Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: Larry Davis -- petersfan, Sunday, April 06, 10:06:28pm [1]
Who? Any particulars? name, initials, ht, position, hs, jc etc?????
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: Larry Davis -- jajk, Sunday, April 06, 10:32:52pm [1]
pure guesses would be tf or se.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: Larry Davis -- Sludge, Sunday, April 06, 10:54:13pm [1]
Still only a commitment, as is Hall. Let's wait til the LOI's begin to arrive on the 16th. Not a name most will be familiar with anyway.
[ Edit | View ]
[>
Larry Davis leaning to Hofstra. -- Fraedo, Monday, April 07, 09:56:22am [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
Not sure you are right -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 12:04:54pm [1]
Don't think Dunne had anything to do with Davis and he was pure BG. In fact getting Davis in was part of the rift between Quinlin and BG.
Surprised none of the eternal optimists do not mention Grant from VU. Dunne actually secured his commitment to SHU under Orr but was released after Orr was fired. Dunne was the integral part with Grant.
Just because you see names out there, they have no bearing on our being in the mix. Dunne has been heard to say that he does not want a quick fix, which is why you don't hear about JCs. Only issue, is his plan a 10 year plan.
Seems our boy Sludge likes to titillate. One would like to know what his definition of a big is. If the kid is 6'4" or smaller, he better be a stud and from his phrase "not known here" it would be doubtful. My definition of big starts at 6'6" and 6'5" with a big body. Both Shumate and in particular Conley ( height and body) qualify as bigs to me. Anyone familiar with the MAAC understand that quality is generally woeful after 6'7" in the MAAC. So if I was to guess, 6'5" tp 6'7" would be the height. I have no problem waiting for the insiders to let us know, as the school last year did not even announce their LOIs in the press. It would appear Sludge has more confidence in the system then it has shown so far.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: Not sure you are right -- Sludge, Monday, April 07, 01:23:13pm [1]
It is not my purpose to go "cryptic" here as some of us have been fond of doing in the past. Promise was made to someone far more knowledgeable not to go further since this remains only a commitment until the papers are signed. Purpose here was to indicate that, at least until something is known on departures, our current offerings have been accounted for.
The conjecture now will presumably turn to who is staying. Finally, while I'm somewhat perplexed in admitting, the Moderator and I do agree on what the meaning of "big" is.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: Not sure you are right -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 01:31:09pm [1]
If you are right, our front line for next year is Bacon (no half court offensive skills), Gooding (ditto) and a freshman....to complement Costner (no offense) and Hogga (ditto) and Traore (no ditto).
Aside from scoring, unless Bacon morphs into Elvin Hayes, where will our rebounds come from?
I sure hope you are wrong.
Where do I sign up for my premium seats? :>(
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: Not sure you are right -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 02:50:01pm [1]
The new recruit must be a "3" that can score, if not a "big" player....we sure as heck don't need another guard to join Hall, Jenkins, Mumphord, Leon and Lampley.
Idea....maybe Dunne believes Conley can step right in and get significant minutes at the "5"?
Nothing else seems to make sense.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Hey, Sludge -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 03:45:03pm [1]
You are going to drive Loyal to an early grave.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Calm him down -- Sludge, Monday, April 07, 04:27:41pm [1]
After all, you're like a father to him anyway. Besides, the post was intended to "titillate" you.
You should feel good. After you see this recruiting class, at least on paper, you should be unanimous on all counts in your criticism of John.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Calm him down -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 05:15:31pm [1]
One only needs to remember that it is you who took issue with last year's class. I still think it was a decent class and the issues that Loyal put forth are less the problem than John's ability to handle what he has. As much as you like to disagree he is doing the picking and I have always liked his picks so far including this year. On paper it always has looked good. Performance another story and only one person can be looked at for that. Now if you can't work that out, you need a remedial course in analysis. Somewhere along the line accountability will be needed and your soft shoe dancing put to bed.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Calm him down -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 06:09:19pm [1]
Accountability....now there is a concept!
Peacock, per the above, don't you think our inability to score from the "3", "4" or "5"....or rebound from the "5" will be a big problem next season? Why not? I imagine teams will have no need to double down (unless bored) and our guards will have one or two hands in their face every step over the half court line.
