What is the Story on Hargrove

[moytoy12]

5 hours ago, 3star_recruit said:

I'm not sure where this meme is coming from. Perkins' man rarely scores on him. He's been pretty solid on D all season.

Agreed. Perkins has been fine on D. I think folks don't see the French/Goodwin "fire" out of Perkins and just conclude that he is playing lazy D. 

[Old guy]

I have the feeling, I may be wrong of course, that Perkins is just in the process of ramping up his D1 play. I think we will see a lot more from Perkins as he gets there. You have to be patient with some kids.

[wgstl]

9 minutes ago, Old guy said:

I have the feeling, I may be wrong of course, that Perkins is just in the process of ramping up his D1 play. I think we will see a lot more from Perkins as he gets there. You have to be patient with some kids.

agreed.  Juco players typically take a bit to get going. People assume since they already played at a level higher than HS they should be good to go from day 1.

[almaman]

Hargrove would be starting any team since RM except this one, we are deep. He gets to get first year in school under his belt and enjoy watching his team for a year. Deep not a sensation we're used to around here, It's  disorientating.  

[glazedandconfused]

12 minutes ago, almaman said:

Hargrove would be starting any team since RM except this one, we are deep. He gets to get first year in school under his belt and enjoy watching his team for a year. Deep not a sensation we're used to around here, It's  disorientating.  

I mean he wouldn't have started over Bess/Isabell/Goodwin/French/Foreman last year.

The fact that he's not even playing means he's just not ready yet. And that's ok. 

Other question, what position is he? A 3/SF?

[MichaelC]

On 11/14/2019 at 2:59 PM, Clock_Tower said:

Roy.   That was only our 3rd game of the year -- 4 if you count the exhibition game.    Hargrove entered the exhibition game AFTER the walkon (HIghtower), then did not play the 1st regular season game (though Hightower did), played 32 second (and in the first half) in the second game of the season (ahead of Hightower though only 32 seconds) and again last night ahead of Hightower - and for longer than Hightower. Call it a start - or dismiss it, but Hargrove now appears to be ahead of Hightower.   As to him being ahead of our guards?   I just don't see Hargrove playing the 3 at all this year.    And while he can knock down a 3 pointer (like Hankton can), I would prefer neither of them shoot the 3 unless the defense is truly not guarding them.   My point is that Hargrove's competition appears more to French, Bell, Hankton and Diarra than the guards - so there is definite minutes available for Hargrove to get more minutes (and to surpass both Bell and Hankton).   

As to your comments about Perkins and Hargrove, yes, I had hoped that both would be further along by now.   They aren't and Ford is doing the right thing.   By the start of the conference games, hopefully they will show big improvement.   If not enough, then hopefully by the midpoint of the conference games, and if not, then by the A10 Tournament.

As to Bell, he does have competition -- French, Hankton, Diarra and Hargrove.

Comparing Hargrove to Hightower is apples to oranges, Hightower is neither behind or ahead of Hargrove, it's a positional/role thing. In the games in which Hightower has played Ford has inserted him as the Point Guard even in situations (like the Belmont game) when another PG (in this case Goodwin) was still in the game, in that instance Ford put Goodwin off the ball and let Hightower run the team. So in reality, Hightower is the 3rd PG behind Goodwin and Collins.  In the BeImont game, even though Hightower only saw 2 minutes of live ball action, due to free throws, etc. he played 9 possessions (5 on O, 4 on D) that allowed Ford to get Yuri got 5-6 minutes of valuable rest, I think that's pretty typical of what you would want from a 3rd stringer. If Ford was playing Hightower off the ball then it would be fair to question why him and not Hargrove but Hightower is filling a role Hargrove can't. 

[Cowboy]

29 minutes ago, MichaelC said:

Comparing Hargrove to Hightower is apples to oranges, Hightower is neither behind or ahead of Hargrove, it's a positional/role thing. In the games in which Hightower has played Ford has inserted him as the Point Guard even in situations (like the Belmont game) when another PG (in this case Goodwin) was still in the game, in that instance Ford put Goodwin off the ball and let Hightower run the team. So in reality, Hightower is the 3rd PG behind Goodwin and Collins.  In the BeImont game, even though Hightower only saw 2 minutes of live ball action, due to free throws, etc. he played 9 possessions (5 on O, 4 on D) that allowed Ford to get Yuri got 5-6 minutes of valuable rest, I think that's pretty typical of what you would want from a 3rd stringer. If Ford was playing Hightower off the ball then it would be fair to question why him and not Hargrove but Hightower is filling a role Hargrove can't. 

