Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 11, 2005 15:01:17 GMT -5
Just what I thought. You cannot admit you were wrong in your assessment, so you change the subject. Oh well. That's a low blow considering you don't have any stats to support your side of the arguement either. Pretty lazy to bash SF because he couldn't produce evidence either way, when you can't either.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 11, 2005 15:02:01 GMT -5
Just what I thought. You cannot admit you were wrong in your assessment, so you change the subject. Oh well. Wrong in my assessment of what? I can't prove it without significant work, and it isn't worth that much to me. Can you prove it wrong? If not, under your logic, we're both wrong. SirSaxa somehow got my point exactly.
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on Apr 11, 2005 15:02:13 GMT -5
Just what I thought. You cannot admit you were wrong in your assessment, so you change the subject. Oh well. Wow. Just wow.
|
|
|
Post by snowdog on Apr 11, 2005 15:18:56 GMT -5
I was at the game. Thought Egerson played well, better than Sapp. Egerson can run the break well. Sapp needs some work on his shot selection but at times played well. At the end of the day, you've got 2 quality recruits coming in next year.
|
|
HOYAPLAYA
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
IT'S TIME FOR A RUNNNNNNN!!!!!!
Posts: 1,329
|
Post by HOYAPLAYA on Apr 11, 2005 17:08:43 GMT -5
Wrong in my assessment of what? I can't prove it without significant work, and it isn't worth that much to me. Can you prove it wrong? If not, under your logic, we're both wrong. SirSaxa somehow got my point exactly. SF, Don't waste your time. I learned a few weeks back that stats and facts mean very little to some on this board. I quit on an argument a few weeks ago because I figured that this guy was just baiting me into an argument. Keep in mind that there are a lot more people on this board that trust your knowledge of the game and team and just move on. You'll never win the argument even if you back it up with facts/stats because they don't matter in some poster's eyes.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 18:38:56 GMT -5
Its just really funny how people are so quick to run and get stats when they think they are right, but the minute they realize they made a "boo-boo" in what they said, they backtrack, and sidestep the issue with bogus rhetoric. But for those who are concerned. I stated my case. I said two games where Tyler played significant minutes, one in the 2nd Rutgers game where he was allowed to step up and helped us win (11 points, 5 rebounds). The other game was the BC game where he had like 12 points and 6 rebounds in garbage time of a blowout.
But the assertion was made that Tyler was in a lot of ball games, especially during crunch time this year. Well if you look at the entire season, Tyler did not play signficant minutes,save for a couple of games, for a majority of the ballgames this year. So how does his rebound per minutes affect what the team does when he has played sparingly all year. That was what I said. All I said was show me where Tyler played a lot of minutes in a lot of games that demonstrated he was a great rebounder. Rebound's per minute played are a poor indicator of how good a rebounder he his, especially when he only averaged 7 minutes a ballgame all year.
But the people who kept quiet, know this, but were afraid to admit they were wrong. Its okay. We all make mistakes. Nobody is going to laugh at you for saying something inaccurate. Your perferct little world is still intact.
|
|
dreamhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by dreamhoya on Apr 11, 2005 18:44:14 GMT -5
Crawford is an excellent, instinctive rebounder for his size. He really is. Some people can't tell because of his lack of playing time, but he's got something special going on - instincts. he makes plays quietly.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 11, 2005 18:48:53 GMT -5
I have many times admitted I was wrong. Here I do not know if I was wrong.
However:
1) Tyler tended to play quite a bit in crunch time for the total amount of minutes he played. He was often used as a defensive replacement in that period. Just because he only played seven minutes doesn't mean it didn't matter. I just can't prove either way since I don't have good play by play info.
2) I'm guessing rebounds per minute are a good indicator as long as the person has 100+ minutes. You can try to prove me wrong if you'd like. Someday I may take the time to prove it. But you've done NOTHING to prove your point, either.
