Quinton Chievous

[Clock_Tower]

Looked it up, he hit 9 3s. Not much of a threat.

Is it a full moon or what?!? Congratulations on your research. I never said David Robinson was a threat. In fact, I inferred the opposite. Still, he took a number of 3's, and if we accept your number, hit 9 of them. At a 33% successs rate, that means David Robinson launched 27 3 pointers or 1 per game. How many did CR and BC shoot this past year? I'd suggest that while some players do, most players who play the 4 or 5 don't average 1 per game. Still think your comparison is a good one?

Also, the rest of my comment was that he physically could have played as a wing if he played at a different. For us, he did not have the luxury to play on the perimeter. David Robinson was small and undersized but was effective b/c he played with heart. I still see no comparison between David Robinson and CR or BC.

[jjray]

What's your point? I read your comment in the context it was written - that we might have to do the same, which worked under Spoon, next year. I did not post that all Spoon teams were small.

Maybe you speak a special variation of the English language. I'm starting to lose my patience to play nice with you Clock. Let's review.

Your post: "Wait a second guys. We may not be that good at the 4 and 5 positions but we will NOT be small. Comparisons to Spoons' teams are just not even close. David Robinson was a tweener who could have played some minutes at the 3 at a different program."

What the frick (stronger word intended) are those words supposed to mean? You are wining because you perceive the comments say our team will be small. Don't even respond because I'm tired of this conversation. There is really no way for you dig reason out of what you have posted.

[thetorch]

Is it a full moon or what?!? Congratulations on your research. I never said David Robinson was a threat. In fact, I inferred the opposite. Still, he took a number of 3's, and if we accept your number, hit 9 of them. At a 33% successs rate, that means David Robinson launched 27 3 pointers or 1 per game. How many did CR and BC shoot this past year? I'd suggest that while some players do, most players who play the 4 or 5 don't average 1 per game. Still think your comparison is a good one?

Also, the rest of my comment was that he physically could have played as a wing if he played at a different. For us, he did not have the luxury to play on the perimeter. David Robinson was small and undersized but was effective b/c he played with heart. I still see no comparison between David Robinson and CR or BC.

David Robinson was 9-40 lifetime from 3 point range. 0-11 his jr year. 9-29 his senior year. His jr year the team had 654 attempts, his sr year we shot 730. He shot 3s occasionally because everyone else did. They were always cringe inducing and I remember Spoon pulling him out of the game because he was shooting them. Robinson was a 5 in a 3s body. He played center at JUCO. He wasn't a wing or capable of playing there. His JR year we had minutes to give at the 3, with really only Highmark as a true wing, he never played there. Harris did though, he could guard a 3 early in his career. Eric Jones was geting solid backup minutes at the 3. Besides Larry Simmons, the least talented scholarship player Spoon brought in. If Robinson could have played the 3 he would have.

[kmbilliken]

David Robinson was 9-40 lifetime from 3 point range. 0-11 his jr year. 9-29 his senior year. His jr year the team had 654 attempts, his sr year we shot 730. He shot 3s occasionally because everyone else did. They were always cringe inducing and I remember Spoon pulling him out of the game because he was shooting them. Robinson was a 5 in a 3s body. He played center at JUCO. He wasn't a wing or capable of playing there. His JR year we had minutes to give at the 3, with really only Highmark as a true wing, he never played there. Harris did though, he could guard a 3 early in his career. Eric Jones was geting solid backup minutes at the 3. Besides Larry Simmons, the least talented scholarship player Spoon brought in. If Robinson could have played the 3 he would have.

Sekue Barantine was the least talented scholarship player Spoon brought in. When Spoon's main target signed elsewhere he had no plan B, so he brought in Barantine, a juco who was a backup even on his juco team.

[thetorch]

Sekue Barantine was the least talented scholarship player Spoon brought in. When Spoon's main target signed elsewhere he had no plan B, so he brought in Barantine, a juco who was a backup even on his juco team.

Barentine was at least athletic. He was kind of a joke but he made some contributions. Jones could defend and that was it, no offensive skills whatsoever.

[thetorch]

Back to Chievous. Iowa is going hard after him. Big Ten could be too much to turn down especially without Moser here.

[billiken_roy]

greg hardin was the least talented billiken ever brought in as a scholarshipped player.

[moytoy12]

Back to Chievous. Iowa is going hard after him. Big Ten could be too much to turn down especially without Moser here.

Say goodbye to chievous then.

[SpencerFilibuster]

Say goodbye to chievous then.

This is interesting because Iowa doesn't really need a 6'5" SF/SG type. They need a true PG and some big men.

[Clock_Tower]

Maybe you speak a special variation of the English language. I'm starting to lose my patience to play nice with you Clock. Let's review.

Your post: "Wait a second guys. We may not be that good at the 4 and 5 positions but we will NOT be small. Comparisons to Spoons' teams are just not even close. David Robinson was a tweener who could have played some minutes at the 3 at a different program."

What the frick (stronger word intended) are those words supposed to mean? You are wining because you perceive the comments say our team will be small. Don't even respond because I'm tired of this conversation. There is really no way for you dig reason out of what you have posted.

Whatever. Next time post something that makes sense in the first place. Also, next time be careful when you agree with genius known as Archy as some of his comments will get attributed to you.

[billiken_roy]

This is interesting because Iowa doesn't really need a 6'5" SF/SG type. They need a true PG and some big men.

we really dont need a sf/sg either. but i have heard over and over here if you have a chance to upgrade talent why pass on it. wouldnt that same thinking work for iowa?

[Scoop]

Say goodbye to chievous then.

