Hills Tiger Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 10:35 PM)former guest Wrote:  Well, just to perpetuate the narrative, Parrish is sitting in on the CBS Sports channel March Madness 3-hour extravaganza. As they were discussing the West region, he mentioned that Memphis has been the #2 ranked team in winning percentage (or something to that effect...) "since Emoni Bates hasn't been playing for them." How's that for crapping on the kid? Was it really necessary???

From a "journalism" angle it's exactly what is necessary. Guy the other day mentioned the "Emoni Bates experiment didn't work."

Yes we need more debate from people who never played on a team. Makes sense.

It's lazy. National journalists who haven't paid attention to us--fine. But Calkins and Parrish--just plain lazy.

Parrish especially never discusses what make the lesser pieces of a team a greater whole; never seeks to discover what makes an Izzo team great (even though he hangs out with him). He limits his analysis to KenPom rankings and recruiting rankings. His analysis of the Tigers this year has been slightly more in-depth railing on Alex Lomax and complaining about rotations; however, he's given no greater insight into what makes a great PG and Alex's limitations beyond what is apparent to any of us watching.

A journalist should be able to provide insight into things that we don't already know. Otherwise, their just writing words, trying to fill the space of the required 400; or trying to fill out 2 hours of a radio show with empty space.

It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

(03-16-2022 11:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

You are asserting that as if it's the truth, when that is simply opinion without any way to back it up.

Bates' main problem is that he isn't physically ready to play against men. What caused him problems was his inability to play through any contact. That's not a knock on him, he tried really hard and it seemed like his mind was willing, it's just that his body wasn't able.

Unless he put on 20 pounds of muscle in two months and learned how to use it, he would still face the same issues. Getting pushed around, getting swallowed on picks, having the ball D'Bo'd from him in close contact.

The kid has all the talent in the world, he just needs to say his prayers and eat his vitamins.

(03-16-2022 11:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

No doubt, but would we be playing on Thursday?

(03-16-2022 10:12 AM)micman Wrote:  Parrish especially never discusses what make the lesser pieces of a team a greater whole; never seeks to discover what makes an Izzo team great (even though he hangs out with him). He limits his analysis to KenPom rankings and recruiting rankings. His analysis of the Tigers this year has been slightly more in-depth railing on Alex Lomax and complaining about rotations; however, he's given no greater insight into what makes a great PG and Alex's limitations beyond what is apparent to any of us watching.

You mean they don't teach point guard analysis in journalism school?

I am shocked.

Bates was carrying a big ole back-pack onto the bus. Somebody help that man. He got a bad back. Aint you know?!

In the Portland presser--Penny refused to rule out Bates--kept saying that he didn't know--we will see.

(03-16-2022 01:53 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  In the Portland presser--Penny refused to rule out Bates--kept saying that he didn't know--we will see.

Landers is “iffy” for tomorrow. He might need to get a few minutes out of Bates.

Nolley is iffy?

Dayum

Bates could contribute but such a different animal from practice. Every dribble is magnified especially if game stays close or potatoes get a lead

(03-16-2022 02:46 PM)Mimi Wrote:  Nolley is iffy?

Dayum

Bates could contribute but such a different animal from practice. Every dribble is magnified especially if game stays close or potatoes get a lead

Media at practice said Nolley was held out of today’s practice & is wearing a knee brace. Bates practiced with the team.

I’d be okay if he takes Dandridge’s minutes.

(03-16-2022 02:56 PM)BandwagonJumper Wrote:  I’d be okay if he takes Dandridge’s minutes.

At backup center?

He got pushed around by 6'2 210 lb guards...how's he gonna bow up on a 6'7 250 dude?

(03-16-2022 02:56 PM)BandwagonJumper Wrote:  I’d be okay if he takes Dandridge’s minutes.

Either way, they both are turnover machines!

Honestly, it would be the most Penny thing ever for the Tigers to have rolled thru a 12-3 stretch without Bates and he plays him during the NCAAs. Bates jacks up some stupid shots featuring a couple of airballs, plays no D, turns it over 5 or 6 times leading to Boise layups, and we lose by 18.

Maybe we even get lucky during a crucial stretch of the game and have a lineup of Alo, Penny Jr, Dandridge, Bates, and Tyler on the court together.

(03-16-2022 09:19 AM)passat25 Wrote:  Bates has handled all of this situation like a class act.. regardless if he stays or leaves.

I agree 100% , and really hopes he stays with the team . He always seems like he's enjoying celebrating with his teammates .

If he took Harris' and some of Nolley's minutes in the Houston game, it wouldnt have hurt my feelings any at all.

(03-16-2022 03:33 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 02:56 PM)BandwagonJumper Wrote:  I’d be okay if he takes Dandridge’s minutes.

At backup center?

positionless basketball

(03-16-2022 11:12 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

You are asserting that as if it's the truth, when that is simply opinion without any way to back it up.

Bates' main problem is that he isn't physically ready to play against men. What caused him problems was his inability to play through any contact. That's not a knock on him, he tried really hard and it seemed like his mind was willing, it's just that his body wasn't able.

Unless he put on 20 pounds of muscle in two months and learned how to use it, he would still face the same issues. Getting pushed around, getting swallowed on picks, having the ball D'Bo'd from him in close contact.

The kid has all the talent in the world, he just needs to say his prayers and eat his vitamins.

Only thing that could have improved greatly in Bates game would be his shooting percentages and shot selection. 6'9 with a reliable mid-range jumper off the dribble should be deadly in college

He is still going to get bumped off his line on the drive...
Still going to be horrible defensively...

(03-16-2022 07:35 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:12 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

You are asserting that as if it's the truth, when that is simply opinion without any way to back it up.

Bates' main problem is that he isn't physically ready to play against men. What caused him problems was his inability to play through any contact. That's not a knock on him, he tried really hard and it seemed like his mind was willing, it's just that his body wasn't able.

Unless he put on 20 pounds of muscle in two months and learned how to use it, he would still face the same issues. Getting pushed around, getting swallowed on picks, having the ball D'Bo'd from him in close contact.

The kid has all the talent in the world, he just needs to say his prayers and eat his vitamins.

Only thing that could have improved greatly in Bates game would be his shooting percentages and shot selection. 6'9 with a reliable mid-range jumper off the dribble should be deadly in college

He is still going to get bumped off his line on the drive...
Still going to be horrible defensively...

Such hate for an 18 year old. I'm sure you have weaknesses yourself. Tell them to us with the same tone you use for an 18 year old.

(03-16-2022 11:12 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  It's not lazy...it's the truth.

Bates just wasn't ready for D1 ball. He wasn't strong enough to get past contact, he had trouble with defenders stripping the ball, he was pretty poor defensively, and wasn't a high percentage shooter yet he took the highest percentage of shots. After the first few games, teams started getting game tape on him and adjusted accordingly.

His last 13 games...he shot 34% from the field (26.9% from three) and had a 1:2 assist to turnover ratio. He had the lowest PER on the team and the lowest true shooting percentage. Yet he had the highest usage %. He was the only player with a negative box score +/-.

Perhaps....there is a way to incorporate him in certain situations, but it's to the point where the team is playing well and re-inserting Bates means someone else (Harris, Les, Landers) loses minutes.

If Bates was playing, he would be much better than he was earlier in the season.

You are asserting that as if it's the truth, when that is simply opinion without any way to back it up.

Its a rather obvious truth 99% of the time.

Were all his weakness going to be fixed? Of course not but if he had been able to play 30 games he would be a lot better at this point of the season.

Its not wild speculation to say that, its just a logical and obvious conclusion based on reality.