Of course, you're the guy who quoted me, deleted a line I wrote, and then tried to criticize me for not commenting on something -- which was commented on in the line YOU deleted!
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 18:50:35 GMT -5
Crawford is an excellent, instinctive rebounder for his size. He really is. Some people can't tell because of his lack of playing time, but he's got something special going on - instincts. he makes plays quietly. I have no doubt in Tyler's ability. I think he is still raw and developing as a basketball player. He may be a great rebounder, but he has not shown , if it all, this season that he is a great rebounder. He hasn't had enough playing time to demonstrate whether or not he is great rebounder.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 11, 2005 18:50:35 GMT -5
Crawford is an excellent, instinctive rebounder for his size. He really is. Some people can't tell because of his lack of playing time, but he's got something special going on - instincts. he makes plays quietly. I have no doubt in Tyler's ability. I think he is still raw and developing as a basketball player. He may be a great rebounder, but he has not shown , if it all, this season that he is a great rebounder. He hasn't had enough playing time to demonstrate whether or not he is great rebounder.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 18:56:31 GMT -5
I have many times admitted I was wrong. Here I do not know if I was wrong. However: 1) Tyler tended to play quite a bit in crunch time for the total amount of minutes he played. He was often used as a defensive replacement in that period. Just because he only played seven minutes doesn't mean it didn't matter. I just can't prove either way since I don't have good play by play info. 2) I'm guessing rebounds per minute are a good indicator as long as the person has 100+ minutes. You can try to prove me wrong if you'd like. Someday I may take the time to prove it. But you've done NOTHING to prove your point, either. Of course, you're the guy who quoted me, deleted a line I wrote, and then tried to criticize me for not commenting on something -- which was commented on in the line YOU deleted! Dude, why are you twisting things around. Your argument has no basis. I proved what I have to say. You can't wiggle your way out of this one. I think its sad when you can't admit you are wrong. Nobody is perfect. Its not the end of the world. Oh well. I'm not going to lose sleep over this. I think we can all agree that Tyler is an up and coming player for GU that will play a huge part in our turn around as a basketball program. I hope that Marc Egerson will do the same for GU when he arrives next year.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 11, 2005 18:58:15 GMT -5
Dude, why are you twisting things around. Your argument has no basis. I proved what I have to say. You can't wiggle your way out of this one. I think its sad when you can't admit you are wrong. Nobody is perfect. Its not the end of the world. Oh well. I'm not going to lose sleep over this. I think we can all agree that Tyler is an up and coming player for GU that will play a huge part in our turn around as a basketball program. I hope that Marc Egerson will do the same for GU when he arrives next year. Missed that proof. You prove me wrong, I'll admit it. But I do like Tyler a lot. Mostly because he can board.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 11, 2005 19:04:35 GMT -5
Mods---somehow my last post was scrubbed and replaced with one of no_way's looney bin postings. What happened?
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 19:05:19 GMT -5
Missed that proof. You prove me wrong, I'll admit it. But I do like Tyler a lot. Mostly because he can board. Yeah, I guess its hard for you to see the truth sometimes, but thats okay. Its a strange phenomenon called denial. Ever heard of that? But yeah, Tyler can board alright, I mean he averaged 1.2 rebounds this season.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 11, 2005 19:08:26 GMT -5
no_way... I'm curious... Which games did you see this season?
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 19:13:09 GMT -5
no_way... I'm curious... Which games did you see this season? Jersey, maybe you can help me. Please, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't recall Tyler being in a lot games for a lot of minutes, except for 3 or 4 ballgames this year. He played sparingly for the most part. I don't recall him demonstrating a knack for rebounding. Granted, he didn't get a lot of minutes. So I don't see where the argument that he is a great rebounder comes from. His biggest games were Rutgers and BC. In fact a lot of people complained how he wasn't getting a lot of playing time. So please, let me know.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 11, 2005 19:24:06 GMT -5
Tyler played 169 minutes this year. It isn't a huge number. But it isn't a number that gives you a lot of crooked numbers, either. He didn't play much against the cream puffs, if at all, so most of that time is versus real competition. That's roughly 5 games of PT for a starter getting 34 mpg.
