blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,753
|
Post by blueandgray on Mar 23, 2014 11:28:43 GMT -5
I am honestly happy for Vee...great kid....but if he couldn't except his role here then he didn't belong here. Vee is a good ball player ...but may have never been a starter at Georgetown. He certainly would have a solid contributor and someone we could have used, but let's not pretend that the kid is a game changer. In the end, he found a good home and happy for him....just funny how the trolls start lurking as soon as the kid has a couple good games.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,007
|
Post by dense on Mar 23, 2014 11:29:24 GMT -5
Mano y mano, Clark was not a better player than Vee; Clark was a better PERSON for the Hoyas than Vee at the time - or, at least JTIII saw it that way. Also, why not play a 3 guard lineup? if you've got 3 good guards? Or at least more minutes. Maybe i wouldn't say this if JTIII didn't consistently do this with players such as Hayes and Domingo. Talent is on the bench. What!!!!!!! Lol this is absurd
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 23, 2014 11:33:02 GMT -5
Remember, dense, same dude who claimed Bowen would go for 23 ppg. Consider the source.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,769
|
Post by njhoya78 on Mar 23, 2014 11:39:24 GMT -5
Mano y mano, Clark was not a better player than Vee; Clark was a better PERSON for the Hoyas than Vee at the time - or, at least JTIII saw it that way. Also, why not play a 3 guard lineup? if you've got 3 good guards? Or at least more minutes. Maybe i wouldn't say this if JTIII didn't consistently do this with players such as Hayes and Domingo. Talent is on the bench. Looking at the numbers, Sanford's percentages are, in some cases, better than Clark's for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons (the only two seasons they played together). Clark's minutes played decreased from 2009-10 (1137) to 2010-11 (1077), while Sanford's minutes played increased from 2009-10 (130) to 2010-11 (178); essentially, the drop in Clark's minutes are almost equivalent to the increase in Sanford's minutes. I don' think that the difference in percentages are meaningful, though, in that Clark played over 1000 more minutes in 2009-10 and almost 900 more minutes in 2010-11. You cannot extrapolate that Sanford's numbers would consistently remain constant with significantly more playing time. The sample size is too small. The Hoyas were 23-10 in 2009-10 and 23-11 in 2010-11. Yes, they did bow out on the first weekend each year in the NCAA tournament. It's very hard to argue that more playing time for Sanford would have made a significant difference in GU's fortunes those seasons. Sanford apparently decided to transfer for more playing time. There is nothing out there suggesting that he was forced out. Sanford is a sixth man at Dayton, and has had a good run for the Flyers off the bench. Let's be happy for him. However, let's not argue or assume that his decision to transfer cost the Hoyas the services of the next Bryce Cotton. He's not.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 23, 2014 11:40:13 GMT -5
Why did he need to start Dense? Vee played 6.6 mpg his last year at G'town, that same year Clark played 30.. Clark was without doubt the better player but he wasn't 24 mpg better, I feel JT3 could have found more time for Vee which probably would have kep him around.. Vee would have helped the 2011-12 team and he would have helped last years team as well.. You left out Starks who played more minutes than Vee in 2011. And a lot of the time when Clark or Freeman or Wright was out, we played only 2 guards with Hollis at the three. So if we needed another point guard in the game, it was Starks, not Vee; and if we needed a better scoring option, it was Freeman at the 2 and Hollis at the 3, not Vee at the 2. The problem with that season was the Henry Sims had not yet developed, so we played a lot of Benimon or Lubick alongside Julian Vaughn. Vee was not the solution to that problem either. The bottom line with Vee is that he was going to always be limited in minutes for his career at Georgetown -- with the possible exception of his senior year. Even if, for the sake of argument, III had given him a few of the "DC 3's" minutes in Vee's sophomore year, he would have played 10-12 minutes a game instead of 7. It was never going to be more than that, nor should it. He knew that. III is consistently criticized for not looking to the future, but giving Markel signfiicant minutes that year was vital for the two years that followed. So, even if Vee had gotten a handful of extra minutes his soph year, he knew that Markel and Clark were going to start the next year, so he wasn't going to get starter's minutes as a junior either. It's important to note that were certainly more minutes available his junior and senior years, if he had chosen to stay. Jabril came in his junior year and played far more minutes than