Hope you see some way I don't out to make a respectable MAAC club from this guard heavy, front line thin (no pun intended) roster.
I don't think Bobby Knight could win in the MAAC with next years front line, as currently constituted. Really.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I do disagree -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 06:35:41pm [1]
If you look around the MAAC there are not very many dominant front lines. Our problem has been style and plays. Nobody wants to admit it, but last years team was styled to just take jump shots. The assistants constantly said as much explaining away the early defeats. I personally believe they can be made to be much more competitive than they were last season which says a different coach or style for that matter ( and I will give Dunne this opportunity also) could turn them around. I usually state the era of Bob Kelly who when fired gave virtually Dukiet the same team and gave us a 20 win season.
Now Conley is your programmed center. If he is no good we will suffer. He has body at 235 and size at 6'7" with genetics that project further growth. Dad suppose to be a 7 footer. If there is a problem with analysis it is the constant thought that you need 6'9 or better to have a good front court. In the past I complained that SPC doesn't ever get the athletic 6'5-6-7" range players. Well he has got them now so I definitely have to disagree with your conclusion. We can win with the players we have now. Hell we played the most disproportionate amount of freshman than all the teams including Canisius. The team this year and next was and is far better than a 6 win team. Only the apologist offer reason why they were not. Something needs to change and that will be the defining moment next season.
Think about how many 6'5" -6'6" players with big bodies that have dominated down low. The question on the kids we are getting for the front line will be how good they are and are concessions made to their limitations rather than molding them into styles they are not capable of handling.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I do disagree -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 06:52:23pm [1]
I understand your premise....
Well, after next season, there should be no more room for apologists...JD is "buying the groceries and cooking the meal".....and we've left Felician College on the side of the recruiting road! :>(
I do think our "1", "3" and "4" players were more limited than you state, but, as you say....we'll know a lot more after next season.
I do agree the recruiting pattern indicated Dunne believes Conley can do the job......I sure hope JD is right....I agree a very talented 6'6" inside player is plenty good in the MAAC.....but Bacon has a long way to go and Conley is bound to have a learning curve...so I don't see us having that type of player next year...do you?
Next season's prospects look slim from here, but I refuse to throw in the towel in (early) April. Reality, though, says none of our projected front line starters can shoot a ten footer, or dribble. How are we ever going to score in a half court offense?
OK, off to ponder something more fun...doing my taxes.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Don't discount Hall -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 06:55:59pm [1]
You just might get surprised. He was rated higher than Jackson of St pats.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Don't discount Hall -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 06:58:18pm [1]
I do want to believe that; I hope he is the next Jasper Walker/Tony Holm.....but can't get over his quote in the Ledger about his only other offer coming from Felician.
:>(
Hope you are right!
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You're off to an earlier start this year... -- Sludge, Monday, April 07, 07:57:17pm [1]
in overhyping the recruits. Of course, when we fail to meet expectations, only the coaching will be to blame.
Loyal is right. Who have we competed with for these commits?
Shumate - Central Conn.
Robt. Morris
New Hampshire
Conley - Wingate (D-2)
Hall - Felician (?)
4th commit - No one
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
No overhyping them, just liking them -- Peacock, Tuesday, April 08, 12:02:08am [1]
Not like you choosing to denigrate them, which I am sure you will deny next season. Your post actually gives credence to all that I have said about your position. In fact were you not the one who attempted to chide me because you thought I was blaming Dunne for poor recruiting, when all I said was if the recruits are bad, then it is the staffs fault. This did lead to your famous facilities defense. Now we have that there is no relationship between the staff and the success/failure of the recruits and we can't come to that conclusion because you feel that would not be kosher. Have you ever had a position that had a foundation.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You show further lack of understanding -- Sludge, Wednesday, April 09, 01:27:07pm [1]
Quite the contrary. Your agenda demands that you triumph the recruits and JD's efforts here if only to advance your argument that he can not transfer this "superior" talent to the playcourt.
Further once more. I did not denigrate the recruits but only to suggest that they were not as talented as some had projected.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You are the Biggest hypocrite on the board -- Peacock, Wednesday, April 09, 06:35:12pm [1]
You assign agenda at will but never acknowledge your own. Never saw a more blatant example of an agenda than your feeling than Dunne could not have done better than six games ( and 3 from Dec on) with this talented group. Glad to see your support for such lowly accomplishments.
