hoya73
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,222
|
Post by hoya73 on Apr 4, 2007 12:41:29 GMT -5
Or, if WVU releases its recruits now that Beilein's gone, that Flowers kid from St.Mary's Ryken.
|
|
chep3
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,314
|
Post by chep3 on Apr 4, 2007 13:11:14 GMT -5
I have no idea what kind of player Flowers is, but I graduated from Ryken in 2000 and that was our second season ever above .500 in our conference. It would scare the crap out of me to have a player from there. Are there any quality big men out there besides Patterson (who I'm assuming we have no shot at)?
|
|
PopeJohn2
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Ultimate bailout is yet to come and unavoidable. Uncle Sam gonna pay your debt for you!
Posts: 1,465
|
Post by PopeJohn2 on Apr 4, 2007 13:18:44 GMT -5
Samardo Samuels is not until 2008 and looks headed to UNC.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 4, 2007 13:23:33 GMT -5
Transfers obviously had nothing to do with Summers starting, since he moved into the lineup well before that - your memory is failing you, YB. It seems pretty clear that neither did injuries, since Sapp replaced Crawford. My memory is failing me? Also, when did my name become YB? Anyways.. I'm not disagreeing with your assertion that Summers was starting at the time. What I'm arguing is that Summers and Egerson were essentially splitting the SF position up and until his transfer. Both were getting about 20 minutes a game. It is hard to see if one was really that much higher on the depth chart than the other. My point is that 1) Egerson's transfer, 2) Crawford's illness and 3) Summers' dramatic improvement over the course of the season allowed Summers to fill the starting role at SF nicely, but I'm not entirely sure that had any of those factors not occured he would definitely be the starting SF at season's end. More than likely, had Crawford not gotten sick or Summers not improved dramatically, we would have seen a lot more of Crawford and Ewing at the SF earlier in the season. As a reference and glimpse into the past, here is this thread from when we learned of Marc's departure. I've quoted some posters below, not because I agree with their assessments, but to give a survey of the general sentiment on the board at the time. Giga: Here is SFHoya99's analysis at the time: TheWay: SFHoya99 chimes in again with hilarious speculation on aggressive play:
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Apr 4, 2007 13:35:35 GMT -5
I edited my post after I finished to also respond to Yb saying that Egerson started up until he left, which is why it got confusing.
Anyway, again, Summers took over the starting job well before Marc left. Sapp took Crawford's spot. Would Summers had played less without Egerson's transfer? Sure. But there is no reason to think he would have lost his starting job. DaJuan started because JTIII either thought he was better at that point in the season, or because he thought starting would help his development. Either way, Cambridge's initial statement - that transfers and illness contributed to Summers becoming the starter - was not accurate.
I honestly have no idea what the point of posting what people thought about Egerson's transfer has to do with this thread.
|
|
hoya73
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,222
|
Post by hoya73 on Apr 4, 2007 13:52:37 GMT -5
Samardo Samuels is not until 2008 and looks headed to UNC. My bad, I meant Jamar Samuels from Carroll HS and stuck a -do on the end of his first name by mistake.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 4, 2007 14:19:09 GMT -5
Either way, Cambridge's initial statement - that transfers and illness contributed to Summers becoming the starter - was not accurate. So your contention is that it had absolutely nothing to do with it. I disagree. It was meant to show what the general consensus was at the time. By looking back at how people reacted to the news, we can better assess what the perceived impact was. This is a much more accurate impression than any personal memory that is filtered through the lens of hindsight and experience. I do not suggest that they are 100% accurate or that they were predictive of what happened; I merely wanted to show that at the time of Egerson's departure his role on the team and that of Summers were perceived very differently than you portrayed. As those sentiments were contemporary with the time period you are speculating about, they are incredibly useful. It's called a primary source. Historians and other academics tend to use them to get first hand accounts of the contemporary reactions to historic events. I hope that the academic standards of Georgetown haven't slipped so much as to neglect teaching proper research skills.