Vee had played the previous two years in a smilar "first guard off the bench" role because AF and CW were both gone. Certainly Vee would have taken a number of Jabril's minutes that first year-- and if he had performed well he maybe would have started his senior year instead of DSR (but maybe not). So, he was looking at an increase in minutes his junior year, but still a limited role. And so he made a perfectly rational and intelligent decision to leave and seek out a program at which he would have a better shot at more. It's instructive that he found such a program and still ended up with the same role he probably would have had here his last two years. That's not a mistake by III (or one by Vee). No one harbors ill will toward him. III not playing BH more (whether you think it justified or not) is a completely different situation than the situation with Vee.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,769
|
Post by njhoya78 on Mar 23, 2014 11:43:33 GMT -5
Mano y mano, Clark was not a better player than Vee; Clark was a better PERSON for the Hoyas than Vee at the time - or, at least JTIII saw it that way. Also, why not play a 3 guard lineup? if you've got 3 good guards? Or at least more minutes. Maybe i wouldn't say this if JTIII didn't consistently do this with players such as Hayes and Domingo. Talent is on the bench. What!!!!!!! Lol this is absurd Surely you knew that this thread would lead to a discussion of Hayes and Domingo. I haven't seen enough of Hayes to form any opinion, positive or negative, yet, but we've seen plenty of Domingo over the past two seasons, and I can't argue that he merits more minutes on the court on the basis of what we've seen to date.
|
|
chep3
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,314
|
Post by chep3 on Mar 23, 2014 11:49:06 GMT -5
I'm starting to think some of these guys are elaborately skilled trolls. They really have their fingers on the pulse of HT and know exactly what bs will raise everyone's hackles. It's this perfect mixture of distilled ignorance and conviction. I'm not even mad, that's amazing.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,007
|
Post by dense on Mar 23, 2014 11:55:06 GMT -5
What!!!!!!! Lol this is absurd Surely you knew that this thread would lead to a discussion of Hayes and Domingo. I haven't seen enough of Hayes to form any opinion, positive or negative, yet, but we've seen plenty of Domingo over the past two seasons, and I can't argue that he merits more minutes on the court on the basis of what we've seen to date. Oh I should have been more clear my comment was at the utter lack of basketball knowledge to say Sanford is better than Clark. That just disqualifies you from making any point basketball related.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,007
|
Post by dense on Mar 23, 2014 12:06:28 GMT -5
Remember, dense, same dude who claimed Bowen would go for 23 ppg. Consider the source. I see this now lol
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:13:55 GMT -5
I wanted to congratulate former hoya Vee Sanford on a great tournament. Its a shame that 95% of this board knew that Vee had a lot of talent and just needed more minutes. Its a testament to JT3's stubbornness that Vee had to transfer. Wouldn't have been nice to have Vee here 4 years. Should have given him playing time. We all knew it!! Doesn't seeing him hit game winning shots make you sick, while we are in the NIT! Thanks JT3. Nice. When people write this it makes me wonder one thing. Who should have sat Chris Austin or Jason Clark?? He doesn't even start for Dayton. He left cause Markel won the battle for time. Im happy for him cause he has said nothing bad about Georgetown and has stayed in contact with some of the guys via twitter that I have seen. So this all jt3 did him wrong stuff is overblown. He wouldnt even be on this team this year. Every team has transfers. He doesn't start but he finishes.
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:16:55 GMT -5
I wanted to congratulate former hoya Vee Sanford on a great tournament. Its a shame that 95% of this board knew that Vee had a lot of talent and just needed more minutes. Its a testament to JT3's stubbornness that Vee had to transfer. Wouldn't have been nice to have Vee here 4 years. Should have given him playing time. We all knew it!! Doesn't seeing him hit game winning shots make you sick, while we are in the NIT! Thanks JT3. Nice. So which player would you have benched - Wright, Freeman, or Clark? Or would you have played a 4-guard lineup and benched Hollis? I liked Vee but he wasn't taking Wright's or Freeman's minutes and Clark was the better complementary player to play with Wright and Freeman. Vee's time might have come the next season but it would have been at the expense of Starks. I'm surprised about your reaction. We all yelled how can vee not play more. There are always minutes for deserving players. He prob would have ate into Hollis minutes. He was a big disappoint IMO.
