|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 12, 2014 13:34:52 GMT -5
I don't think there is anybody here who has a personal problem or animus toward Mikael Hopkins. As a person and student athlete, I think he has represented the university well. He's never complained about his role on the team, and he almost always seems to play hard. Aside from fouling, he's also shown he can play good defense.
All that being said, he's the worst big man on offense that John Thompson III has ever had given the amount of minutes he has played. That's why he's getting a lot of resistance on this board. I would love it if he suddenly turned the corner this season, but the signs just are not there.
As an addendum, Hopkins' O rating the last two years was 92.3 (on 21.3% of possessions), and 82.7 (junior year - on 23.7% of possessions). It's highly abnormal for a big man in John Thompson III's system to use that many possessions with such little offensive ability. I realize Hopkins was forced into that role both in 2013 and 2014, but the blunt fact is that he did not perform on the offensive end and those offensive performances are among the worst of the last 10 years on our team.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 13:57:15 GMT -5
I don't think there is anybody here who has a personal problem or animus toward Mikael Hopkins. As a person and student athlete, I think he has represented the university well. He's never complained about his role on the team, and he almost always seems to play hard. Aside from fouling, he's also shown he can play good defense. All that being said, he's the worst big man on offense that John Thompson III has ever had given the amount of minutes he has played. That's why he's getting a lot of resistance on this board. I would love it if he suddenly turned the corner this season, but the signs just are not there. As an addendum, Hopkins' O rating the last two years was 92.3 (on 21.3% of possessions), and 82.7 (junior year - on 23.7% of possessions). It's highly abnormal for a big man in John Thompson III's system to use that many possessions with such little offensive ability. I realize Hopkins was forced into that role both in 2013 and 2014, but the blunt fact is that he did not perform on the offensive end and those offensive performances are among the worst of the last 10 years on our team. I never suggested it was anything personal - it doesn't have to be anything personal for someone to see a trend and be inclined to pile on without coming to their own conclusions. Secondly, "worst big man on offense" is subjective, as others have pointed out, because it fails to take into account the Nate Lubicks of the world. I'm just tired of people looking at numbers to tell the whole story. Sure they serve as indicators but basketball is played on the court, not on paper. There are no stats to quantify the parts of the game that determine how much attention is drawn by a player, how much a coach gameplan towards or away from a certain player, and how a role fits into the overall scheme. Players are too often evaluated in a vacuum and different real life circumstances will yield different results even if all the remaining parts remain exactly the same. While he isn't a world beater, he is still better than the picture many have been trying to paint by using his numbers. He has the talent and the coaching and the want-to, there's no point in tempering expectations just because he hasn't reached his potential yet that's not how players get better. And it's mostly all relative even though Jabril is slated to make an impact as a senior I'd argue that a similar case can be made about him and his deficient play. His handle is average, he fouls way too much, he has a limited game off the dribble, not a great jumper, he is about as good a ft shooter as Mikael (slightly better) and is an average passer at best, all that is not to say that he still can't be an effective player.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Aug 12, 2014 14:09:39 GMT -5
I don't think there is anybody here who has a personal problem or animus toward Mikael Hopkins. As a person and student athlete, I think he has represented the university well. He's never complained about his role on the team, and he almost always seems to play hard. Aside from fouling, he's also shown he can play good defense. All that being said, he's the worst big man on offense that John Thompson III has ever had given the amount of minutes he has played. That's why he's getting a lot of resistance on this board. I would love it if he suddenly turned the corner this season, but the signs just are not there. As an addendum, Hopkins' O rating the last two years was 92.3 (on 21.3% of possessions), and 82.7 (junior year - on 23.7% of possessions). It's highly abnormal for a big man in John Thompson III's system to use that many possessions with such little offensive ability. I realize Hopkins was forced into that role both in 2013 and 2014, but the blunt fact is that he did not perform on the offensive end and those offensive performances are among the worst of the last 10 years on our team. I never suggested it was anything personal - it doesn't have to be anything personal for someone to see a trend and be inclined to pile