|
|
JimmyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Hoya fan, est. 1986
Posts: 1,867
|
Post by JimmyHoya on Apr 4, 2007 14:40:13 GMT -5
Austin is the Summers of the class, Wright the Macklin. I think Rivers could end up like Ewing because of his defense as Mr. Crawford and Wattad (initially) fall further into the Sead and Izzo roles. Sapp is going no where. Are you all saying that Wright--not even the human MACHINE, Austin Freeman--is going to be so much better by the end of the year he will have surpassed a bigger, stronger, Jessie Sapp with 2 years more of experience in some legitimately huge games, who I further assume will have an ever improving and at least respectable jump shot and the same above average perimater defense skills? Whaaaaat? I really, really, really hope this somehow happens.
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Apr 4, 2007 15:24:32 GMT -5
Either way, Cambridge's initial statement - that transfers and illness contributed to Summers becoming the starter - was not accurate. So your contention is that it had absolutely nothing to do with it. I disagree. This isn't an opinion question - since Egerson hadn't left yet, his transfer had nothing to do with Summers moving into the starting lineup. The other half of your statement (about Crawford) isn't factually wrong, but there is little reason to think he had anything to do with DaJuan's spot in the lineup. Sapp had hurt his ankle earlier, and was widely expected to take the spot anyway. People also forget that Crawford played significant minutes for 7 games after returning, then lost his spot in the rotation. It wasn't as if he never got playing time after the illness. It was meant to show what the general consensus was at the time. By looking back at how people reacted to the news, we can better assess what the perceived impact was. This is a much more accurate impression than any personal memory that is filtered through the lens of hindsight and experience. I do not suggest that they are 100% accurate or that they were predictive of what happened; I merely wanted to show that at the time of Egerson's departure his role on the team and that of Summers were perceived very differently than you portrayed. As those sentiments were contemporary with the time period you are speculating about, they are incredibly useful. It's called a primary source. Historians and other academics tend to use them to get first hand accounts of the contemporary reactions to historic events. I hope that the academic standards of Georgetown haven't slipped so much as to neglect teaching proper research skills. Uhh . . .weird, weird post. The discussion was about how Summers became the starter. What people thought of Egerson leaving is totally irrelevant. Nice rant and attempted insults, but you were laughably off the mark. I "portrayed" Summers as the starter at the time Egerson left; nothing more. Unless you wanted to dispute that he was in the starting lineup, you wasted a lot of time and typing.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 4, 2007 15:36:38 GMT -5
Can we all just agree that we're very happy to have Summers and the incoming freshmen, and that their development will be key to the Hoyas doing well in 2008 and 09.... and leave it at that?
Boy, getting to a Final 4 doesn't even stop the self-immolation of our fanbase!
|
|
gujake
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 831
|
Post by gujake on Apr 4, 2007 15:38:22 GMT -5
It's so hard to predict how things will turn out with the guard rotation next year. Here are some of my own observations though:
Austin: I really can't see him not getting good minutes. The guy is incredible. Whether he is starting by the end of the year or not doesn't matter too much because he'll be getting minutes some way or another. Only way he doesn't play is if he doesn't improve defensively.
Chris: Depends a bunch on how he learns the offense and if his passing skills improve within it. Already a terrific shooter and defender, he is basically Jeremiah Rivers with a much better shot and worse passing skills.
Jesse: Should still be a starter in the beginning of the year and likely the whole season. He is too valuable as a passer in the Princetown to not get his minutes. If Freeman and/or Wright start learning the offense though, Jesse's minutes will be reduced.
Jeremiah: Will certainly get PT in the beginning of the year, but if he does not become a bigger threat to shoot offensively, his minutes will be in jeopardy. The only advantage he really has over Chris is his knowledge of the offense, but if Chris starts to catch up, there will be little reason for Jeremiah to get time.
Tyler: With the huge cluster of guards, it's going to be hard for Tyler to get minutes... I think. Tyler's biggest asset is his defense, and next year we will have two incredible perimeter defenders in Chris and Jeremiah. If his health was really the most important reason he didn't get much time this year though, then he might surprise us.
