jbizzle09 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I agree with most of your thoughts. But recall, we were not hoping for the return of WR and his Freshman year or even his Soph year. We were hoping for an improved WR -- 4 years following high school. In short, every player on this team must improve in the off-season and must come ready to play from day 1 if we are to make the Tourney. Is the Austrailian trip still on? Guess no one knows anything about CE's rehab. Also, my memory is vague on what position DE play the second half of the season. I do recall him starting and gettin alot of minutes but don't recall it mostly being at the 3. Thought he played quite abit at the 4. Anyone with better memory?? I would say that down the stretch, DE played more time at the 3 but still some minutes at the 4. He would typically start the game at the 3, with RL (sometimes CR) and BC starting at the 4 and 5. Then, depending upon matchups and flow of the game, he would sometimes move to the 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Broy- Could you respond to the rumors that you were under the influence the day that you said Cassity had NBA potential? Was it in fact due to alcohol or just a poor basketball IQ? so after all these months, you are now first admitting to reading comprehension issues or is it just a matter that it took you some four months to read through the discussion of cassity's "nba potential"? go back and reread the posts again. maybe you can comprehend this time. either it is the steroids affecting your brain power or did you take too many hits off the helmet during college batting practice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 so let me get this straight, you want to penalize meyer for being good enough to play more minutes per game? wow. That's no more crazy than you penalizing Conklin for not being a small town midwesterner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 That's no more crazy than you penalizing Conklin for not being a small town midwesterner. how did i do this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bk18 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 If we get Christian Thomas as a walk-on, I think the offseason recruiting was a success. Manning was fine. Adding Christian Thomas as a walk-on would be nice as well. Next year we will have 4 scholarship spots available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 so let me get this straight, you want to penalize meyer for being good enough to play more minutes per game? wow. Conklin Vs. Meyer Vs. Sloan Conklin was clearly superior to Meyer and Sloan his freshman and sophomore years. Meyer had no position and wasn't good enough to play on a very bad team until the midway point his freshman year. Sloan his freshman year was horrible. I never thought he would make it to a senior season at least at SLU. Sloan and Meyer's number spiked their JR years. Conklin's rose but not as drastically. I still think Conklin had a better Jr year than Sloan maybe not Meyer. Look at Sloan's Jr year Sloan Here are Conklin's Jr Year Now Meyer's Jr year Sloan and Meyer's numbers are more consistent than Conklin's because they played more minutes. I think Conklin's numbers despite playing less are better than Sloan's. Meyer was extremely consistent his Jr, look at all those double digit scoring games. Conklin didn't have that but he did have several big games, games with point totals and rebounding totals that Meyer didn't have. Big games count too. Through 3 years I'd give the overall edge to Conklin. Just their Jr years I take Meyer slightly over Conklin with Sloan behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 If we get Christian Thomas as a walk-on, I think the offseason recruiting was a success. Manning was fine. Adding Christian Thomas as a walk-on would be nice as well. Next year we will have 4 scholarship spots available. Now there is a hopeful thought! They might work a deal with Christian that he gets the open scholarship for next year but the program expects to take it back the following year to bring another player in. Something like the Paul Eckerle / Daniel Lisch deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BACKHANDtheRICAN Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 so after all these months, you are now first admitting to reading comprehension issues or is it just a matter that it took you some four months to read through the discussion of cassity's "nba potential"? go back and reread the posts again. maybe you can comprehend this time. either it is the steroids affecting your brain power or did you take too many hits off the helmet during college batting practice? Backing off of your ridiculous claim that Cassity has a chance to make it to the league. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 You forgot to say that RM may or may not be back. I still say he might not be back. A month ago, I had reason to believe he was calling it quits. But he sure has been acting like he cares about next yr, hasn't he? We shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Backing off of your ridiculous claim that Cassity has a chance to make it to the league. Well done. not at all. read the posts again. i said he had the size and skill set to be in a position should he have very good junior and senior years. i never once said he was going to be an nba player. is there anything else you are trying to read you might need some help with? maybe that third harry potter book you have been reading for six years? how about your monthly "highlights" magazine? i am there for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 We ended the 09-10 regular season 20-10. RE: the NIT: OK, 20 regular season wins will again put us on the bubble for the NIT, I meant earlier that we project to be similar to '09-'10, which was 20-10. I lobbed out the 22 a bit carelessly, thinking about the 23 wins that yr. And again, 20 might not be enough to get into the NIT, it depends upon who we play, RPI, who we beat, etc. So if we somehow do better than '09-'10 and get 22 wins, go, say, 22-8, I agree, we should get into the NIT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BACKHANDtheRICAN Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I still say he might not be back. A month ago, I had reason to believe he was calling it quits. But he sure has been acting like he cares about next yr, hasn't he? We shall see. I am going to take the opposite side of this argument. I say he might be back. Which also means he might not be back. We shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I am going to take the opposite side of this argument. I say he might be back. Which also means he might not be back. We shall see. You guys present compelling arguments, but I'm going to straddle the fence on this one. I'll say he may or may not be back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BACKHANDtheRICAN Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 