on without coming to their own conclusions. Secondly, "worst big man on offense" is subjective, as others have pointed out, because it fails to take into account the Nate Lubicks of the world. I'm just tired of people looking at numbers to tell the whole story. Sure they serve as indicators but basketball is played on the court, not on paper. There are no stats to quantify the parts of the game that determine how much attention is drawn by a player, how much a coach gameplan towards or away from a certain player, and how a role fits into the overall scheme. Players are too often evaluated in a vacuum and different real life circumstances will yield different results even if all the remaining parts remain exactly the same. While he isn't a world beater, he is still better than the picture many have been trying to paint by using his numbers. He has the talent and the coaching and the want-to, there's no point in tempering expectations just because he hasn't reached his potential yet that's not how players get better. And it's mostly all relative even though Jabril is slated to make an impact as a senior I'd argue that a similar case can be made about him and his deficient play. His handle is average, he fouls way too much, he has a limited game off the dribble, not a great jumper, he is about as good a ft shooter as Mikael (slightly better) and is an average passer at best, all that is not to say that he still can't be an effective player. Jabril had an ORTG of 110.2 last year. He shot 51.9% from the floor and scored 9.1 PPG last year. He also looked a lot better from behind the arc after he came back from his jaw injury (and made a higher percentage--he shot 40% on 30 3PT attempts in conference). He obviously has the weaknesses you note, but his weaknesses are nowhere near as bad as Mikael's. If Mikael had played as well as Jabril did last year (especially down the stretch), people wouldn't be arguing with you.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 15:33:12 GMT -5
I never suggested it was anything personal - it doesn't have to be anything personal for someone to see a trend and be inclined to pile on without coming to their own conclusions. Secondly, "worst big man on offense" is subjective, as others have pointed out, because it fails to take into account the Nate Lubicks of the world. I'm just tired of people looking at numbers to tell the whole story. Sure they serve as indicators but basketball is played on the court, not on paper. There are no stats to quantify the parts of the game that determine how much attention is drawn by a player, how much a coach gameplan towards or away from a certain player, and how a role fits into the overall scheme. Players are too often evaluated in a vacuum and different real life circumstances will yield different results even if all the remaining parts remain exactly the same. While he isn't a world beater, he is still better than the picture many have been trying to paint by using his numbers. He has the talent and the coaching and the want-to, there's no point in tempering expectations just because he hasn't reached his potential yet that's not how players get better. And it's mostly all relative even though Jabril is slated to make an impact as a senior I'd argue that a similar case can be made about him and his deficient play. His handle is average, he fouls way too much, he has a limited game off the dribble, not a great jumper, he is about as good a ft shooter as Mikael (slightly better) and is an average passer at best, all that is not to say that he still can't be an effective player. Jabril had an ORTG of 110.2 last year. He shot 51.9% from the floor and scored 9.1 PPG last year. He also looked a lot better from behind the arc after he came back from his jaw injury (and made a higher percentage--he shot 40% on 30 3PT attempts in conference). He obviously has the weaknesses you note, but his weaknesses are nowhere near as bad as Mikael's. If Mikael had played as well as Jabril did last year (especially down the stretch), people wouldn't be arguing with you. He was asked to do less. Evaluating their performance in the context of their role is my whole main point. JT3 basically force fed Mikael possessions his soph year until he realized how much it was negatively affecting the overall play of the team. Last year both were juniors and while Jabril was better offensively, he was not as good defensively. The same argument can be made that he played out of necessity because of a lack of options, but he still didn't fill a similar role to that which JT3 was attempting to create for Mikael. Sure Jabril's numbers were good, but it wasn't a skill related improvement after his injury, it was a mental jump that he made. His numbers don't tell the whole story because while they were head and shoulders above Mikael's in terms of efficiency his impact was not that much greater. Mikael anchored our post D for a while last season and there's no denying that. I expect even more improvement from him because he has been working diligently all offseason and is in much better shape and spirits than he has been in the past. Time will tell though.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Aug 12, 2014 15:57:39 GMT -5