What a good problem to have.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 4, 2007 15:41:55 GMT -5
What about if you count Tyler as a forward (which he basically is, with his rebounding)? If he's a frontcourt player then he gives us good depth where we need it and doesn't crowd the backcourt...
He'd be perfect in guard-heavy sets.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 4, 2007 16:00:15 GMT -5
I know, I know, the best people should be on the court. But - Freeman and Wright are high school All-Americans, as was Macklin. High school All-Americans expect to be in the starting lineup and, when potential future recruits see they are not at Georgetown, they will go elsewhere where they can start and get playing time. I'd like to see us start Freeman at the 3 and Wright at the 1 and use Ewing and Sapp as backups who may get a lot of minutes. That way, both Freeman and Wright get the experience to be at their peaks come tournament time, even if it costs us losses early on.
|
|
chep3
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,314
|
Post by chep3 on Apr 4, 2007 16:38:22 GMT -5
Jessie is going to be WAY too good with another year of offseason workouts to bring off the bench. For evidence, see the 60 foot laserbeam pass in the unc game. Also, he's way too good of a rebounder from the guard spot to talk about benching him for someone who hasn't stepped foot on campus. We'll get playing time for both of them. I don't think Sherron Collins got any less love from anyone just because he came off the bench behind Russell Robinson.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 4, 2007 16:49:12 GMT -5
So your contention is that it had absolutely nothing to do with it. I disagree. This isn't an opinion question - since Egerson hadn't left yet, his transfer had nothing to do with Summers moving into the starting lineup. The other half of your statement (about Crawford) isn't factually wrong, but there is little reason to think he had anything to do with DaJuan's spot in the lineup. Sapp had hurt his ankle earlier, and was widely expected to take the spot anyway. People also forget that Crawford played significant minutes for 7 games after returning, then lost his spot in the rotation. It wasn't as if he never got playing time after the illness. It was meant to show what the general consensus was at the time. By looking back at how people reacted to the news, we can better assess what the perceived impact was. This is a much more accurate impression than any personal memory that is filtered through the lens of hindsight and experience. I do not suggest that they are 100% accurate or that they were predictive of what happened; I merely wanted to show that at the time of Egerson's departure his role on the team and that of Summers were perceived very differently than you portrayed. As those sentiments were contemporary with the time period you are speculating about, they are incredibly useful. It's called a primary source. Historians and other academics tend to use them to get first hand accounts of the contemporary reactions to historic events. I hope that the academic standards of Georgetown haven't slipped so much as to neglect teaching proper research skills. Uhh . . .weird, weird post. The discussion was about how Summers became the starter. What people thought of Egerson leaving is totally irrelevant. Nice rant and attempted insults, but you were laughably off the mark. I "portrayed" Summers as the starter at the time Egerson left; nothing more. Unless you wanted to dispute that he was in the starting lineup, you wasted a lot of time and typing. A few points before I let this go: 1) In the future I will stay out of the way of your huge edited for Summers. It's obvious that you are sensitive to any percieved criticism of him or questions about what his role would have been had other factors not come into play. It's noted, you love Summers. 2) I really don't understand why you don't think what people thought of Egerson, Summers and the team in general when Egerson left it sheds any light on our discussion. What people thought of Egerson and Summers shows how valuable he was to the team. To wit, while Summers was the starter he split time evenly with Egerson at the time he left the team. Many even contended that Egerson was the better player. Therefore, had Egerson stayed how can we be certain Summers would have played more than 20 minutes? How would can we know whether Egerson wouldn't have won back the job? We can't. I think Summers would have kept the job, but Egerson leaving obviously eliminated one of the only competitors for the job. 3) Your comments about Tyler are also off point. Sure Tyler did return and get very limited burn, but you cannot discount the fact that Tyler's mono stripped him of 30 pounds of muscle and prevented him from working out and practicing with the team for several weeks. That effectively eliminated Summers only other competition for the job.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Apr 4, 2007 17:03:49 GMT -5
From everything I've read and the two times I saw Chris Wright play, I am confident in saying Wright is Allen Iverson part deux. Not b/c of his height, athleticism or game (though there are similarities) but because of similar situations (pre Iverson's trade to Denver). The guys on Wright's HS team SUCKED. Not counting the guy going to Mason, you could randomly pick any 3 Hoyatalkers to replace the rest of St. John's starting 5 and the team would be comparable. Kind of like Iverson in Philadelphia. Wright shot a lot because it gave his team the best chance to win. Just like Iverson in Philly. Doesn't mean he can't pass, just that it wasn't what the team needed from him.