You guys present compelling arguments, but I'm going to straddle the fence on this one. I'll say he may or may not be back. Boytoy- you can't take both sides. Either take: 1) he might be back (but maybe not) or 2) he might not be back (but maybe he will) We appear thoroughly divided on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 You guys present compelling arguments, but I'm going to straddle the fence on this one. I'll say he may or may not be back. Now this is pure speculation, but I think there is a 60% chance he will probably be back, a 30% chance that me might not return and a 10% chance that he thinks he may want to come back but isn't quite sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Now this is pure speculation, but I think there is a 60% chance he will probably be back, a 30% chance that me might not return and a 10% chance that he thinks he may want to come back but isn't quite sure. I'm not sure that is speculation. It may or may not be a counter-argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 i don't know why this is a question. on the other hand....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm not sure that is speculation. It may or may not be a counter-argument. Same dummies that could not understand the stupidity of arguing about the "10 man rotation" a month ago. I told them I had serious concerns about WR and RM, and that it was highly unlikely all 10 players would be here in the fall. Don't learn much, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Same dummies that could not understand the stupidity of arguing about the "10 man rotation" a month ago. I told them I had serious concerns about WR and RM, and that it was highly unlikely all 10 players would be here in the fall. Don't learn much, do you? Stick to giving betting advice about Duke games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 RE: the NIT: OK, 20 regular season wins will again put us on the bubble for the NIT, I meant earlier that we project to be similar to '09-'10, which was 20-10. I lobbed out the 22 a bit carelessly, thinking about the 23 wins that yr. And again, 20 might not be enough to get into the NIT, it depends upon who we play, RPI, who we beat, etc. So if we somehow do better than '09-'10 and get 22 wins, go, say, 22-8, I agree, we should get into the NIT. MB. Agree to disagree I guess but I see almost no comparison between '09-'10 and next year. In short, we had just lost our SR fixtures of KL, TL and BE and were trying to replace them with unproven guys from our Soph class of KM, WR, BC and KC (and w/o BT). These Sophs were to lead the team with our incoming Frosh class filling in the gaps and adding support. Believe AD May had made a comment that our Frosh class (CE, CS, JS, JJ and the shooter from KS) may be better than our Soph class. The youngest team in college basketball - but also a very talented group. That year, though, turned out to be a team led by only 3 players -- KM, WR and CE. Until CE arrived, our team was mediocre and lacked an additional scoring threat and almost no 3 point shooting. The loss of KM for the MO State game showed how dependent we were on KM. WR was good but really picked up his game as the season went on. Unlike '09-'10, next year we will have multiple options at point (4 guys with experience at the pg -- KM, MM, KC and JJ). Unlike 09-'10, we will have actually have good outside shooting in not only KM but also with MM and JB. Unlike '09-'10 when we only had WR on this the inside, next year we will have RL, DE, BC, CR and Manning - and possibly more. Unlike '09-'10, we will NOT be the youngest team in college basketball but instead will have two (2) Seniors (KC and BC) who have played considerably over the past 3 years, a veteran PG (KM) who is really a 4th year JR, we will have have CE as a JR as opposed to a late arrival, 1/2 semester Frosh, we will have 4 returning Sophs who were starters/guys who played significant minutes and who carried the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Same dummies that could not understand the stupidity of arguing about the "10 man rotation" a month ago. I told them I had serious concerns about WR and RM, and that it was highly unlikely all 10 players would be here in the fall. Don't learn much, do you? Thanks for setting everybody straight. You were the ONLY one who thought that WR might not make it back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BACKHANDtheRICAN Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Stick to giving betting advice about Duke games. +1 Smart money says... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 MB. Agree to disagree I guess but I see almost no comparison between '09-'10 and next year. In short, we had just lost our SR fixtures of KL, TL and BE and were trying to replace them with unproven guys from our Soph class of KM, WR, BC and KC (and w/o BT). These Sophs were to lead the team with our incoming Frosh class filling in the gaps and adding support. Believe AD May had made a comment that our Frosh class (CE, CS, JS, JJ and the shooter from KS) may be better than our Soph class. The youngest team in college basketball - but also a very talented group. That year, though, turned out to be a team led by only 3 players -- KM, WR and CE. Until CE arrived, our team was mediocre and lacked an additional scoring threat and almost no 3 point shooting. The loss of KM for the MO State game showed how dependent we were on KM. WR was good but really picked up his game as the season went on. Unlike '09-'10, next year we will have multiple options at point (4 guys with experience at the pg -- KM, MM, KC and JJ). Unlike 09-'10, we will have actually have good outside shooting in not only KM but also with MM and JB. Unlike '09-'10 when we only had WR on this the inside, next year we will have RL, DE, BC, CR and Manning - and possibly more. Unlike '09-'10, we will NOT be the youngest team in college basketball but instead will have two (2) Seniors (KC and BC) who have played considerably over the past 3 years, a veteran PG (KM) who is really a 4th year JR, we will have have CE as a JR as opposed to a late arrival, 1/2 semester Frosh, we will have 4 returning Sophs who were starters/guys who played significant minutes and who carried the team. The missing piece is a defensive force in the middle... WR. That was the key, a big INSIDE force defensively. Maybe someone will step up, but RL and CE are perimiter bigs, and BC and CR are not tall, long, not defensive intimidators. You think we will be better than 20-10 regular season next yr? I hope you are right. We shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Jesus, will you please stop with that? Willie was never a defensive force. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 He will be missed far more on the offensive end than the defensive end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.