He's a mobile four with a decent, at worst average jumpshot and an above average face up game for a back to the basket center and is quick and has above average handle. If he can't provide spacing then that's by design of the system. Problem is you're comparing him to Copeland (and maybe Otto) but they are not at all similar players, both those guys will make their money in the NBA by playing on the perimeter... Also 70% from the line for a big is mediocre?? Talk about subjective.... You and I watched a different Hopkins. There is nothing decent about Hopkins' jumper. It's been bad to awful his entire career. No teams respected Hopkins' jumper. Plus, he's a poor finisher. As for his handle, so many of Hopkins' turnovers happened when he attempted to put the ball on the floor. To say his handle is decent is an exaggeration of immense proportion. Henry's handle was decent. He could, and frequently did, take his man from the top. Hopkins, not even close. And if Hopkins shot 70% from the FT line, I would be ecstatic. Fact is, last yr he shot 63% from the line, while his soph yr he shot 62.1%. To his credit, as a frosh he shot 75% on only 36 attempts. That does give one some hope. As TBird and others have pointed out, though, you just don't want someone with a 92 ORtg using 20+% of possessions. We hopefully will have better options. No one wants Hopkins to be a great player this year for us more than I do. I pray the kid gets it together. Your arguments for Hopkins, however, ring hollow.
|
|
hoyafan23
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 289
|
Post by hoyafan23 on Aug 12, 2014 16:11:31 GMT -5
Josh looks good and in shape.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 16:22:16 GMT -5
He's a mobile four with a decent, at worst average jumpshot and an above average face up game for a back to the basket center and is quick and has above average handle. If he can't provide spacing then that's by design of the system. Problem is you're comparing him to Copeland (and maybe Otto) but they are not at all similar players, both those guys will make their money in the NBA by playing on the perimeter... Also 70% from the line for a big is mediocre?? Talk about subjective.... You and I watched a different Hopkins. There is nothing decent about Hopkins' jumper. It's been bad to awful his entire career. No teams respected Hopkins' jumper. Plus, he's a poor finisher. As for his handle, so many of Hopkins' turnovers happened when he attempted to put the ball on the floor. To say his handle is decent is an exaggeration of immense proportion. Henry's handle was decent. He could, and frequently did, take his man from the top. Hopkins, not even close. And if Hopkins shot 70% from the FT line, I would be ecstatic. Fact is, last yr he shot 63% from the line, while his soph yr hhe shot 62.1%. To his credit, as a frosh he shot 75% on only 36 attempts. That does give one some hope. As TBird and others have pointed out, though, you just don't fIgwant someone with a 92 ORtg using 20+% of possessions. We hopefully will have better options. No one wants Hopkins to be a great player this year for us more than I do. I pray the kid gets it together. Your arguments for Hopkins, however, ring hollow. I clearly stated in games re: Hopkins' jumper. He has a good jumper in warmups, drills, and even in non-competitive setting he just hasn't gotten past the nerves. That's not to say that I think he'll get better in games just that that wasn't my argument. It's not like teams sag off him even half as far as they sagged off of Nate, and that incorporates his ability to put the ball on the floor. You have to be able to differentiate production from ability. Sure he had a lot of turnovers handling the ball, but so do most bigs and even some guards. That doesn't negate the possibility of being a positive contributor. His ft stroke is also better than he showed this past season - same way DSRs 3pt stroke and Reggie's are better than what they showed last season. No one is suggesting that he use up 20% of possessions to be effective. My arguments ring hollow when you try and evaluate his performances in terms of statistical context. And that's if you value offense over defense, which is not his forte.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Aug 12, 2014 16:23:13 GMT -5
While the frosh showed a good deal of promise, JT3 will likely stick with his pattern and start the season with his experienced guys starting. I expect we'll see DSR, Trawick, Cameron, Hopkins and Smith at the beginning. Copeland and Peak will get their minutes and will increase as the season goes on if they produce. For all his strong play in Kenner, Peak was notably outplayed by Trawick when they went head to head and will find less success against zone defenses than he had in summer ball. It will be a nice luxury for JT3 to be able to go with whatever combination of Trawick, DSR, Peak, Cameron, Bowen and Campbell for the perimeter spots is most effective on a given day. I think we'll see Bowen start over Cameron.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 16:25:08 GMT -5
Josh looks good and in shape. Good news
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 16:28:29 GMT -5
Josh looks good and in shape. Pics or GTFO! jk haha But umm Serious or nah?