One only needs to read what you post to understand the negative bent. I do understand that you don't have any real understanding and need to maintain what appears to be a neutral approach while spouting the reasons why these recruits are not that good. One only needs to read your post on the current crop to see through your transparent feelings. Yes the group was not upper division qulaity out of the shoot, but they also were not six win qualtiy unless you want to comment otherwise.
I just don't remember when SPC got as many NJ All Staters than he has. Strange how you love to quote questionable recruiting schools but lack understanding how that information comes out. By the way, Hall was 1st team All Group 4, and fourth team All State. And I guess liking him doesn't fit your lofty goals.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: You are the Biggest hypocrite on the board -- petersfan, Wednesday, April 09, 08:28:24pm [1]
third team all state; same as Gio Fontan
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I'll be kind and characterize your falsehoods as merely misspeak -- Sludge, Wednesday, April 09, 08:48:51pm [1]
More of the same rubbish from you. Repeat often enough and some will begin to believe, must be your mantra. Not sure sometimes why I allow for some measure of legitimacy to your absurd remarks by submitting a response. Maybe it is in the hope that you are capable of at least some absorbtion of reason(ing).
Quickly for the learning impaired.
- NEVER have I ever stated or implied the Dunne could not have done better than six games.
- NEVER have I said that out recruits were no good (assuming you were talking last year's crop). Rather, said before, during, and after the season that they were not AS GOOD as many on this board had projected.
- NEVER said this current group (as presently constituted), was not good. Said that, on paper, does not look as good as last year's class based on pedigree and from a list of the schools that we were competing against. Gave no specific mention to Hall's creditials other than to include him in a group that; I will repeat....... DOES NOT APPEAR ON PAPER TO BE AS GOOD AS LAST YEAR'S CLASS (ON PAPER).
Enjoy your world of black or white.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You are the prefect candidate for Survivor -- Peacock, Friday, April 11, 05:00:06pm [1]
You have all the traits and hidden comments of the successful there.
I have to assume than you have NEVER said anything. Why you ask? Too many weasel words typical of you and never voicing an opinion on the topic but always choosing to criticize other posts. Its OK to go after the delusional, but much of the topics on last years team was far from delusional, but more of responsibility. At no point did you ever step up on the overall coaching of the team as it applied to the performance. It was always some cerebal comment on the nature of the players.
Assume this will be done for now, but wait for some future shots that hold little to the issue at hand.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
And now that you mention -- Sludge, Saturday, April 12, 03:40:17pm [1]
Your personality bears a resembelance to a certain judge on American Idol.
Now that we have all engaged in the mastications of personal assasination, can we get back to more mundane issues such as the makeup of the squad next year, candidates for A.D., renovations to Yanitelli, etal?
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
And you don't think he knows of what he speaks -- Peacock, Saturday, April 12, 04:23:25pm [1]
Or do prefer the other two that give 85 to 100 praise.
Actually have more interest in the releases of Iona. Was wondering how they could offer as many guards as they did. Now we know.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Have no interest in any of these "performances" -- Sludge, Saturday, April 12, 07:01:01pm [1]
Whether celebrity or reality show, all are staged to take in the gullable, cathartic viewer. Might sit well with the delusionals that enjoy these mindless productions.
Williard looks like the second coming of big Jeff, only with a better brand of lipstick. You can generally count on three "defections" from the New Rochelle campus each year. Usually it's the classroom or the "rules" that help thin the herd. May have room for another, since Machuado (sp), is not expected to project.
Interesting takeaway our of P'town; seems that Brady was shopping himself from the moment he crossed the Hudson. At least Teddy waited a few year's :-)
By the way, heard a good report on Hall. Sees the floor well, pass first mentality, not a shooter or scorer, but an excellent DEFENDER. Dare I say: still waiting for our herd to trim.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Somehow I don't think you like to be entertained? -- Peacock, Sunday, April 13, 05:53:16pm [1]
must be a golf addict, which falls under the same comments you just made on the shows. A group of delusional people wasting thier lifes away just counting the occasional decent shots that make them think they are great. Might even think it is a health benifit.
By the way, what can be more mindless than watching the actions of this country and our beloved leader.
