Page 5 of 37 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 725
  1. #81
    Ok, just looked at the box score. A couple of things stand out:

    -50 rebounds is ridiculous, were they playing a team of dwarfs who couldn't box out??
    -Shooting 57% at the line will not get it done
    -Bullock only got 13 mins, how long before this blow hard starts acting out???
    -HB had good 1st half numbers, really good, but nothing in the second half... humm? Probably nothing to it.
    -70% from 3pt land is not going to happen very often if ever again

    So, it is hard to say just looking at the numbers, but looks like a typical game where one team is way WAY more talented than the other and wins easily. I am not going to take a lot away from this win.

    I did read where the "we want biscuits" chant was revised... is this not the lamest chant in sports anywhere? I mean come on, begging for biscuits... really?

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    Ok, just looked at the box score. A couple of things stand out:

    -50 rebounds is ridiculous, were they playing a team of dwarfs who couldn't box out??
    -Shooting 57% at the line will not get it done
    -Bullock only got 13 mins, how long before this blow hard starts acting out???
    -HB had good 1st half numbers, really good, but nothing in the second half... humm? Probably nothing to it.
    -70% from 3pt land is not going to happen very often if ever again

    So, it is hard to say just looking at the numbers, but looks like a typical game where one team is way WAY more talented than the other and wins easily. I am not going to take a lot away from this win.

    I did read where the "we want biscuits" chant was revised... is this not the lamest chant in sports anywhere? I mean come on, begging for biscuits... really?
    wow, i thought you were starting to come around a bit.

    commenting on the game by just looking at the box score isn't really a valid commentary.

    I agree, shooting 57% from the line will not be good enough against most opponents, but I think UNC will be much better from the line.

    I agree that drawing any kind of negative conclusion from HB not scoring in the second half would be silly. UNC won by 40+ points. If UNC lost the game and HB didn't contribute, then perhaps there would be some validity.

    As far as Bullock. I think calling him a "blow hard" is a bit low, but I know why you dislike him. I think that little "ratface" comment miss characterized him quite a bit. He is a good kid with a good head on his shoulders and I do not think he will say or do anything to complain about a lack of playing time. I think there are just too many guys at the 2. Dexter got 23 minutes and Leslie McDonald got 15 minutes. Both are sophomores and both had great games last night. Watching the game and not simply reading a combination of numbers would have allowed better insight into the game.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by jv001 View Post
    Think SI curse..Go Duke!
    Shhh about SI. Have you seen the latest cover?

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Interesting how many of them did not have particularly distinguished professional careers.
    Not that I think this necessarily reflects in any way on Barnes, but in the interest of fairness, six of the 14 guys SI listed are all-time great NBA players or are headed in that direction (Durant, Anthony). Of the rest of them, all but Pervis Ellison were at the very least solid players in the League or have the potential to be. (Note: I'm counting Bernard King as an all-time great because it's my duty as a Knicks fan, but he did average over 22 ppg for his career, including one season where he averaged over 32.) Jury's still out on Hansbrough and Beasley, though the verdict is looking pretty good for Beasley, who's killing it right now.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Right

    Quote Originally Posted by Starter View Post
    Not that I think this necessarily reflects in any way on Barnes, but in the interest of fairness, six of the 14 guys SI listed are all-time great NBA players or are headed in that direction (Durant, Anthony). Of the rest of them, all but Pervis Ellison were at the very least solid players in the League or have the potential to be. (Note: I'm counting Bernard King as an all-time great because it's my duty as a Knicks fan, but he did average over 22 ppg for his career, including one season where he averaged over 32.) Jury's still out on Hansbrough and Beasley, though the verdict is looking pretty good for Beasley, who's killing it right now.
    Agreed that most were solid players. I'd argue that Chris Jackson didn't do much, but I'm too lazy to look up his statistics. I think Ellison would have been solid, but for injuries.
    Just trying to point out that being one of best freshmen of all time is not necessarily a guarantee of NBA stardom. Players mature at different rates and at different times. I think we sometimes forget that.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Agreed that most were solid players. I'd argue that Chris Jackson didn't do much, but I'm too lazy to look up his statistics. I think Ellison would have been solid, but for injuries.
    Just trying to point out that being one of best freshmen of all time is not necessarily a guarantee of NBA stardom. Players mature at different rates and at different times. I think we sometimes forget that.
    Can't that argument be made a lot of college stars, freshman or not?