I've come to terms that we will not bring in anyone else for next year. I believe we are a bubble team if this team stays where it is for next season. Hopefully Manning can give us around 8-10 quality minutes a game grabbing a few boards and altering some shots. Our guard play will be very exciting with KM pushing for A10 POY. A tourney birth depends on the development of RL, CE, and CR in my opinion.

[billiken_roy]

I've come to terms that we will not bring in anyone else for next year. I believe we are a bubble team if this team stays where it is for next season. Hopefully Manning can give us around 8-10 quality minutes a game grabbing a few boards and altering some shots. Our guard play will be very exciting with KM pushing for A10 POY. A tourney birth depends on the development of RL, CE, and CR in my opinion.

completely agree with every word of the above post.

[slu72]

A tourney birth depends on the development of RL, CE, and CR in my opinion.

No truer words were ever spoken. Although, I'd lump BC in there with them as well. He showed some real development in his game this year... at times. If he can be consistent he will be a major part of our success next year.

[moytoy12]

I've come to terms that we will not bring in anyone else for next year. I believe we are a bubble team if this team stays where it is for next season. Hopefully Manning can give us around 8-10 quality minutes a game grabbing a few boards and altering some shots. Our guard play will be very exciting with KM pushing for A10 POY. A tourney birth depends on the development of RL, CE, and CR in my opinion.

Agreed. To go one step further, I think we will have enough development out of RL, CE and CR to push us into the tourney.

[brianstl]

The key for this team making the tounament next year is Jake Barnett being as good as advertised. His ability to spread the floor with his outside shooting alone will make are bigs better on the offensive end.

[slu72]

The key for this team making the tounament next year is Jake Barnett being as good as advertised. His ability to spread the floor with his outside shooting alone will make are bigs better on the offensive end.

I'd add KM and MM making a leap forward in their ability to hit 3's in the high 30s, or at the least CE getting his stroke back, and we'll be solid. Can't expect JB to do it every nite, even if he's as good as advertised.

[NH]

The key for this team making the tounament next year is Jake Barnett being as good as advertised. His ability to spread the floor with his outside shooting alone will make are bigs better on the offensive end.

We need good defense and rebounding out of the bigs. In my mind that is they key. Last year, Rob and Cody were both subpar defensively and neither were great rebounders. I think Rob is going to have a huge year this year, if he can become a solid defender and rebounder that would be extremely beneficial.

I think our best lineup might be to go small and play DE at the 4 honestly. Our guards are just much better than our bigs. And what's worrisome is I don't see any bigs coming in that are going to shift that dynamic in the next couple years. But we will have one of the deepest backcourts in the nation next year.

[moytoy12]

We need good defense and rebounding out of the bigs. In my mind that is they key. Last year, Rob and Cody were both subpar defensively and neither were great rebounders. I think Rob is going to have a huge year this year, if he can become a solid defender and rebounder that would be extremely beneficial.

I don't disagree with your assessment of Rob's D last year, but I was encouraged by his increased defensive intensity and effectiveness the last handful of games.

[NH]

I don't disagree with your assessment of Rob's D last year, but I was encouraged by his increased defensive intensity and effectiveness the last handful of games.

+1 It's mostly about gaining strength at this point for Rob in my opinion. He is firmly entrenched as a starting big for the next three years. We NEED to fill out the pieces around him in the frontcourt.

[brianstl]

We need good defense and rebounding out of the bigs. In my mind that is they key. Last year, Rob and Cody were both subpar defensively and neither were great rebounders. I think Rob is going to have a huge year this year, if he can become a solid defender and rebounder that would be extremely beneficial.

I think our best lineup might be to go small and play DE at the 4 honestly. Our guards are just much better than our bigs. And what's worrisome is I don't see any bigs coming in that are going to shift that dynamic in the next couple years. But we will have one of the deepest backcourts in the nation next year.

Could the defense from the bigs be better? Sure.

Is it the most important thing? It is not even close.

We were a pretty good team defensively least year. We ranked 47th in the country in defensive efficiency.

The big problem was that we were absolutely awful offensively. We ranked 242nd in offensive efficiency and 263rd in 3 pt FG%.

[NH]

Could the defense from the bigs be better? Sure.

Is it the most important thing? It is not even close.

We were a pretty good team defensively least year. We ranked 47th in the country in defensive efficiency.

The big problem was that we were absolutely awful offensively. We ranked 242nd in offensive efficiency and 263rd in 3 pt FG%.

Fair points. But I trust that our offensive efficiency will improve greatly. I guess offensive production from the bigs is just as important.

We got killed rebounding in certain games as well, I think that is very important.

I have great faith between KM, KC, JB, JJ, MM, and DE our guards and wings will be productive on both ends of the floor. After that is where I become a little concerned if that makes sense.

[brianstl]

The Chievous recruitment is starting to remind of the Peterson recruitment. Hopefully we don't lose him to a program that doesn't have a coach.

[GOSLU68]

Fair points. But I trust that our offensive efficiency will improve greatly. I guess offensive production from the bigs is just as important.

We got killed rebounding in certain games as well, I think that is very important.

I have great faith between KM, KC, JB, JJ, MM, and DE our guards and wings will be productive on both ends of the floor. After that is where I become a little concerned if that makes sense.

+1 and besides that if we don't take anyone for spring it is a real sign that RM is not going to start taking players just to run them off later. Problem with having someone else like

Porter trying to build a reputation as a recruiter is they almost act like Vtime in that they are always pitching someone.

[moytoy12]

For what it's worth, not much mention of Iowa and Chievous on the interwebs.

Also, here's what one person had to report yesterday via twitter:

@ESPNChiPreps Scott Powers

Made some calls about unsigned seniors. It sounds like Saint Louis is all over Notre Dame F Quinton Chievous. Tennessee is also evaluating.

21 Apr via web