Iona has always been an outlaw school, which is why I like watching them. I like the western flicks.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You never cease to disappoint -- Sludge, Monday, April 14, 09:27:17am [1]
You simply can not avoid the invectives, the personal mischaracterizations. Must be much more satisfying for you than to have to engage in a sport that encourages social interaction among the participants. For you, solitaire might best fit your personality, allowing you to enjoy your sport without recourse.
Keep spiking with the political. Presumably, as a product of the Hudson County mob machine, you know full well how the corrupt game is played.
Unlike your game, at least in golf we occasionally do make a decent shot.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Invectives? -- Peacock, Monday, April 14, 12:31:44pm [1]
Is not "social interaction among the participants" a euphemism for Republican rich cats. More possibly a substitute for the back room of the HC mob machine. Not exactly a blue collar sport, or do the occasional wannabees count.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
All those fat cats? -- Sludge, Monday, April 14, 01:34:33pm [1]
You mean those such as the Corzine's, the Rockefeller's, and all those other guilt riden, condescending elitists that frequent such selective and off limit compounds as the one standing on Rockland Road in Wilmington?
Maybe we should look into the questionable actions of the hosts here for misdirecting all those ill gotten profits toward outrageous pensions and health benefits for their fat and unappreciative retirees.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Just out of curiosity -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 06:57:24pm [1]
Do you or anyone else really understand the instruction for AMT. If that was written for the common taxpayer, we will have a front line.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Just out of curiosity -- loyal, Monday, April 07, 06:59:47pm [1]
Nope...I spend the bucks on Turbo Tax soley for the purpose of calculating the AMT....it is a nightmare.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
There you go again........ -- Sludge, Monday, April 07, 07:32:05pm [1]
giving further misleading information about what was said. I guess in some arenas the more one repeats a falsehood the more people will begin to accept and believe it. Much like someone claiming that they were under attack and dodging enemy fire at the airport in Bosnia. Well, sometimes one is forced to look carefully, check out, and respond to such illusory accounts of what is said.
To respond succinctly and clearly to your accusation; I never took issue with the quality of last year's class relative to our circumstance or prior year's. I simply stated that I did not feel it was as good as some others had protrayed. Some, of course, is now based on actual performance (Leon, Lampley) while other comments were made at signing for individuals such as Hooga, Mumford, Costner, and Leon.
Of course, none of this fits with your agenda which seeks to place lack of performance solely on the back of "one person". Unlike you, I have taken a more balanced view, placing responsibilty for the poor result on some higher than realistic expectations for the players as well as on the coaching. Much like the politicians of today, everything is the fault of the opponent, in your case, our present coaching staff. So fixated are you on the one cause, that you could not even restrain yourself, even in circumstances where there was but no other alternative. Amusing as much as it characterizes your bias, you found John the culprit in misusing the guard play by allowing Leon to run the point while, "in everyone's eyes" (paraphrased, but meaning yours), he was not capable of performing this role. I'm still scratching my head on this one. Guess the staff must have missed your early season take on this one. Did my intolerant and feathery friend think that Lampley was the better choice or would he have had Spitler running this high-powered offense?
You indeed are the master of ex post facto statement.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Yes you did -- Peacock, Monday, April 07, 11:51:51pm [1]
You specifically challenged in order, Mumford, Costner, Lampley, and Hogga and also asked about their quality. Or did you really believe that their quality is a 6 win team. You have also implied it about Shumate. You hide under the guise of skillful writing but practice the McCarthy tactics of the 50s. You asked where their résumé’s were as if you had no knowledge of their accomplishments in HS.
I know being a skilled politician is your desire but you have been as transparent in touting the stories from within with pleasure. Your best comment was on Hogga's defense which I doubt was intimate knowledge on your part.
Are you not the same guy who wants to blame the administration for the inability to get good players. If am not mistaken you even once blamed the garage.
And finally you even again practice making statements that are not exactly on the money. You come out when simple questions were made on the performance of the staff and respond about agendas. There are no agendas, other than yours, only questions about the obvious what all see. You struck with the vengeance of a defender of the faith when simple questions were asked. The more negative comments came because of your defensive responses. The need is to wonder why that balanced approach of yours is so soft hearted on the performance of the staff. You were not balanced but completely and totally for the staff as if they hardly played a factor in the poor performance using nothing more than throw away comments as criticisms aganst them. In this you are identical to the Siena faction that defend their absurdities.
