Jump to content

Open Practices Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 314
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

There are a number of superlatives you could use to describe Kevin & his SLU career (tough, competitive(?), lights out shooter, gutty). However, "winner" is not one of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

Best doc post maybe ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SLU's record during Kevin's career was 70 - 55. His teams never won anything of significance nor participated in a post-season tournament. His teams suffered several embarrassing losses such as Texas A&M 33-69 in 2006 and the dreaded GW game. Very hard to argue SLU put up much of a "fight" in those games. His 2006-07 team was (rightly or wrongly) expected to make a postseason tournament and didn't largely because of crippling losses to terrible St. Bonaventure & Duquense teams to open the conference season.

For comparisons sake, SLU's record during Loe, Evans, McCall, & Jett's careers was 93 - 41.

Kevin was a very good player for SLU perhaps great by SLU standards. Reportedly, he is a great person as well. Though largely not his fault, his teams were pretty mediocre. There are a number of superlatives you could use to describe Kevin & his SLU career (tough, competitive(?), lights out shooter, gutty). However, "winner" is not one of them.

Kevin was a winner. Sodie was not, as he was unable to provide KL with a better supporting cast. A good point guard would have really helped. And having TL run the point for stretches usually ended in disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

I should have known this would cause a sh*t storm. As I said, not saying Kevin isn't any of the things you are saying, I just can't call him a "winner" because he didn't win anything (while at SLU). I don't want to de-rail the thread, so let's just leave it there.

I will say that sometimes I forget that Kevin was a part of the team that played at GW game because it is hard to believe a player of his caliber could be a part of that awfulness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to derail the thread, but by my count, Welmer was 4 for 6 from three and 2 for 4 in the paint during the scrimmage. He pulled down one tough offensive rebound near the end too. There was a play where he had an open look from 3 but didn't shoot, and after the play Milik told him "you've gotta shoot that." He is a bean pole so I won't expect a whole lot in the paint this year, but he has a quick release and can really stroke it. If we can have a good stretch 4 this year it would be huge for our offense.

Overall they looked a lot better yesterday than the other practices. The score was 40-34 after 20 minutes of basketball with a 24 sec shot clock, but there were some obvious defensive lapses. There were some bad turnovers which will happen this year. The shooting and passing was good and no one got seriously chewed out like they did in the other practices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Neufeld.............in my opinion we have not had a comodity like him in the middle in years. I believe the

coaching staff needs to utilize him and his skill and will learn to do so. The new offense should do this if they

get him the ball in the post and he is good enough around the basket to find the open man when he does not

have the shot. In time the coaches will insist they get it inside to him and this will create other opportunities

and weapons within the offense. He and Welmer have HIGH basketball IQ's and with maturity will make

this a better team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the practice. it was the first I had been to and I thought the movement from one drill to another was great. The intensity and noise for coaches and players interesting. I have nothing to compare it to, since I did not see any practices before.

The Blink test failed me. I saw Welmer and in warm up/shoot around, and he was missing shots, looks skinny etc...Blink: not going to contribute much will see how he develops.....then the drills started. He moved well, he is the fastest big in the wind sprints, tenacious in rebounding drill, nice block on defense, then in the scrimmage he was the Star... Hit 3 or 4 behind the arc. Passed up one and got held at by his teammates to shoot....apparently they know he can. He moves very well without the ball, and while he has a skinny frame he seems strong, I left thinking it is going to be hard to keep him off the floor. It is one practice but he is more talented than I expected...

Agree MN kinda disappeared, but showed flashes of athleticism and skills, still think he has a high ceiling.

The New offense seems to favor a guy like MY, creates mismatches, MY was on the wing and he was suppose to cut to the left low post, coaches yelling "fill, fill, fill..." He finally did and posted up against a guard. I think he shoots well enough from 15 feet to bring a big out on him.....so if you put a big on him, it should open the lane up etc... I think there will be bumps implementing it but once the get it and play there will be so many options.....

I think DR can get to the basket when he wants, had trouble finishing but had fouls call and hit the FT.

The not so good:

AY and DR seemed to try to force things when they need points. AY is still getting traveling calls(Arrrgghh?$/!!) hit the FTs!!!!

Lots of turnovers.....

Other Good things:

Turnout pretty filled bleacher...

Larry Hughes there.....

EAJ

Did anyone else see Jake Barnett?

MR played well yesterday too, took a little physical abuse from DR but bounced up quickly, turned his ankle later....

Overall I was impressed the recruits are better than expected time will tell how much production they will have in their first year...

