Jump to content

Seattle Game Issues


HoosierPal

Recommended Posts

1) Early morning assumption is that we will have a short bench again.  Nothing has been circulated to suggest otherwise.  (Let's hope for a surprise.)

2) This will be a very interesting baptism for French, going against a 7'3" player. 

3) If Anthony doesn't get more than 9 minutes as he did against H-S, that may say he is destined for the end of the bench.  His size against the 7'3" pivot may be crucial.

4) It will be interesting to see who matches up against the Redhawks 6'8" guard Kavas, who can stroke it from the arc.  AD's 6'6" would seem to fit the task, but...........

5) Seattle has a new coach and new team (with three graduate transfers and the previously mentioned center coming back from a major injury), quite similar to the Bills.  It may not be a a clinically attractive game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

 -he was not a stat stuffer at SHall

Yes, we all knew that coming in. He averaged only 6 minutes and less than 1 point per game at the Hall.  But with his size, I for one thought he would be (and let me hopefully say WILL BE) a significant contributor.  Nine minutes against Harris Stowe raised my eyebrows.  Coach did say he had his best practice of the year on Wednesday, so maybe he will make a contribution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

Yes, we all knew that coming in. He averaged only 6 minutes and less than 1 point per game at the Hall.  But with his size, I for one thought he would be (and let me hopefully say WILL BE) a significant contributor.  Nine minutes against Harris Stowe raised my eyebrows.  Coach did say he had his best practice of the year on Wednesday, so maybe he will make a contribution.

Tonight will tell us a lot more about Anthony’s role than HS.  I don’t expect him to put up big numbers, but it would be a big help if he can provide solid defense against when we match up against teams with tall centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

1) Early morning assumption is that we will have a short bench again.  Nothing has been circulated to suggest otherwise.  (Let's hope for a surprise.)

2) This will be a very interesting baptism for French, going against a 7'3" player. 

5) Seattle has a new coach and new team (with three graduate transfers and the previously mentioned center coming back from a major injury), quite similar to the Bills.  It may not be a a clinically attractive game.

1) I assumed this may be coming, but hadnt heard anything

2) ya im worried

5) two of the three 5th years averaged less than 2 points through their 4 years. Crazy the 12 footer only averaged 6 boards last year. They only have two scoring threats too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoosierPal said:

1) Early morning assumption is that we will have a short bench again.  Nothing has been circulated to suggest otherwise.  (Let's hope for a surprise.)

2) This will be a very interesting baptism for French, going against a 7'3" player. 

3) If Anthony doesn't get more than 9 minutes as he did against H-S, that may say he is destined for the end of the bench.  His size against the 7'3" pivot may be crucial.

4) It will be interesting to see who matches up against the Redhawks 6'8" guard Kavas, who can stroke it from the arc.  AD's 6'6" would seem to fit the task, but...........

5) Seattle has a new coach and new team (with three graduate transfers and the previously mentioned center coming back from a major injury), quite similar to the Bills.  It may not be a a clinically attractive game.

If all players are not dressed, hope at least all players are present and seated near their teammates.  To me that would be a positive sign.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wgstl said:

1) I assumed this may be coming, but hadnt heard anything

2) ya im worried

5) two of the three 5th years averaged less than 2 points through their 4 years. Crazy the 12 footer only averaged 6 boards last year. They only have two scoring threats too. 

Whoa...they gots a 12 footer?  And his name is Crazy?  Well, that's just....crazy.  Gonna be tough to defend.  Well, can one of our players stand on another player's shoulders? I don't recall anything in the rule book saying you can't do it.

HoosierPal likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

Whoa...they gots a 12 footer?  And his name is Crazy?  Well, that's just....crazy.  Gonna be tough to defend.  Well, can one of our players stand on another player's shoulders? I don't recall anything in the rule book saying you can't do it.

Section 4. CLASS B TECHNICAL INFRACTIONS
Art. 1. A technical foul shall be assessed to a player or a substitute for the following infractions:

b. Climbing on or lifting a teammate to secure greater height.