Back down all you want now, but you continue to still make an issue about talking about the defections, when in fact you have been the only one who pre-emptively initiated those thoughts. Maybe someone is going to go and that in it self casts doubts on the staff when one ties in the issues of last season. You make more trouble for the school because you bring to the surface the issues that are suspect by trying to defend them. Even your Leon Lampley comment is a great example of that issue.
Other than your self and some other great evaluator, not one has come to the defense of Leon at the point. An God Bless you, because with this comment you actually expose your inability to see what most others do. And then you defend it by saying the staff couldn't see it.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Are you the father of revisionist teaching? -- Sludge, Wednesday, April 09, 01:41:37pm [1]
Either you fail to to absorb my sarcasm or refuse to comprehend what was written.
You overstated the talent of virtually all that was brought in last year. I made my opinions known by cautioning on the qualifications of such as Costner, Leon, Hogga, and Mumford. How quickly you choose to forget. On the other hand, how else does one make his case.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
By asking -- Peacock, Wednesday, April 09, 06:39:27pm [1]
Was this team as bad as their record or a product on inept handling. Not only did they have the recruits, but two former All MAACers and a promising sophmore.
Your failure to even consider poor managment as a more than an incidental is monumental.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: Not sure you are right -- oldtimer#1, Tuesday, April 08, 06:35:30am [1]
Peacock, please don't misrepresent views different from yours. No one is defending Leon's inability to be the point guard of the future. In fact, I was the first to suggest that JD might have to recruit over both Leon and Lampley. The question asked of you previously is if you were were critical of JD starting Leon at point and rotating him occassionally with Lampley what would have been your alternate suggestion?
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
One does not mis-interpret yours -- Peacock, Wednesday, April 09, 11:07:14am [1]
From the beginning you were a Lampley detractor. I had no problem putting Leon at the point in the beginning, but by the Fairfield game it was obvious that he didn't have a chance to mature into the position due to certain talent deficiencies. Now Lampley has his flaws but are less in the talent mode for the point. Dunne did little to give Lampley to extensive time one needs he gave Leon to learn and alter his issues. If I remember correctly you blanched at that suggestion quoting the turnover to assist ratios and his shootin percentage. So it was put forth. From that point I do believe Lampley should have been given the time and not the occasionally as you said. In retrospect we would not have lost any more games and a kid with a lot of talent might have been harnessed in. However there are factions that denigrate his attitude and were down on him from the start of the season as was you. You even posted to me that Lampley had issues with many of his teammates, or did you forget, as I noted the camaraderie he showed during warm-ups of the Fairfield game. Yes the kid was classed as a hot head, but no where near the level of the abuse that came from you and some insiders. Don’t you wonder where the defection rumors come from. Irresponsible insiders.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Your accounting only tells me..... -- Sludge, Wednesday, April 09, 01:16:04pm [1]
...that you need to spend more time on the telephone.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: One does not mis-interpret yours -- oldtimer#1, Wednesday, April 09, 06:28:54pm [1]
Peacock, wrong on just about every count.
#1) Detractor is a very strong word. Don't like to use that label unless you want to be yourself labeled as a Leon detractor, a Dunne detractor and a host of others too lengthy to mention. Go back and read your postings on the above! In any event my only real objection to your opening sentence was "form the very beginning". As opposed to some, I like to watch players before commenting so I would ammend your opening sentence to read that after I saw Lampley play several times that I was not a big fan. And by the way didn't you just post that he was a "headcase". Would that qualify you as a Lampley detractor?
#2) If you want to get into analysis ( and everyone is entitled to their own opinion) I fail to understand this overfacsination with his "potential". Quickness does not equate with potential. I would respect the opinion of others who RESPECTFULLY disagree but I would contend that Darrell is a below average shooter, either does not see the floor well or is an extremely selfish player, mediocre basketball instincts and just as poor as Leon defensively. Now that's a pretty harsh evaluation. On the young man's behalf he is quick, energetic and explosive but he is not a point guard! Just to repeat some statistics in case you didn't see all his games. Only had 48 assists with 72 turnovers and a .294 shooting percentage from the three. A player who shoots too much and doesn't pass enough. I leave your "headcase" comment as yours, not mine.
