TheChosenOne Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Justin Johnson is really going to step up this year. Looking great in practice. Ross Varner was a killer in practice, Justin Johnson not so much (maybe in the layup line or walking thru campus). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Thanks for the morning laugh. It's always humorous to uncover the ironies of writing such as yours here. On the one hand, any MBM must surely be "mistaken" to believe they can analyze a player in a single practice. On the other hand, here is my analysis... I think a couple other guys have made similar remarks already. Let me just suggest you all read Gladwell's "Blink" and then think a little bit deeper about that proposition. In fact, we make quick judgments in the blink of an eye all the time. Yes, some are dubious at best, but the point of "Blink" is that once someone develops some expertise (10,000 hours worth), they can and in fact do make judgments and analysis with little or no cognitive effort. So no, we are not "mistaken": our quick knee jerk response to a player's innate skills, at this level and at this particular time, are often pretty accurate. Does it mean we can judge long-term results?? of course not. But let's all take a deep breath and realize, for those of us who have been around the game many decades and have seen countless guys come and go, and maybe even played, coached, and/or refereed a very long time: You can tell a great deal in even just a practice or 2. for example, you write: "MN is clearly a gamer who has skill and he competes. He is thinner than he will be in two years but he is not skinny and he has real bounce off the floor for dunks in game situations. He has a nice touch from the free throw line." Right, exactly -- that's Blink! Trust in the Blink -- at least, in areas where you have put in your "10,000 hours" (on that, see "Outliers" ... Also according to "Outliers", you need talent/ability to become an "expert." Since nobody on this board has that when it comes to judging hoops talent, we're all still just MBMs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Trust in the Blink -- at least, in areas where you have put in your "10,000 hours" (on that, see "Outliers" ... Just some quick and dirty math on this 10,000 hours thing - if you watch every SLU game in every season, as well as make it to a few practices that season, it would take you 125 seasons to judge any given player. As a spectator, 10,000 hours is a ridiculous threshold. That's two hours of watching basketball every day for about 14 years; realistically, given the game's seasonality and the fact we can't devote every day to watching some basketball, it's easily double that, and realistically more. So you're basically suggesting that only people who devote their lives to basketball are qualified to give an opinion. Which makes this board kind of pointless, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Which makes this board kind of pointless, right? -since Off Season Fridays went away at times I do wonder the point of this board.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Ross Varner was a killer in practice, Justin Johnson not so much (maybe in the layup line or walking thru campus). I was just remembering some of reports posted every summer with Johnson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 We have two open slots on the all-preseason squad to go with JJ, Varner and Newbourne. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Newbourne and Johnson hype, mild as it was, always cracked me up. Varner, though, was legitimately a practice All-American. Nailed every shot, always in the right position, got rebounds, set murderous screens. I'll never figure out why it didn't translate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Just some quick and dirty math on this 10,000 hours thing - if you watch every SLU game in every season, as well as make it to a few practices that season, it would take you 125 seasons to judge any given player. As a spectator, 10,000 hours is a ridiculous threshold. That's two hours of watching basketball every day for about 14 years; realistically, given the game's seasonality and the fact we can't devote every day to watching some basketball, it's easily double that, and realistically more. So you're basically suggesting that only people who devote their lives to basketball are qualified to give an opinion. Which makes this board kind of pointless, right? No need to be down about this Pistol, the 10,000 hours is just an easy number to remember and to be impressed by (in terms of the difficulty in achieving it), but in reality everyone is different and what may take someone 10,000 hours of work to develop, may take someone else a couple of hundred hours to do. There is nothing fixed about the number, it is not a fixed constant, what is required is to be able to eliminate the erroneous stuff from your fast thinking. I am sure there are quite a number of people in this board, you included in my opinion, that can do this type of adjustment quite adequately without the "required" 10,000 hours of expertise. On the other hand Dr. B is indeed saying that opinions coming from people that have devoted their lifetimes to basketball have more validity than those coming from people