    Look at the last 10 years of Naismith winners:

    Shane Battier
    Jason Williams
    T. J. Ford
    Jameer Nelson
    Andrew Bogut
    J. J. Redick
    Kevin Durant
    Tyler Hansbrough
    Blake Griffin
    Evan Turner

    It's too early to decide on the career of Turner of Griffin, but 1 isn't playing in the league anymore (JWill), 1 is virtually useless now (Ford), 3 are solid role players (JJ, Battier, Hansbrough), 1 is a decent second/third banana (Bogut), 1 is a one-time All-Star that probably won't make it again (Nelson), and 1 is a Superstar (Durant).

    And those are the best college players.

    While there is a correlation between success in college and success in the NBA, there are so many outliers.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Agreed that most were solid players. I'd argue that Chris Jackson didn't do much, but I'm too lazy to look up his statistics. I think Ellison would have been solid, but for injuries.
    Just trying to point out that being one of best freshmen of all time is not necessarily a guarantee of NBA stardom. Players mature at different rates and at different times. I think we sometimes forget that.
    Jackson (Abdul-Rauf) wasn't ever an NBA superstar, but he had four very strong NBA seasons (averaging between 16 and 19.2 ppg) and was a double-digit scorer for the first 7 years of his career. Then he fell off the map.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Princeton, NJ

    I think you can conclude something from watching this game .

    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    Ok, just looked at the box score. A couple of things stand out:

    -50 rebounds is ridiculous, were they playing a team of dwarfs who couldn't box out??
    -Shooting 57% at the line will not get it done
    -Bullock only got 13 mins, how long before this blow hard starts acting out???
    -HB had good 1st half numbers, really good, but nothing in the second half... humm? Probably nothing to it.
    -70% from 3pt land is not going to happen very often if ever again

    So, it is hard to say just looking at the numbers, but looks like a typical game where one team is way WAY more talented than the other and wins easily. I am not going to take a lot away from this win.

    I did read where the "we want biscuits" chant was revised... is this not the lamest chant in sports anywhere? I mean come on, begging for biscuits... really?
    Here is what I took from the game (and I promise you that you would have had a completely different take on the game if you actually saw it):

    (1) Harrison Barnes has a great shot. Not a good one, a great one. You really can't look much better than he does as the ball leaves his hand. Whether he can utilize that shot against good college defenses of course is yet to be seen. But when Hofstra gave him a little room, he let it fly, and it went in.
    (2) The difference between this year's team and last year's is clearly the ability to shoot the ball. There are many more options, all of whom seem better than their counterpart last year (that being themselves in some cases).
    (3) This is not a great defensive team. Henson's length does make a difference in the middle. Carolina got so many long, offensive rebounds.
    (4) They do not have guards that can attack the basket and dish for easy buckets inside. The one exception to that might be Marshall who had a great pass to a semi-open big man that resulted in an and one (though he is more of a Jason Kidd passer than a drive and dish passer if that makes sense). Kickouts to shooters will be much more effective with this team.

    I think the game at Carolina will be a war.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange&BlackSheep View Post
    Here is what I took from the game (and I promise you that you would have had a completely different take on the game if you actually saw it):

    (1) Harrison Barnes has a great shot. Not a good one, a great one. You really can't look much better than he does as the ball leaves his hand. Whether he can utilize that shot against good college defenses of course is yet to be seen. But when Hofstra gave him a little room, he let it fly, and it went in.
    (2) The difference between this year's team and last year's is clearly the ability to shoot the ball. There are many more options, all of whom seem better than their counterpart last year (that being themselves in some cases).
    (3) This is not a great defensive team. Henson's length does make a difference in the middle. Carolina got so many long, offensive rebounds.
    (4) They do not have guards that can attack the basket and dish for easy buckets inside. The one exception to that might be Marshall who had a great pass to a semi-open big man that resulted in an and one (though he is more of a Jason Kidd passer than a drive and dish passer if that makes sense). Kickouts to shooters will be much more effective with this team.