He had 29 rebounds in that time. That's almost 6 rpg for guard on a team that played games at a 10%+ slower pace than the average college team.
In BE play, he had 18 rebounds in 90 minutes. Again, close to 6 rpg.
Considering our guards mostly sat at about 2-3 rpg (including DJ), and even our starting C was only at 6.3 in BE play...6 rpg from a 6'3" Swingman is impressive.
Is it a small amount of PT? Yes. And some was in garbage time. Jeff played quite a bit down/up by a lot. If Tyler played 30+ minutes would he get 6 rpg? Maybe not, but I bet he'd average at least 5.
Everything else I've seen backs this up: his high school stats, the scouting reports, my personal viewing. He mixes it up. He's strong. He can jump. And he wants the ball.
He's a good rebounder, and on a rate basis, he's up there with Roy, Jeff and Brandon -- all significantly taller than him.
|
|
|
Post by ][-][ 0 `/ /-\ 5 on Apr 11, 2005 19:26:32 GMT -5
I;ve been scared to post in this topic for a while because the_way might make a threat against my life but in the games I watched, tyler was a great rebounder. He was spunky, and strong going for the boards and I can recall 3 specific times when he tipped it in over big men. I do not have facts and stats, these are just my beliefs. (Please don't blow up on me. Please don't blow up on me. Please don't blow up on me. Please don't blow up on me.)
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Apr 11, 2005 19:30:36 GMT -5
Tyler played 169 minutes this year. It isn't a huge number. But it isn't a number that gives you a lot of crooked numbers, either. He didn't play much against the cream puffs, if at all, so most of that time is versus real competition. That's roughly 5 games of PT for a starter getting 34 mpg. He had 29 rebounds in that time. That's almost 6 rpg for guard on a team that played games at a 10%+ slower pace than the average college team. In BE play, he had 18 rebounds in 90 minutes. Again, close to 6 rpg. Considering our guards mostly sat at about 2-3 rpg (including DJ), and even our starting C was only at 6.3 in BE play...6 rpg from a 6'3" Swingman is impressive. Is it a small amount of PT? Yes. And some was in garbage time. Jeff played quite a bit down/up by a lot. If Tyler played 30+ minutes would he get 6 rpg? Maybe not, but I bet he'd average at least 5. Everything else I've seen backs this up: his high school stats, the scouting reports, my personal viewing. He mixes it up. He's strong. He can jump. And he wants the ball. He's a good rebounder, and on a rate basis, he's up there with Roy, Jeff and Brandon -- all significantly taller than him. Again you are projecting. I"m not talking about high school and scouts, and comparing heights to other players. I'm talking about what he actually DID on the court, which wasn't much. Oh yeah, 90/18 = 5. And, 5 does not equal 6. If you want to look at his stats of what he DID, and not projections or wishful thinking click on this link: sports-att.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=22423LOL @ ][-][ 0 `/ /-\ 5, its all good man. We are just debating here and having dialogue. Thats a beautiful thing.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 11, 2005 19:40:34 GMT -5
Again you are projecting. I"m not talking about high school and scouts, and comparing heights to other players. I'm talking about what he actually DID on the court, which wasn't much. Oh yeah, 90/18 = 5. And, 5 does not equal 6. If you want to look at his stats of what he DID, and not projections or wishful thinking click on this link: sports-att.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=22423no_way, I find your claims to be absurd. Sweetney averaged about 7.4 boards per game in his frosh year in a starting role for the most part. Crawford had 18 boards in 90 minutes of Big East play. Using New Math and a base of 10, that is exactly 8 boards per 40 minutes. So, that would be comparable to Mike's numbers, although we have to discount somewhat because Mike didn't average 40 mpg. What is Tyler supposed to do? Adopt the SHU strategy and start a power play?
|
|