Anyone know why the 24 second clock?? Will they play that in the Bahamas? Is it just to quicken the pace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-I like the idea of using the 24 second clock in practice to adjust to the real 30 second version, JCrews must read this board an know of our distaste for the '1 second left heave' so he is trying to eliminate that unfortunate staple from our offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the practice. it was the first I had been to and I thought the movement from one drill to another was great. The intensity and noise for coaches and players interesting. I have nothing to compare it to, since I did not see any practices before.

The Blink test failed me. I saw Welmer and in warm up/shoot around, and he was missing shots, looks skinny etc...Blink: not going to contribute much will see how he develops.....then the drills started. He moved well, he is the fastest big in the wind sprints, tenacious in rebounding drill, nice block on defense, then in the scrimmage he was the Star... Hit 3 or 4 behind the arc. Passed up one and got held at by his teammates to shoot....apparently they know he can. He moves very well without the ball, and while he has a skinny frame he seems strong, I left thinking it is going to be hard to keep him off the floor. It is one practice but he is more talented than I expected...

Agree MN kinda disappeared, but showed flashes of athleticism and skills, still think he has a high ceiling.

The New offense seems to favor a guy like MY, creates mismatches, MY was on the wing and he was suppose to cut to the left low post, coaches yelling "fill, fill, fill..." He finally did and posted up against a guard. I think he shoots well enough from 15 feet to bring a big out on him.....so if you put a big on him, it should open the lane up etc... I think there will be bumps implementing it but once the get it and play there will be so many options.....

I think DR can get to the basket when he wants, had trouble finishing but had fouls call and hit the FT.

The not so good:

AY and DR seemed to try to force things when they need points. AY is still getting traveling calls(Arrrgghh?$/!!) hit the FTs!!!!

Lots of turnovers.....

Other Good things:

Turnout pretty filled bleacher...

Larry Hughes there.....

EAJ

Did anyone else see Jake Barnett?

MR played well yesterday too, took a little physical abuse from DR but bounced up quickly, turned his ankle later....

Overall I was impressed the recruits are better than expected time will tell how much production they will have in their first year...

Anyone know why the 24 second clock?? Will they play that in the Bahamas? Is it just to quicken the pace?

My thought is that they will be using the 24-second possession clock in the Bahamas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

Standing Ovation, DocB! Great post about Kevin!

Kevin was about as good as they came and history will prove that as well.

Kevin was 6th ALL-TIME in Billiken History in Points scored.

Kevin was 7th ALL-TIME in Billiken History in 3P%.

Kevin was 2nd ALL-TIME in Billiken History in 3P Made.

Kevin was 2nd ALL-TIME in Billiken History in 3PA.

Kevin was 8th ALL-TIME in Billiken History in steals.

Kevin was 4th ALL-TIME in Billiken History in minutes played.

Kevin was 9th ALL-TIME in Billiken History in games started.

Not to mention that Kevin was a fierce defender who Rammer named the "Honey Badger" and Rammer is never wrong.

Like Doc said if you look at leadership, student athlete, and all around character - and then add in the stats, there weren't many better Billikens in school history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

So you are saying a winner doesn't have to win? Lisch fulfills his potential, works hard, overachieves, that doesn't necessarily make him a winner.

There is no problem with the definition of winning. Kevin Lisch won games, he didn't win titles at least not at SLU. Lisch might be a better player than Kwamain Mitchell or Jordair Jett but those two were winners. Lisch was not. There haven't been many true winners at SLU. Let's not tarnish their legacies by including others just because they were good or great players. That doesn't make you a winner even in a team sport.

Lisch is probably in my top 5 favorite Billikens of all time and it disheartens me that I have to put him down in order to refute your ridiculous claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy you are so mistaken about this. Just completely wrong. Your idea of a winner is distorted. comparing won-lost records?? give me a break... I suppose that means all those guys at KY and Duke are just, by default "winners." hmmmm

A winner is someone who makes the most out of what they have. Kevin was the best we've had during my time, bar none, the best kid, the best competitor, the best role model. Kevin had a number of teammates who really did not belong in Division 1. To be honest, I'm surprised someone would even claim that he was not. I guess we are facing a "problem of definition" here: a common problem in our era of postmodern epistemological crisis....

So -- Let me state it as clearly as possible right here: Yes, he was a winner, and if he wasn't a winner, nobody was.

I don't disagree with much of what you say, but hard to call Kevin the "best" competitor - Jordair and Marque had an incredible ability to will a team to victory in crunch time. Time and again, those guys refused to lose. Kwamain was also in the same mold. The point is, we've had a lot of great competitors, so it is hard to call Kevin the "best."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are saying a winner doesn't have to win? Lisch fulfills his potential, works hard, overachieves, that doesn't necessarily make him a winner.