PENALTY: Article 1 and Article 2.a through i. Two free throws shall be awarded to any member of the offended team. All infractions count toward ejection but do not count toward the team-foul total or disqualification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, White Pelican said:

Stupid technicalities. Stupid rule book. Sure, penalize an acrobatic team.

i agree.   i'd love to see a player flip up onto a teamates shoulders then do a bicycle kick block on a game ending 3 point attempt as he flipped off the shoulders.   that would make espn top plays for sure.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, moytoy12 said:

Agreed.  Gotta imagine they’re out, at a minimum, until the investigation is over.  This really really hurts our depth.  

I would assume this is the case.  Nothing may be said because it is simply not known if they will be able to play or not.  The outside law firm may not be communicating to the AD (directly or indirectly) what their timeframes are.  I think it is hard reading anything into this as if it has purpose of special meaning.  I think it is simply they do not know.

Do not forget that a few years ago the fire alarms went off inside the arena and nobody knew what to do.  The refs blew play dead and looked at Jim Crews.  Crews shrugged his shoulders (in the universal "I don't know" sign) and looked across the court to someone else in the administration who looked just as confused about what to do.  Gus Foul-ups then felt the need to make the announcement of "Folks nobody has told me what needs to be done".  Then some in the arena went outside.  Some people stayed.  No official announcement was made that people could return, the game just sorta restarted and people came back as they saw fit.  If basic questions like what should we do if the fire alarm goes off seems to escape the AD, then maybe it is best not to wade into the uncertain waters of Situation II.  This story also reminds me of how happy I am that Ford is here and how much things have improved and are improving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't understand why they would be suspended if the investigation is still ongoing. Shouldn't innocent until proven guilty apply here? I would understand if this were coming from Ford and he was suspending them for being stupid enough to get themselves under investigation, but we now know this isn't coming from the coach. 

My only theory is that they are strategizing and hoping that a "time served" punishment could be levied at the end. Otherwise, I think it's a little premature for the school to be enforcing punishment before the investigation is even over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 2010andBeyond said:

I still don't understand why they would be suspended if the investigation is still ongoing. Shouldn't innocent until proven guilty apply here? I would understand if this were coming from Ford and he was suspending them for being stupid enough to get themselves under investigation, but we now know this isn't coming from the coach. 

My only theory is that they are strategizing and hoping that a "time served" punishment could be levied at the end. Otherwise, I think it's a little premature for the school to be enforcing punishment before the investigation is even over. 

Correct. It would fit into the time served if given game suspensions. It also allows the team to work together without them in case they have to continue on a lot longer without them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, 2010andBeyond said:
  1.  I would understand if this were coming from Ford and he was suspending them for being stupid enough to get themselves under investigation, but we now know this isn't coming from the coach.

where have you read or heard that ford or anyone at slu said this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, 2010andBeyond said:

I still don't understand why they would be suspended if the investigation is still ongoing. Shouldn't innocent until proven guilty apply here? I would understand if this were coming from Ford and he was suspending them for being stupid enough to get themselves under investigation, but we now know this isn't coming from the coach. 

My only theory is that they are strategizing and hoping that a "time served" punishment could be levied at the end. Otherwise, I think it's a little premature for the school to be enforcing punishment before the investigation is even over. 

From a purely basketball perspective, it'd obviously be great to have them, but it may be better that the team learns early on to play without them in the event that these 3 never see the floor.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, 2010andBeyond said:

I still don't understand why they would be suspended if the investigation is still ongoing. Shouldn't innocent until proven guilty apply here? I would understand if this were coming from Ford and he was suspending them for being stupid enough to get themselves under investigation, but we now know this isn't coming from the coach. 

My only theory is that they are strategizing and hoping that a "time served" punishment could be levied at the end. Otherwise, I think it's a little premature for the school to be enforcing punishment before the investigation is even over. 

Many others on here are smarter than me about eligibility, but not playing at this point might preserve eligibility in the event of a negative outcome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my point of view, which is not shared by any number of you, the issue is what will be the best course of action to take with these players now if the worst outcome becomes reality when the processing is finished. Will it be better for them to be allowed to play now like nothing happened or will it be better to be kept them out of play now? The same line of thinking has to be taken regarding the University, what will be the better choice for the University now? There is no way I could answer or rationalize the possible answer to these questions, but it looks like the decision may have been taken not to let them play until the processing is finished at the very least.

 

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...