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Aug 12, 2014 16:50:48 GMT -5
You and I watched a different Hopkins. There is nothing decent about Hopkins' jumper. It's been bad to awful his entire career. No teams respected Hopkins' jumper. Plus, he's a poor finisher. As for his handle, so many of Hopkins' turnovers happened when he attempted to put the ball on the floor. To say his handle is decent is an exaggeration of immense proportion. Henry's handle was decent. He could, and frequently did, take his man from the top. Hopkins, not even close. And if Hopkins shot 70% from the FT line, I would be ecstatic. Fact is, last yr he shot 63% from the line, while his soph yr hhe shot 62.1%. To his credit, as a frosh he shot 75% on only 36 attempts. That does give one some hope. As TBird and others have pointed out, though, you just don't fIgwant someone with a 92 ORtg using 20+% of possessions. We hopefully will have better options. No one wants Hopkins to be a great player this year for us more than I do. I pray the kid gets it together. Your arguments for Hopkins, however, ring hollow. I clearly stated in games re: Hopkins' jumper. He has a good jumper in warmups, drills, and even in non-competitive setting he just hasn't gotten past the nerves. That's not to say that I think he'll get better in games just that that wasn't my argument. It's not like teams sag off him even half as far as they sagged off of Nate, and that incorporates his ability to put the ball on the floor. You have to be able to differentiate production from ability. Sure he had a lot of turnovers handling the ball, but so do most bigs and even some guards. That doesn't negate the possibility of being a positive contributor. His ft stroke is also better than he showed this past season - same way DSRs 3pt stroke and Reggie's are better than what they showed last season. No one is suggesting that he use up 20% of possessions to be effective. My arguments ring hollow when you try and evaluate his performances in terms of statistical context. And that's if you value offense over defense, which is not his forte. If he can't bring it in games, what's the point? Production counts. Don't get me wrong, rock, I don't want to negate the possibility of Hopkins being a positive contributor, because I realize that possibility exists. Who saw Henry's sr yr coming? I didn't. I hope he does contribute positively more than he has in the past. But despite our obvious front court deficiencies, Hopkins still only played just over 20 mins/game. For him to see significant time, he's got to produce more in games.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Aug 12, 2014 16:52:10 GMT -5
While the frosh showed a good deal of promise, JT3 will likely stick with his pattern and start the season with his experienced guys starting. I expect we'll see DSR, Trawick, Cameron, Hopkins and Smith at the beginning. Copeland and Peak will get their minutes and will increase as the season goes on if they produce. For all his strong play in Kenner, Peak was notably outplayed by Trawick when they went head to head and will find less success against zone defenses than he had in summer ball. It will be a nice luxury for JT3 to be able to go with whatever combination of Trawick, DSR, Peak, Cameron, Bowen and Campbell for the perimeter spots is most effective on a given day. I think we'll see Bowen start over Cameron. I'll be extremely surprised if Bowen starts for us. All he has shown thus far in his career is backup talent.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,238
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 12, 2014 16:54:33 GMT -5
I clearly stated in games re: Hopkins' jumper. He has a good jumper in warmups, drills, and even in non-competitive setting he just hasn't gotten past the nerves. This makes me think of Josh Thornton and Nikita, both legendary 3-pt shooters in practice.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 17:13:13 GMT -5
I clearly stated in games re: Hopkins' jumper. He has a good jumper in warmups, drills, and even in non-competitive setting he just hasn't gotten past the nerves. That's not to say that I think he'll get better in games just that that wasn't my argument. It's not like teams sag off him even half as far as they sagged off of Nate, and that incorporates his ability to put the ball on the floor. You have to be able to differentiate production from ability. Sure he had a lot of turnovers handling the ball, but so do most bigs and even some guards. That doesn't negate the possibility of being a positive contributor. His ft stroke is also better than he showed this past season - same way DSRs 3pt stroke and Reggie's are better than what