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Mar 23, 2014 12:18:36 GMT -5
I wanted to congratulate former hoya Vee Sanford on a great tournament. Its a shame that 95% of this board knew that Vee had a lot of talent and just needed more minutes. Its a testament to JT3's stubbornness that Vee had to transfer. Wouldn't have been nice to have Vee here 4 years. Should have given him playing time. We all knew it!! Doesn't seeing him hit game winning shots make you sick, while we are in the NIT! Thanks JT3. Nice. You were doing good until you started bashing our coach ..stop living in the past ...Vee didn't have to transfer Vee chose to transfer ...he even said he transferred because he saw what was coming in ...it was a smart move for Vee and his choice no one else's...
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:21:41 GMT -5
I am honestly happy for Vee...great kid....but if he couldn't except his role here then he didn't belong here. Vee is a good ball player ...but may have never been a starter at Georgetown. He certainly would have a solid contributor and someone we could have used, but let's not pretend that the kid is a game changer. In the end, he found a good home and happy for him....just funny how the trolls start lurking as soon as the kid has a couple good games. What are you talking about troll. We all saw his potential!!! Now we are seeing it on the biggest stage while we are in NIT! Get over yourself. Jt3 should have gave him more minutes. I'm soooo happy for VEE. I just think it makes jt3 look a bit foolish
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:22:57 GMT -5
Remember, dense, same dude who claimed Bowen would go for 23 ppg. Consider the source. I don't recall saying that.
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:26:41 GMT -5
I wanted to congratulate former hoya Vee Sanford on a great tournament. Its a shame that 95% of this board knew that Vee had a lot of talent and just needed more minutes. Its a testament to JT3's stubbornness that Vee had to transfer. Wouldn't have been nice to have Vee here 4 years. Should have given him playing time. We all knew it!! Doesn't seeing him hit game winning shots make you sick, while we are in the NIT! Thanks JT3. Nice. You were doing good until you started bashing our coach ..stop living in the past ...Vee didn't have to transfer Vee chose to transfer ...he even said he transferred because he saw what was coming in ...it was a smart move for Vee and his choice no one else's... I'm going to be honest when it comes to coach. If I think he's stubborn then I will say it. I'm not praising that man after his post season collapses. And certainly after an nit appearance. Please.
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Mar 23, 2014 12:32:31 GMT -5
Mano y mano, Clark was not a better player than Vee; Clark was a better PERSON for the Hoyas than Vee at the time - or, at least JTIII saw it that way. Also, why not play a 3 guard lineup? if you've got 3 good guards? Or at least more minutes. Maybe i wouldn't say this if JTIII didn't consistently do this with players such as Hayes and Domingo. Talent is on the bench. Looking at the numbers, Sanford's percentages are, in some cases, better than Clark's for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons (the only two seasons they played together). Clark's minutes played decreased from 2009-10 (1137) to 2010-11 (1077), while Sanford's minutes played increased from 2009-10 (130) to 2010-11 (178); essentially, the drop in Clark's minutes are almost equivalent to the increase in Sanford's minutes. I don' think that the difference in percentages are meaningful, though, in that Clark played over 1000 more minutes in 2009-10 and almost 900 more minutes in 2010-11. You cannot extrapolate that Sanford's numbers would consistently remain constant with significantly more playing time. The sample size is too small. The Hoyas were 23-10 in 2009-10 and 23-11 in 2010-11. Yes, they did bow out on the first weekend each year in the NCAA tournament. It's very hard to argue that more playing time for Sanford would have made a significant difference in GU's fortunes those seasons. Sanford apparently decided to transfer for more playing time. There is nothing out there suggesting that he was forced out. Sanford is a sixth man at Dayton, and has had a good run for the Flyers off the bench. Let's be happy for him. However, let's not argue or assume that his decision to transfer cost the Hoyas the services of the next Bryce Cotton. He's not. Vee always could play the one and two and was just as good and smarter than any other Hoya on that team...politics played a significant role and coach has done a better job at playing most of his players now..maybe it's something he had to work on ...