    I think the game at Carolina will be a war.
    I didn't see the entire game, only brief, interrupted segments, but I was impressed. Obviously Hofstra isn't a strong opponent, so I can't draw any clear conclusions yet, but O&B seems on target in these specific points.

    As long as the Heels don't have to over-depend on brilliant PG play, and as long as LDII doesn't turn into a soap opera [for whatever reason], he and Marshall might do just fine. I'll be interested to see how both do against better competition. I can see that Marshall is no speed-demon, but that guy is a first-rate passer.

    I thought last year that McDonald would transfer, but with the unexpected departures of 3 guys, minutes have opened up, and he can play some.

    If one can get beyond HB's super self-consciousness, brand-wise, it's pretty hard to deny he's very good in lots of ways. Lots.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Can't that argument be made a lot of college stars, freshman or not?

    Look at the last 10 years of Naismith winners:

    Shane Battier
    Jason Williams
    T. J. Ford
    Jameer Nelson
    Andrew Bogut
    J. J. Redick
    Kevin Durant
    Tyler Hansbrough
    Blake Griffin
    Evan Turner

    It's too early to decide on the career of Turner of Griffin, but 1 isn't playing in the league anymore (JWill), 1 is virtually useless now (Ford), 3 are solid role players (JJ, Battier, Hansbrough), 1 is a decent second/third banana (Bogut), 1 is a one-time All-Star that probably won't make it again (Nelson), and 1 is a Superstar (Durant).

    And those are the best college players.

    While there is a correlation between success in college and success in the NBA, there are so many outliers.
    Well, one thing to take from this list is that most of the guys with real elite NBA talent don't stay in school long enough to win a Naismith Award. The Naismith and most of the other awards tend to skew a bit toward upperclassmen. It is not impossible for a freshman to win one, but experienced players get a little extra benefit of the doubt compared to a frosh.

    However, the great NBA players tend to be kids who leave after their freshman year (or high school before that was disallowed).

    -Jason "it is true though-- the skills to succeed in college and to succeed in the NBA are not always the same" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  11. #91
    I watched most of the game.

    Barnes looked very good in the first half. His shot was falling, and he does a lot of little things. Very effortless looking player. He's not, however, particularly strong with the ball and needs to work on defensive consistency.

    UNC was okay defensively in the first half, despite Hofstra's high shooting percentage. They forced a lot of turnovers, but Hofstra hit some tough shots. That Jenkins kid is legit. In the second half, or at least the first part of it that I watched, UNC was a little better defensively, and Hofstra didn't shoot as well even when open a bit. I think UNC mixed up their defense, or maybe it was just fatigue, but Jenkins was less effective.

    Hofstra could give them a false sense of accomplishment, however. They had little height, and what they had was not particularly physical except for one sub. It will be interesting to see if Minn. more physical front line can handle the UNC finesse bunch without any double downs opening up the perimeter. That brings me to that Knox kid. He actually shows some flashes of skill, and his by far the most physical presence UNC has in the paint. He'll be important to them when they meet teams with thick front lines. If he gets the job done, it will raise them up a notch in the scheme of things. If not, they'll be vulnerable to physical interior play.

  12. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mizzou, post-Quin
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    I didn't watch the game...
    I was really looking forward to your first impression, as you are one of the harsher critics of unc's game... not the program, the coach, the fans (you all are equally equipped there), but as I recall, Old Navy was one of the first to cry foul last season with the team, and particularly, the interior game.

    Kudos to Orange, Gumbo and Sand for giving their analysis.

    I'm looking forward to better competition, as early as today, although I have my criticisms of Tubby Smith, so I hope you can check out the game, Old Navy.

    And for those that didn't see... Henson hit a hook shot (the only one he took, I believe). It still line drived toward the basket, but it went in.

  13. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Loved HB's second half productivity against that almost mid-major powerhouse.