#3) Leon, by the way, had 85 assists with 91 turnovers and shot .380 from the field, not to mention foul shooting. Forgetting about statistics, if you saw or listened to games throughout the entire season, there was no question who was the better player. Both had some bad games but Lampley's were much worse and Darrell's good ones were not as good as Nick's. Quite frankly both are natural #2's and if I had to choose who I would be the first sub in there I would choose Leon, better shooter, passer and foul shooter. Oh and by the way, you excuse that Lampley didn't see enough playing time is pure... Darrell played 22.6 minutes per game and Nick 26.9.
Your next excuse would be that Darrell should have seen more time at point to develop his potential - whatever you think that is. Your reasoning was that it didn't really make a difference in our won/loss record. My first question would be why didn't you post as such at the time? Other's have accused you as using hindsight as you best arguments. The problem is that IF you would have posted that at the time you would have left yourself open to the criticism of not starting our best team or best option at point in order to "develop" a player who's potential at the very least is open to question. Whatever Leon's shortcomings he was our best choice to TRY to win a game and I assume that was the Staff's goal.
#4) Just to let you know, you were not the first to mention Darrell's camaraderie with some teammates. In an exchange with jajk, I posted that Darrell and Nick seemed to be quite supportive of each other. Talking, high five's etc. Thought that should be noted since they were competing for playing time. I liked that in both of them. Doesn't mean all teammates get along but just wanted to get the record straight.
#5) As far as defections, I assume you words weren't directed at me but just to let you know I have no knowledge on that front. Others have speculated including yourself. Did you not post some apparent inside information on that over a month ago? It caught my eye because you mention two unnamed possibilities, stating that one might be academically, not coaching related.
Finally, the year is over and we all await the anticipated signing. Without seeing him play I'm sort of excited about Hall and his assist potential. Contrary to you, and I say that respectfully, IMO most three point shots (Jenkins/Leon and whoever) are generated not by running plays but by the penetration kick out assist or by high post passing. If Jenkins is to have a good year we need players who have both the mindset and ability.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Absolutely the right word -- Peacock, Wednesday, April 09, 06:57:32pm [1]
The only real thing to respond too is that Sludge was the first and only one to bring up defections to which, yes, I have responded. Now where did Sludge get this information, from someone who admits he knows nothing. So that in a nut shell sums up the total of your knowledge. As a person you have little credibility and are the revisionist that Sludge admires.
If you really understood basketball, you would be talking about the dramatic change in dynamics of next year's team rather than your total defensive analysis of Leon and Lampley.
As far as being wrong, we are looking at one of the more abysmal performances of a staff in SPC history. Why do I think this worse than Leckie's first two years? Well Bob had zero experience as a D1 coach. Dunne has the experience and your analysis fails to acknowledge his major part in the results.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: One does not mis-interpret yours -- oldtimer#1, Wednesday, April 09, 10:19:57pm [1]
Peacock, when you can't win an argument, change the subject. FYI you were the latest to bring up the Lampley/Leon situation (see all the above posts). You can knock JD for a lot of things, including the teams record, but this latest one is a stretch. All I did was to respond to the stupidity of your analysis and comments.
I also hate to burst your conspiracy theory bubble but it may interest you to know that I disagree with Sludge's posts on Lampley's future at SPC. My reasoning is simple. Where else is he going to go? Certainly not another D1 school. In fact, I think Darrell can be a decent role player at SPC. He brings some things we need to the table and I think he can contribute. And, by the way, Dunne stayed with Darrell a lot longer than other Coaches would have this year. Hope he improves next year.
With regard to next year's team I'd rather wait until I see the players in person than go by newspaper clippings, although I understand that some like that approach. Brandon Hall will be the one who interests me next year as we desperately need a point guard. For all the plays, picks and screens you bemoan the staff doesn't teach, most three point attempts in college basketball are the result of a simple penetration and kick out, from a high post passer or from rapid ball movement. If we don't get those, Wesley will be a marked man and will be forcing up a lot of contested shots.
Always fun to read your take on things no matter how far off they are.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: One does not mis-interpret yours -- SPC Dawg, Thursday, April 10, 12:42:26am [1]
You are losing it Oldtimer. Take a few weeks off.
|
Forum timezone: GMT-5 VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB: Before posting please read our privacy policy. VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems. Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved. |