that have devoted their lives to something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I think Welmer will end up being a nice piece by the time he is a junior. That said, it is crazy to expect him to have an impact this season. He just doesn't have the body yet to play extended minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 No need to be down about this Pistol, the 10,000 hours is just an easy number to remember and to be impressed by (in terms of the difficulty in achieving it), but in reality everyone is different and what may take someone 10,000 hours of work to develop, may take someone else a couple of hundred hours to do. There is nothing fixed about the number, it is not a fixed constant, what is required is to be able to eliminate the erroneous stuff from your fast thinking. I am sure there are quite a number of people in this board, you included in my opinion, that can do this type of adjustment quite adequately without the "required" 10,000 hours of expertise. On the other hand Dr. B is indeed saying that opinions coming from people that have devoted their lifetimes to basketball have more validity than those coming from people that have devoted their lives to something else. I really don't care. Just pointing out that the 10,000 hours thing is absurd as it relates to us giving opinions on what we see from these players. I'm glad someone finally recommended a Malcolm Gladwell book, though. Never heard of him. Must be a plucky upstart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I'm also saying: do not underestimate a long term fan's blink when it comes to talent. But trust the coaching staff even more. I've also read a bunch of those books, including the thinking fast and slow; it's such fascinating stuff. I've found the concept of Blink very useful, however, as an introductory concept for the recent neuroscience; and by the way, you do not need to be a "professional" either, to have a very solid judgment. For instance, I'm a guitarist, not professionally, but for over 40 years. I can listen to about 20-30 seconds of a guitar player and have a pretty accurate sense of their level of playing ability. Sometimes it turns out to be wrong, but usually not. It's just Blink. My main point above was: of course we can have useful, legitimate judgments and analysis about these players, even after a single practice! You jump to the wrong conclusion: the observations of long-term amateurs is not pointless. By the way, the word "amateur" has a root in love: an amateur truly is a "lover" of some thing or activity, that is what the word means, so much so they do not need to be paid to pay attention to it, or participate in it. So yes, my point is simple: of course the judgments of long-term amateurs is not worthless. Read my original post, I think it was pretty clear about that. It was the other guy who claimed the opposite (even though he went on to contradict his own statement in the next paragraph) ... As for the math: the amount of hours, as Old Guy says, is just a number, and Gladwell has all sorts of other issues besides. He's a bit of a showboat, as well. But generally, I've definitely spent thousands and thousands of hours in, around, playing, and observing the game of basketball, amateur and MBM though I may be. Many others on here have as well. It adds up, just like my guitar playing, or whatever your hobby happens to be. You might be surprised about how many thousands of hours readers of this board have spent immersed in all things basketball, including this board, a forum for floating ideas and analysis and judgments. (the average American adult spends roughly 1000-2000 hours per year watching TV, for instance...something like 4-5 hours /day, on average). I can't express how much I love stirring up this board ! ! ! over and out; anyone else going tonight?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishdude Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I think Welmer will end up being a nice piece by the time he is a junior. That said, it is crazy to expect him to have an impact this season. He just doesn't have the body yet to play extended minutes. With his SHOT alone he will have some kind of an impact this year. If the new offense clicks he will get some back side kicks for some open looks. He is MUCH quicker and athetic that advertised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 Welmer may be more impactful in the non-conference slate. I just see him wearing down against A10 players night in and night out as a long season ends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 In other news, I have seen about 8,800 hours of the team so far so I am close to being able to give a full report. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 In other news, I have seen about 8,800 hours of the team so far so I am close to being able to give a full report. Can we just have Steve delete that nonsense? No reason for that discussion to continue. If it continues I am on board with them laying out their expectations for each player and the team and seeing how their expertise plays out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Varner, though, was legitimately a practice All-American. Nailed every shot, always in the right position, got rebounds, set murderous screens. I'll never figure out why it didn't translate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Gladwell's last book David and Goliath touches on hoops and specifically less talented teams using the press to win games. Starts by citing an 8th grade girls team before he eventually weaves in Pitino's Fordham/Providence teams. It's mostly anecdotal stuff as Gladwell is want to do, but it still makes for a fun read: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/05/11/how-david-beats-goliath Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Newbourne and Johnson hype, mild as it was, always cracked me up. Varner, though, was legitimately a practice All-American. Nailed every shot, always in the right position, got rebounds, set murderous screens. I'll never figure out why it didn't translate. This is strictly observational and anecdotal, but the most telling factor as to whether a fundamentally (shooting, dribbling, rebounding, etc.) strong player will have success at the next level is his natural vertical ability. A player can be the best ball handler and shooter in the country, but unless he is extraordinary tall or can "get up," he will struggle to get his shot off, finish in the lane, rebound, etc. when he takes his game to the next competitive level. This is why Ross Varner and Vashawn struggled in D1 games. This is why Kevin Lisch had a limited upside beyond the D1 level. This is why Kwamain, McCall, and Jordair had great success despite being undersized. This is also why Willie Reed could step on the court and be effective from the start despite having so many fundamental flaws in his game. In the case of Johnson, he just wasn't that coordinated or fundamentally strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlebill Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 We have two open slots on the all-preseason squad to go with JJ, Varner and Newbourne. I may go Grandy Glaze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I may go Grandy Glaze. 6' 8" PF from Texas ....Sekue Barentine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 nailed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 This is strictly observational and anecdotal, but the most telling factor as to whether a fundamentally (shooting, dribbling, rebounding, etc.) strong player will have success at the next level is his natural vertical ability. A player can be the best ball handler and shooter in the country, but unless he is extraordinary tall or can "get up," he will struggle to get his shot off, finish in the lane, rebound, etc. when he takes his game to the next competitive level. This is why Ross Varner and Vashawn struggled in D1 games. This is why Kevin Lisch had a limited upside beyond the D1 level. This is why Kwamain, McCall, and Jordair had great success despite being undersized. This is also why Willie Reed could step on the court and be effective from the start despite having so many fundamental flaws in his game. In the case of Johnson, he just wasn't that coordinated or fundamentally strong. Interesting theory. Varner did have some decent ups for his frame, though. He was 6-8 and pretty thick, but could show a nice step at the rim when he had to (in practice, of course). He didn't wind up getting to show that in games very often. I think he was deceptively athletic; by no means explosive but certainly could run and jump well for his size. There's no reason Varner shouldn't have been a solid contributing role player at the very least. I don't understand why it didn't come together in games. Newbourne was terribly flat-footed. The first time I saw him on a court, that was the first thing I noticed. I'm really curious as to what our staff saw when they watched him in juco. He was extremely limited athletically. JJ never shook his baby giraffe syndrome. He was all limbs. I don't know what his vertical was, but any dunk was just swinging and flailing arms and legs. He had no touch, he never really filled out his frame, he ran awkwardly - I find it hilarious that he was ever tagged "athletic" here by anyone. As for the vertical theory, it's certainly a piece of the puzzle but I think it's incomplete as a reason why players succeed or fail. Drew Diener had maybe a 4-inch vertical but managed to be a contributor for four seasons with his limited physical abilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 6' 8" PF from Texas ....Sekue Barentine Donnie Atkins. Scored about 20 pts in a midnight madness scrimmage and won the dunk contest the same night. Redshirted his freshman year and left the following year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Donnie Atkins. Scored about 20 pts in a midnight madness scrimmage and won the dunk contest the same night. Redshirted his freshman year and left the following year. I'm pretty sure Atkins was a juco transfer. He did sit out his junior year and then played just one year before ceding his final year of eligibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 I'm pretty sure Atkins was a juco transfer. He did sit out his junior year and then played just one year before ceding his final year of eligibility. I'll let willie and kshoe verify this, but I'm like 95% sure he came in as a frosh and never played an actual game. 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.