they showed last season. No one is suggesting that he use up 20% of possessions to be effective. My arguments ring hollow when you try and evaluate his performances in terms of statistical context. And that's if you value offense over defense, which is not his forte. If he can't bring it in games, what's the point? Production counts. Don't get me wrong, rock, I don't want to negate the possibility of Hopkins being a positive contributor, because I realize that possibility exists. Who saw Henry's sr yr coming? I didn't. I hope he does contribute positively more than he has in the past. But despite our obvious front court deficiencies, Hopkins still only played just over 20 mins/game. For him to see significant time, he's got to produce more in games. I agree my point was while it's not great it's still not at lubick's level where there were mechanical issues and everyone sagged off of him people still guard him when he faces up. There's a difference between having a broke jumper and not producing and having a reliable jumper and not producing that goes past just stats. For a lot of people all they know is what they see in games and they don't have the luxury of seeing players in settings outside of a Hoya uniform and that distorts the bigger picture to an extent. Having some players make big leaps in their game more often comes as a surprise to those who can only see them in verizon. I just wanted to share my perspective, because of all the players on this roster capable of making a significant jump Mikael definitely has the most tools to work with. It's upto him to put them together.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 12, 2014 17:28:24 GMT -5
I never suggested it was anything personal - it doesn't have to be anything personal for someone to see a trend and be inclined to pile on without coming to their own conclusions. Secondly, "worst big man on offense" is subjective, as others have pointed out, because it fails to take into account the Nate Lubicks of the world. I'm just tired of people looking at numbers to tell the whole story. Sure they serve as indicators but basketball is played on the court, not on paper. There are no stats to quantify the parts of the game that determine how much attention is drawn by a player, how much a coach gameplan towards or away from a certain player, and how a role fits into the overall scheme. Players are too often evaluated in a vacuum and different real life circumstances will yield different results even if all the remaining parts remain exactly the same. While he isn't a world beater, he is still better than the picture many have been trying to paint by using his numbers. He has the talent and the coaching and the want-to, there's no point in tempering expectations just because he hasn't reached his potential yet that's not how players get better. And it's mostly all relative even though Jabril is slated to make an impact as a senior I'd argue that a similar case can be made about him and his deficient play. His handle is average, he fouls way too much, he has a limited game off the dribble, not a great jumper, he is about as good a ft shooter as Mikael (slightly better) and is an average passer at best, all that is not to say that he still can't be an effective player. Rock, no worries. I was just trying to soften my comments by making it clear that I appreciate Hopkins as a player, even if his performance has not been up to the level we would have liked. I still maintain that Hopkins' performance ranks him as the worst big man on offense that JTIII has had, given his usage rate and the amount of minutes he has played. Nate Lubick wasn't great either, but also did not try to do things he could not do, and as a result, he was actually a fairly efficient offensive player. Name one player who has played as much as Hopkins who has done worse? You cannot. As I said, I like the guy. In fact, after his freshman and sophomore years, I was hugely hopeful he would develop, but he hasn't. And it is not statistics. It's also from what I have seen during games - he's foul prone, he makes poor decisions (the classic hold the ball in the post for 5 seconds, then try to barrel into 3 defenders, and turning it over move), and he cannot finish well. I really hope he improves on this - he has been a solid team member, and I would love nothing more than to see him succeed more on the court. To the degree Hopkins' usage rate is so high because of the coaching staff, then I would also blame the coaching staff. The last two years, more Hopkins' possessions has meant poor offense for us. It's no surprise that when Hopkins' usage fell dramatically at the end of 2013 (and Porter's went up), our performance