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by Devilsfan View Post
    Loved HB's second half productivity against that almost mid-major powerhouse.
    he's overrated, huh? should have scored 9 pts in the first half and 10 in the second? then you would respect his 19 pt's? If you were HB, how would you break up his 19 pt's per half for the game?

    UNC won by 40+ pt's, get a bit of perspective instead of picking on him for basically no reason.

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    new york

    kong's right

    hard to argue with kong on this one. it's a long season, but early signs on hb are good for them and less good for those hoping to see more of what we saw last year from the heels.


    wheat, please call home.

  16. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by shoutingncu View Post
    I was really looking forward to your first impression, as you are one of the harsher critics of unc's game... not the program, the coach, the fans (you all are equally equipped there), but as I recall, Old Navy was one of the first to cry foul last season with the team, and particularly, the interior game.

    Kudos to Orange, Gumbo and Sand for giving their analysis.

    I'm looking forward to better competition, as early as today, although I have my criticisms of Tubby Smith, so I hope you can check out the game, Old Navy.

    And for those that didn't see... Henson hit a hook shot (the only one he took, I believe). It still line drived toward the basket, but it went in.
    Thanks. I did see the Lipscomb game and to be honest was not very impressed. UNC in that game looked like the UNC from last year. They had a very inferior team that they really could not put away. Turnovers were not that big of a deal, but they had a difficult time getting defensive stops. That and Ol Roy's substitution pattern would be concerns for me, if I was a UNC fan.

    By all reports, the Hofstra game was more like the UNC of two years ago. Dominating an inferior team from start to finish. But it is still too early to tell how they will play over the season. What we may have is exactly what we have seen in the two games thus far, a hybrid of the '09 and '10 teams. '10 on some nights and '09 on others.

    Barnes is going to be a really good player, but the issue to me is will he be an AA type player and if not how will that impact his psyche. I think he will be fine as long as the UNC fans and media do not eat him alive when he doesn't live up to the unrealistic expectations heaped upon him.

    Kong, I disagree that you cannot get anything out of looking at a box score without watching the game, if that were the case then why print them?? I can tell a lot by looking at shooting percentages, rebounding, minutes played, TO:A, etc... of course nothing replaces actually seeing the flow and play of the game, but boxscores do tell a tale.

    The blow hard comment about Bullock may not be fully justified, but I am not a fan of his after the "ratface" comment. Yes, he is a kid, but he is old enough to know better than to say things like that. Even his buddies had enough sense to distance themselves from that comment. I got the impression from that comment that he is one to say what is on his mind without thinking about it. So if he is hitting 2/3 of his shots and only getting 13 minutes a game, yes I would expect at some point for him to mouth off, either in public or in practice. We will have to wait and see...

  17. #97
    He is the Dimitar Berbatov of basketball (only I like Berbatov in soccer). He is good, but he doesn't do the most athletic stuff, he looks like he is sleepwalking for large portions of the game. He shoots well, but he is not ever going to beat anybody off the bounce at this level.

  18. #98
    If UNC survives Minn. it looks like they get WVU. That will test the toughness of UNC's frontline. I don't know WVU's situation in terms of talent and experience this year, but Huggins' teams are always very physical.

  19. #99
    ok, just watching some of the Hofstra/WKU game... UG-LY basketball. 28-32 8 minutes into the second half... UNC should have scored 130 point on this group!!

  20. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    ok, just watching some of the Hofstra/WKU game... UG-LY basketball. 28-32 8 minutes into the second half... UNC should have scored 130 point on this group!!
    I love it, and I agree! Even Hubert Davis was saying that it was "fool's gold."

Similar Threads

  1. Roy Williams Is Already in Mid-Season Form
    By slower in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 11:26 AM
  2. Wash Post - Early Season Winners/Losers
    By gw67 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-26-2007, 08:50 AM
  3. An Early Season Look at UNC
    By gw67 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-05-2007, 08:53 PM
  4. Early Season Look at ACC Stats
    By gw67 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-04-2007, 09:51 PM
  5. Loss in the early part of the season...
    By Kewlswim in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-01-2007, 08:27 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •