[ Show ]
[ Shrink ]
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: Sunday, February 17, 01:41:30pm
Subject: Re: My case for Tim Spitler
In reply to:
's message, "My case for Tim Spitler" on Sunday, February 17, 12:49:25pm
I agree....Dunne has not blindly given Tim senior minutes because he's "earned them", but rather used Tim judiciously, for the benefit of the club.
Nice job yesterday on the road, albeit against one of the few Division One clubs ranked below us in the RPI index. Frosh guard performance was encouraging; Turner is no slouch. Noting Lampley has decreased his turnovers as the season moves on, which offers a ray of hope.
IF IF IF IF IF Dunne can get a banger to help inside next year (Conley? TBD?) it will make a huge difference in how next season shapes up. Without a replacement for Todd's rebounds/presence inside, it will be very hard to be competitive. If Conley is ready to step in (tall order) or we find someone in the spring who is (equally tall order), we can jump to mid-pack....maybe higher, depending on how our frosh play as sophs.
Getting a "5" or strong "4" ready to contribute AND having Bacon take a quantum leap forward next season is a long shot, but one I am rooting for.
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Re: My case for Tim Spitler -- jajk, Sunday, February 17, 03:17:06pm 
Cindy, you make a great case for Tim. I agree with virtually all of it. His efforts on the court and as a representative of SPC over his career can only be applauded. I hope that many will come out on senior day to show their appreciation for Tim as well as Todd and Raul.
I also agree with you about Tim's contributions this year and that his play merits at least the minutes he has gotten. Another area of agreement is our view that the glass is half full is just a more pleasant way of going through our days here. I also share your thought that while we all love the teams we root for to get as many Ws as possible,each game is an event to be enjoyed,even savored. Hell,to this day I will stop and watch kids playing three on three in a playground. I never get to as many games as you do and some of the more serious things in life you mentioned have kept me away from a few more this year. But the tv and this newfangled technology has filled in some of the gaps in seeing the Peacocks perform.
On the other hand I was wondering along with Nick about Lampley's only 15 minutes yesterday. Now this was only fro my my perspective of listening to the game and reviewing the play by play on gametracker or whatever so I would appreciate your ,or anyone else's , perspective. From my admitted limited one, it seems Darrell came into the game and was on the floor for virtually all of the 25-3 run that was one of the two keys to this much needed win. From the stats he had three three's and assisted on two other threes in this stretch.
What did he get after that,maybe two or three minutes? In that short span did he do some things so badly on the O or D ends that his play over our winning stretch was totally ignored. I know that in the second half there were points that defense was the key need and maybe at other points some size was the key,but it did seem that ,and again I'm stressing from listening it seemed like there were points when another ballhandler might have been helpful.
For those who want to say this another post by me about my 'agenda' that Lampley get more minutes to show whether he can be MAAC point guard of high caliber,given the chance, there is not much I can do about that. But I would like to get more of your or anyone else's perspective. Guess I would just finish by a comment about the (alas) heartbreaker that my RU just lost to ND. ND's point,Jackson, seems to me to be a prime example that there are all kinds of different successful points. He is not your classic point but a scoring point that will take maybe an ill-advised shot or two,turn it over maybe a time or two more than a coach would want by being too aggressive, but opens up the court and provides tremendous energy and movement for his offense. Again without criticizing any other player, I think is the opportunity that Lampley should at least have the opportunity to see if he can provide for us.
[ Edit | View ]
Re: My case for Tim Spitler -- oldtimer#!, Monday, February 18, 10:54:04am 
Jajk, just reread your post and most of it was quite accurate. However, when you said that Darrell was one of the" two keys" to victory it again shows your bias. When our assistant coach was interviewed after the game he talked about Wesley Jenkins and our guard play, especially that of Nick Leon. Anyone who listened to those comments would have intrepreted that to mean Jenkins was key, our guards were excellent but that he singled out Leon for being the other key factor.
Now reasonable people can have different points of view. Supporting an obvious player favorite is one thing but making some of the statements you make in that support often warrents a response. Darrell played well and was a positive factor in our victory but anything beyond that is hype. LOL
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: My case for Tim Spitler -- jajk, Monday, February 18, 12:35:13pm 
I did not say that Darrell was one of the two keys to winning the game, just that the the 25-3 run was one of the keys,along with the finishing of the game of which Nick Leon was a big part. As to the assistant coach's comments I will differ with you to the extent that I thought he emphasized that Leon was the absolute key to the game. It was the announcer that brought up Jenkin's contribution that the coach then concurred in. So I believe absolutely that the staff,from that interview and from their relative playing time, agree with you that Leon is their guy-at least at this stage. I just get a touch concerned that a player of Darrell's talent (again IMO) and desire to excel may just think that if the staff obviously prefers another player at the slot I want to play and he is in the same year, it may as well be at least a consideration to play somewhere else. This is purely speculation on my part and I surely hope that it is not the case. It would be a shame. And I will also stress that I don't think that this is an easy spot for Dunne as he adapts to Div 1 head coaching. He has two players close in talent with strenghts and weaknesses each and both as freshman. As I have said there are a lot of different type of point guards and it appears that the staff -again at least at this stage- have a preference for Leon. It is just one fan's opinion that I think that Lampley's upside potential is significantly higher, Hey ,maybe part of it is my bias about the type of bb I enjoy watching the most.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: My case for Tim Spitler -- oldtimer#1, Monday, February 18, 02:51:42pm 
Jajk, think you hit the nail on the head regarding our disagreement about Lampley. You like his type of game and I have extreme difficulty warming up to it. I also think that his "talent" has been grossly exaggerated. I will not go further because criticism focusing solely on Darrell is unfair when our entire team, including the coaching staff has had the type of season we have been having.
Quite frankly, while neither of us wants to even hint at or begin unsubstantiated rumors or guesses, I would say that if Darrell did choose to go elsewhere it would in no way reflect on the staff. Leon, atleast as of now, is the better overall player and I would go with that over whatever "potential" you see in Darrell. As I've pointed out, John Dunne has been very supportive of Darrell both on and off the court. There should be no legitimate bitch that he hasn't both stuck with Darrell nor given him plenty of opportunity. Basketball is a team game and no matter how much perceived talent a player has, it's wasted unless molded into the team. This, by the way, is where I applaud Darrell the most. There is no question that he is trying and somewhat succeeding in his attempt to become more of a point guard/team oriented player. He was not in the beginning.
My preference is to continue to see how each player develops. The problem is that I see both players as better than your average sub but not quite having current ingredients to be "the man" on a top level MAAC team. On the other hand, both are essentially freshmen and haven't played that bad as such. If I were John Dunne, I would feel quite comfortable that I had two pretty good players but that wouldn't stop me from looking, if the "right" player came along.
[ Edit | View ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]
Forum timezone: GMT-5|
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.