The analogy goes even further: when Wright was playing AAU ball, he wasn't dominating the offense throwing up every shot necessary. Instead, he altered his approach to reflect the fact that his bad shots were not more likely to go in than an open shot from his teammates and distributed the ball more. Kind of like Iverson when he was playing in the Olympics and had actual talent surrounding him.
Wright is a good passer, with good instincts and the desire to play in the Princeton offense. He'll need to adjust, just like most freshman, but it won't be a massive alteration to his game. The big difference is when he sets up his teammates with open shots (which he did at St. Johns), they'll make them and so he'll keep doing it.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Apr 4, 2007 18:30:02 GMT -5
From everything I've read and the two times I saw Chris Wright play, I am confident in saying Wright is Allen Iverson part deux. Not b/c of his height, athleticism or game (though there are similarities) but because of similar situations (pre Iverson's trade to Denver). The guys on Wright's HS team SUCKED. Not counting the guy going to Mason, you could randomly pick any 3 Hoyatalkers to replace the rest of St. John's starting 5 and the team would be comparable. Kind of like Iverson in Philadelphia. Wright shot a lot because it gave his team the best chance to win. Just like Iverson in Philly. Doesn't mean he can't pass, just that it wasn't what the team needed from him. The analogy goes even further: when Wright was playing AAU ball, he wasn't dominating the offense throwing up every shot necessary. Instead, he altered his approach to reflect the fact that his bad shots were not more likely to go in than an open shot from his teammates and distributed the ball more. Kind of like Iverson when he was playing in the Olympics and had actual talent surrounding him. Wright is a good passer, with good instincts and the desire to play in the Princeton offense. He'll need to adjust, just like most freshman, but it won't be a massive alteration to his game. The big difference is when he sets up his teammates with open shots (which he did at St. Johns), they'll make them and so he'll keep doing it. Sorry to be skeptical about freshmen as second comings but I can't think of a freshman backcourt more talented than Lawson/Ellington. And they got wrecked by poor little old Jon Wallace and Jessie Sapp and their inferior games AFTER a full season of playing. Now maybe Wright is way better than both these guys. Hey and maybe Freeman's loose handle is less of a risk than Vernon "developing" a face-up game (in quotes because he had one in high school and inexplicably lost it in the Big East for no known reason. That won't happen to Freeman's handle I'm sure). Again these guys should be great contributors but we have a very high-level team here with a lot of talent. And I think to call a kid AI or expect him to start is way too much pressure and frankly unrealistic. Let's get them out there and enjoy them as a great addition to this team without expecting them to bump players and be hall of famers.
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Apr 4, 2007 18:39:01 GMT -5
Cambridge, my finals points
1 - I haven't made a single comment about how good Summers is, but rather only about how he got the job in the first place.
2 - We were talking about how Summers got the job, not whether he would have somehow lost it again later had Egerson stayed. Therefore, it is quite obvious that the thread you linked was irrelevant. At this point I assume you know this and are just being difficult.
3 - Crawford didn't lose 30 pounds of muscle, and I didn't hear anything about him still being weak as the season went on. Maybe he was, but I think his limitations as a player are what caused his minutes to fall once Big East play got going (and well after he had returned).