There is no problem with the definition of winning. Kevin Lisch won games, he didn't win titles at least not at SLU. Lisch might be a better player than Kwamain Mitchell or Jordair Jett but those two were winners. Lisch was not. There haven't been many true winners at SLU. Let's not tarnish their legacies by including others just because they were good or great players. That doesn't make you a winner even in a team sport.

Lisch is probably in my top 5 favorite Billikens of all time and it disheartens me that I have to put him down in order to refute your ridiculous claim.

I see what you are saying in regards to "winning" being winning games. So, does that mean there is only a handful of D1 players that are considered winners each year and that is the NCAA Champions? Or, are conference champions also winners? How about the conference tourney winners? Honestly, just trying to understand what you are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall I was really impressed yesterday. For a number of reasons I believe our defense will be much improved overy last year. If we could just cut down on the amount of open look 3s I would be happy though. I really didn't get the feel that Hines was taking a leader role. I noticed almost every player at times being vocal. It seems everyone was communicating well. I felt like DR, MR, and AY were taking on more of the leadership role...imo. MN seems to have a ton of upside. While he didn't show a whole lot of flash on the offensive side during scrimmage; he did show well during 3 on 3 drills, and his defense seems like his biggest contribution. He really felt like a constant pressure down low and for rebounds. Definitely seems to be physical. JB looks great for a freashman. Quick step and great lateral movement. I felt like jolly at times was still being hesitant. There were several times during drills and scrimmage; he could have made a particular "move" but seemed to have this 1 second pause before doing it. The kid that impressed me the most was welmer. He was quicker than I expected, has a good shot and great touch in the paint. I know this season will probably have a lot of ups and downs; but I can't help but be optimistic and excited for this season!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are saying a winner doesn't have to win? Lisch fulfills his potential, works hard, overachieves, that doesn't necessarily make him a winner.

There is no problem with the definition of winning. Kevin Lisch won games, he didn't win titles at least not at SLU. Lisch might be a better player than Kwamain Mitchell or Jordair Jett but those two were winners. Lisch was not. There haven't been many true winners at SLU. Let's not tarnish their legacies by including others just because they were good or great players. That doesn't make you a winner even in a team sport.

Lisch is probably in my top 5 favorite Billikens of all time and it disheartens me that I have to put him down in order to refute your ridiculous claim.

Not sure a bunch of MBM giving opinions about a player tarnishes anyone's reputation....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SLU's record during Kevin's career was 70 - 55. His teams never won anything of significance nor participated in a post-season tournament. His teams suffered several embarrassing losses such as Texas A&M 33-69 in 2006 and the dreaded GW game. Very hard to argue SLU put up much of a "fight" in those games. His 2006-07 team was (rightly or wrongly) expected to make a postseason tournament and didn't largely because of crippling losses to terrible St. Bonaventure & Duquense teams to open the conference season.

For comparisons sake, SLU's record during Loe, Evans, McCall, & Jett's careers was 93 - 41.

Kevin was a very good player for SLU perhaps great by SLU standards. Reportedly, he is a great person as well. Though largely not his fault, his teams were pretty mediocre. There are a number of superlatives you could use to describe Kevin & his SLU career (tough, competitive(?), lights out shooter, gutty). However, "winner" is not one of them.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/basketball/perth-wildcats-claim-fifth-nbl-crown-with-96-72-defeat-of-wollongong-hawks/story-e6frf3f3-1225918760956

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SLU's record during Kevin's career was 70 - 55. His teams never won anything of significance nor participated in a post-season tournament. His teams suffered several embarrassing losses such as Texas A&M 33-69 in 2006 and the dreaded GW game. Very hard to argue SLU put up much of a "fight" in those games. His 2006-07 team was (rightly or wrongly) expected to make a postseason tournament and didn't largely because of crippling losses to terrible St. Bonaventure & Duquense teams to open the conference season.

For comparisons sake, SLU's record during Loe, Evans, McCall, & Jett's careers was 93 - 41.

Kevin was a very good player for SLU perhaps great by SLU standards. Reportedly, he is a great person as well. Though largely not his fault, his teams were pretty mediocre. There are a number of superlatives you could use to describe Kevin & his SLU career (tough, competitive(?), lights out shooter, gutty). However, "winner" is not one of them.

This is the most ridiculous, ill-advised, and ill-informed post I've seen in 10 years of lurking and posting on this board. Shove that post where the sun don't shine. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...