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 23, 2014 12:33:42 GMT -5
Looking at the numbers, Sanford's percentages are, in some cases, better than Clark's for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons (the only two seasons they played together). Clark's minutes played decreased from 2009-10 (1137) to 2010-11 (1077), while Sanford's minutes played increased from 2009-10 (130) to 2010-11 (178); essentially, the drop in Clark's minutes are almost equivalent to the increase in Sanford's minutes. I don' think that the difference in percentages are meaningful, though, in that Clark played over 1000 more minutes in 2009-10 and almost 900 more minutes in 2010-11. You cannot extrapolate that Sanford's numbers would consistently remain constant with significantly more playing time. The sample size is too small. The Hoyas were 23-10 in 2009-10 and 23-11 in 2010-11. Yes, they did bow out on the first weekend each year in the NCAA tournament. It's very hard to argue that more playing time for Sanford would have made a significant difference in GU's fortunes those seasons. Sanford apparently decided to transfer for more playing time. There is nothing out there suggesting that he was forced out. Sanford is a sixth man at Dayton, and has had a good run for the Flyers off the bench. Let's be happy for him. However, let's not argue or assume that his decision to transfer cost the Hoyas the services of the next Bryce Cotton. He's not. Vee always could play the one and two and was just as good and smarter than any other Hoya on that team...politics played a significant role and coach has done a better job at playing most of his players now..maybe it's something he had to work on ... I agree he has gotten better at player management.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 23, 2014 12:44:29 GMT -5
Remember, dense, same dude who claimed Bowen would go for 23 ppg. Consider the source. I don't recall saying that. The are talking about Purplefilms
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 23, 2014 12:50:21 GMT -5
Looking at the numbers, Sanford's percentages are, in some cases, better than Clark's for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons (the only two seasons they played together). Clark's minutes played decreased from 2009-10 (1137) to 2010-11 (1077), while Sanford's minutes played increased from 2009-10 (130) to 2010-11 (178); essentially, the drop in Clark's minutes are almost equivalent to the increase in Sanford's minutes. I don' think that the difference in percentages are meaningful, though, in that Clark played over 1000 more minutes in 2009-10 and almost 900 more minutes in 2010-11. You cannot extrapolate that Sanford's numbers would consistently remain constant with significantly more playing time. The sample size is too small. The Hoyas were 23-10 in 2009-10 and 23-11 in 2010-11. Yes, they did bow out on the first weekend each year in the NCAA tournament. It's very hard to argue that more playing time for Sanford would have made a significant difference in GU's fortunes those seasons. Sanford apparently decided to transfer for more playing time. There is nothing out there suggesting that he was forced out. Sanford is a sixth man at Dayton, and has had a good run for the Flyers off the bench. Let's be happy for him. However, let's not argue or assume that his decision to transfer cost the Hoyas the services of the next Bryce Cotton. He's not. Vee always could play the one and two and was just as good and smarter than any other Hoya on that team... politics played a significant role and coach has done a better job at playing most of his players now..maybe it's something he had to work on ... I appreciate your honesty on the subject GlideHoyas... Some posters act like some players are not anointed starting positions or playing time... And given 2, 3, 4 or 5 times plus to make the same mistakes over and over again... I am not going to mention players names cause people know the players who have regressed and have been given ample playing time. If given the chance at the time I do not believe Vee Sanford would have proven any less a liability than Freeman, Clark or Stark or Trawick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2014 12:51:21 GMT -5
Is Vee still a 5th year Senior? Lol
Why can’t people just be happy for dood and leave it at that. He played behind 3 All Big East guards, tough situation and it worked our for him. Congrats Vee!
|
|