To easyed - there is something to be said for needing to get elite recruits into the lineup. Macklin didn't get big minutes this year, but he was behind lottery picks, considered raw, and was not as highly ranked as Austin. If a guy like Freeman - top 10 recruit, highly skilled and seems to fit well in the Princeton, behind guys who don't have NBA talent - doesn't get many minutes, it could certainly be a red flag to other top recruits who were looking at Georgetown.
Regardless, I'm very confident Austin will get his minutes. He is simply far too talented to be stuck on the bench behind guys like Crawford, Spann and Rivers. Wright will take longer to adjust, but I still expect him to see good time by the end of the year.
Edit - GIGA, from where are you getting the idea that Freeman has a "loose" handle?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 4, 2007 18:56:42 GMT -5
Freeman has a loose handle? That's the first I've heard of that.
That said, comparison to AI is silly. Silly. I know where Tbird was going -- it was more of a commentary on Chris' supposedly selfish play than a comparison of game -- but Iverson was special from day one and is still special. And Chris' and his games are not all that comparable. Iverson is a force of nature whom no one can guard. Chris is more of a shooter than I think most people on this board think. He can get to the hole, and maybe more than anyone currently on our team, but amongst elite PGs, he's not known for his penetration.
Austin and Chris are going to get time.
They both have sweet shots (Chris may be streakier, but he's still a great shot).
They are both intelligent kids.
They are both unselfish. I know there are comments about Chris being more of a scorer -- but so was Jessie and so is Jon. Chris' performance in the McD's game, where he moved without the ball and threw two back doors and ran a nice pick and roll, shows how easily he can fit in.
But they both probably need some help on defense. And they'll take some time to pick up the offense. And they be facing two returning starters of a Final Four team.
They are going to be good. If they start, though, they are going to have to be incredible (unless Jeff/Roy leaves).
|
|
Highsmith
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,490
|
Post by Highsmith on Apr 4, 2007 19:04:22 GMT -5
Here are my thoughts on each player and their role, for whatever they are worth (my thoughts, not the players!!)-
Jeff Green- A big decision for him--many here seem to think he will leave and most of you probably have better sources on that than I do. Based on what I have seen/heard/read, I am pretty split. I think part of Jeff wants to stay and make a run with this group of guys and part of him knows that there could be some big money out there and he may be putting at least some of that at risk. Based on what I know about Jeff, he will make the best decision for himself and while it would not surprise me to see him go, I am still leaning towards him staying by a slight margin......call it blind optimism!!
Roy Hibbert- Again, a decision is in order, but I really don't see Roy leaving. I think he takes one more big step up in his senior year and really goes out on top. If he can work on that nice little outside jumper he showed and work on preventing the silly fouls he gets while just improving his overall game, we should see something very special out of the Center spot all next year.
Jonathan Wallace- I think JW will clearly be starting and fill a similar role as this year. He is a major leader on this team and every guard we will have can learn A LOT from playing with him. He may lose some minutes from this year, just due to more options, but he'll be a major part of next year's team.
Jessie Sapp- I have never seen any of our incoming freshmen play and while Wright is very highly regarded, I am not convinced he will be taking over Jessie's spot in the starting lineup any time soon. Jessie made great strides this year, really understands the system and has turned into a very good player. If he can continue to develop his outside shot, he will be very dangerous next year. If Wright goes way beyond my expectations, maybe he will be starting later in the season and having Jessie off the bench would certainly be a great boost as he could play either guard slot easily and give a solid ball-handler either way. Barring Wright just blowing everyone away, I see Jessie as the starter for the season.
DaJuan Summers- A lock as a starter, most likely in his current "3" spot. This kid really grew as a player this year and if he can improve over the summer like many of our players have between that freshman and sophomore year, then we could see something really great out of him. As far as turnovers, most of the ones I saw were on his drives that led to him losing the ball or getting called for a charge--he definitely needs to work on his passing, but I don't think it is that much of a weakness. I have a feeling the Assassin will make his mark in just about every game we play next year.
Patrick Ewing- One of the three guys, to me, that could either be starting or coming off the bench--depending on Green's status. I loved the energy he gave coming into the game to spell any one of the front-line guys and I would bet that JTIII will want that next year as well if possible. However, if Jeff does go, Ewing is the "most-ready" guy to start.