improved substantially. One last word on statistics: I agree that they do not mean everything, but they are quite meaningful in the sense that it's an objective way to evaluate players that goes beyond personal observation. Trawick is clearly a better offensive player than Hopkins, especially last year. I will say that I think when he avoids fouls, Hopkins can be a very solid defender. After all, he manned the paint during 2013 when we had an elite defense. I do think he's pretty valuable there. Really, I think all Hopkins would have to do to be more valuable would be to play solid defense, keep his usage rate to 10-15%, foul less, and make better decisions. All of those are feasible things. Whether it happens is another story.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Aug 12, 2014 17:42:01 GMT -5
Forget Sims, if Hop is Julian Vaughn I'm happy. This means if Josh is doubled, he gets to a spot where he can receive the pass and dunk. That was pretty much the basis of Vaughn's serviceability. Otherwise they're not all that different. One just puts away easy baskets and the other doesn't and compounds matters by taking difficult, out of control shots.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,815
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 12, 2014 17:42:30 GMT -5
If he can't bring it in games, what's the point? Production counts. Don't get me wrong, rock, I don't want to negate the possibility of Hopkins being a positive contributor, because I realize that possibility exists. Who saw Henry's sr yr coming? I didn't. I hope he does contribute positively more than he has in the past. But despite our obvious front court deficiencies, Hopkins still only played just over 20 mins/game. For him to see significant time, he's got to produce more in games. I agree my point was while it's not great it's still not at lubick's level where there were mechanical issues and everyone sagged off of him people still guard him when he faces up. There's a difference between having a broke jumper and not producing and having a reliable jumper and not producing that goes past just stats. For a lot of people all they know is what they see in games and they don't have the luxury of seeing players in settings outside of a Hoya uniform and that distorts the bigger picture to an extent. Having some players make big leaps in their game more often comes as a surprise to those who can only see them in verizon. I just wanted to share my perspective, because of all the players on this roster capable of making a significant jump Mikael definitely has the most tools to work with. It's upto him to put them together. He doesn't have a reliable jumper Rock.. It doesn't matter how much you've seen him beast out in pick-up games, his jumper/offensive game are well below average.. Yes his form is better than Lubick's but that's not saying much.. If Mikael can concentrate on rebounding & defense he'll be a very nice contributor this coming season..
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 12, 2014 18:00:08 GMT -5
Hopkins has certainly produced less than we might have hoped upon his arrival. That said, I think some of the vitriol which flows his way can be linked to a placid demeanor which gives off the appearance of complacency and lack of determination.
I am not suggesting that he does not care or does not try. I just think his demeanor leaves him with less of the benefit of the doubt than some others who are more demonstrative.
I look back to a guy like Joseph Tuomou who would always get that benefit of the doubt because he was so animated and antic. In my opinion, he was always received better than his play would merit; conversely I think Hopkins is received worse.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 12, 2014 18:32:09 GMT -5
Josh looks good and in shape. Seriously, 23, what is the basis of your comment? Based on seeing him? Or based on some other source? Thanks.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Aug 12, 2014 19:40:20 GMT -5
Hopkins has certainly produced less than we might have hoped upon his arrival. That said, I think some of the vitriol which flows his way can be linked to a placid demeanor which gives off the appearance of complacency and lack of determination. I am not suggesting that he does not care or does not try. I just think his demeanor leaves him with less of the benefit of the doubt than some others who are more demonstrative. I look back to a guy like Joseph Tuomou who would always get that benefit of the doubt because he was so animated and antic. In my opinion, he was always received better than his play would merit; conversely I think Hopkins is received worse. Yep I agree
|
|