Vernon Macklin- The second of the three that have a shot to start if Jeff goes. I do agree, however, that both he and Roy would need to make some pretty big changes/improvements to their games to be successful playing a lot of minutes on the floor together. This alone may keep Vernon out of the starting role, but I wouldn't be surprised to see both he and Roy make those adjustments if that is what JTIII is looking at. Regardless of whether he starts or not, I think we all expect to see a lot more of The Big Ticket next year and I think we should see as much or more improvement from him as anyone on the team.
Jeremiah Rivers- A player who may be as much in control of his own playing time as anyone. If Rivers develops his shot and gets a little more aggressive in taking it, he may make it tough for some other guys to get as much time on the floor as they may want to. If his shooting/scoring abilities don't improve, then I see him dropping down the rotation a bit. There is always room for a bigger guard who can defend, rebound and handle the ball--just not as much room next year as there was this year.
Tyler Crawford- I know everyone really likes Tyler and I won't argue that point. However, with all of the options available where he can play, I don't see how he could possibly get any more playing time than he did most of this year. He played very sparingly and really only had 2 bench guys ahead of him he was competing for playing time with (Rivers and Ewing). Next year that number goes up to at least 3 and maybe as much as 5 if Green stays and Wattad really develops. I don't see him passing Ewing or Rivers for playing time and if Freeman is as good as advertised, e may be ahead of Tyler as well. Wright may start off behind him, but if he is going to develop in to the great player he is supposed to be, he will need time as well. Who knows about Wattad too....Again, I like Tyler a lot--I just don't think the playing time is ever going to be there for him unless he makes some HUGE strides in his game that I have yet to see. He proved this year that he can be a major factor on this team without getting the playing time.
Octavius Spann- As much as I'd love to predict improved playing time for all our returning players, I just think Spann is going to step into the Sead/Izzo space on the bench. He hasn't earned an increase of playing time over his first two years, so I doubt he'll get more as the overall talent level of the team continues to increase. Certainly, I have nothing against him and root for all Hoyas to succeed--just some guys have to be at the end of the bench.
Austin Freeman- I left the incoming freshmen for last because I know the least about them and have seen none of them play. Everything I say is based on what I have read here and from a few other sources. Freeman is my third possibility of who could take the spot in the starting lineup if Jeff leaves. If Austin is as good as advertised, then it will be very difficult to keep a talent like him off the floor. More likely is that he will be that first sub for the 2/3 spots and give us a great scoring threat off the bench--at least that is what I am hoping for.
Chris Wright- There seems to be some of the biggest debate over his role on the team next year of anyone. Some seem to think he will come in and start, while others think he will be behind just about every guard on the team. I guess I see him as being in the place Rivers was this year. He will probably play very little early on, but gradually work his way into the rotation until we see a split between Chris and Jeremiah depending on what is needed on the floor- size, scoring, defense, etc. If Jeremiah becomes a true offensive threat, Chris may have trouble getting that PT, but if not, then I see a split of some sort with Chris eventually getting the bigger share assuming he is as special as everyone says.
Omar Wattad- It seems like people know, or at least have discussed him the least. Based on what little I know, I have to place Omar firmly next to Spann at the end of the bench for now. Hopefully he is as good of a shooter and defender as I have read in places and he can be a bigger part of the team--but for now I don't see it.
I think we all have to realize that JTIII is not likely to run a rotation any bigger than 10 and that is probably pushing it quite a bit. In reality, if Jeff leaves, we will probably see Hibbert, Wallace, Sapp, Summers, Ewing, Macklin, Rivers and Freeman get the bulk of the playing time with Wright eventually working into the mix to take away some of Rivers' time (and possibly Sapp and Wallace to a lesser degree). Only time will tell and we certainly should have a better and deeper bench than we've seen in a long time. I'm sure the summer will provide a lot more questions than answers, but no matter what, this should be one of the most anticipated seasons in years.
|
|