-welcome to the Board, unless you are a troll

[glazedandconfused]

On 11/14/2019 at 1:59 PM, Clock_Tower said:

Roy.   That was only our 3rd game of the year -- 4 if you count the exhibition game.    Hargrove entered the exhibition game AFTER the walkon (HIghtower), then did not play the 1st regular season game (though Hightower did), played 32 second (and in the first half) in the second game of the season (ahead of Hightower though only 32 seconds) and again last night ahead of Hightower - and for longer than Hightower. Call it a start - or dismiss it, but Hargrove now appears to be ahead of Hightower.   As to him being ahead of our guards?   I just don't see Hargrove playing the 3 at all this year.    And while he can knock down a 3 pointer (like Hankton can), I would prefer neither of them shoot the 3 unless the defense is truly not guarding them.   My point is that Hargrove's competition appears more to French, Bell, Hankton and Diarra than the guards - so there is definite minutes available for Hargrove to get more minutes (and to surpass both Bell and Hankton).   

As to your comments about Perkins and Hargrove, yes, I had hoped that both would be further along by now.   They aren't and Ford is doing the right thing.   By the start of the conference games, hopefully they will show big improvement.   If not enough, then hopefully by the midpoint of the conference games, and if not, then by the A10 Tournament.

As to Bell, he does have competition -- French, Hankton, Diarra and Hargrove.

In what world are Hargrove and Bell competing for playing time at the same position? Hargrove is closer to Yuri's height than Bell's. Hargrove will still be one of the shorter 3's if he's truly 6'4".

 

Hargrove is realistically behind all of the following on the depth chart: Goodwin/Jimerson/Perkins/Jacobs/Thatch/Weaver

I think it's safe to say he's a project with legit athleticism. I wouldn't expect much out of him playing time-wise for the forseeable future. 

[almaman]

1 hour ago, glazedandconfused said:

I mean he wouldn't have started over Bess/Isabell/Goodwin/French/Foreman last year.

The fact that he's not even playing means he's just not ready yet. And that's ok. 

Other question, what position is he? A 3/SF?

keep forgetting about last year's tournament team. the years before that then

[WVBilliken]

15 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

In what world are Hargrove and Bell competing for playing time at the same position? Hargrove is closer to Yuri's height than Bell's. Hargrove will still be one of the shorter 3's if he's truly 6'4".

 

Hargrove is realistically behind all of the following on the depth chart: Goodwin/Jimerson/Perkins/Jacobs/Thatch/Weaver

I think it's safe to say he's a project with legit athleticism. I wouldn't expect much out of him playing time-wise for the forseeable future. 

Agree.  If Coach Ford thought Hargrove improves his chance to win, he'd be playing.  Looks like a learning year to me.  And that is okay.  If he learns quick, could see minutes depending on the style of future opponents.

 

[MichaelC]

1 hour ago, Cowboy said:

-welcome to the Board, unless you are a troll

LOL Definitely not a troll, thanks for the welcome. 

[Clock_Tower]

49 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

In what world are Hargrove and Bell competing for playing time at the same position? Hargrove is closer to Yuri's height than Bell's. Hargrove will still be one of the shorter 3's if he's truly 6'4".

 

Hargrove is realistically behind all of the following on the depth chart: Goodwin/Jimerson/Perkins/Jacobs/Thatch/Weaver

I think it's safe to say he's a project with legit athleticism. I wouldn't expect much out of him playing time-wise for the forseeable future. 

Do you not read?  Go back re-read my comments.   Height is only one factor -- but apparently to you, it is the sole, determining factor.  Good grief.

[glazedandconfused]

1 minute ago, Clock_Tower said:

Do you not read?  Go back re-read my comments.   Height is only one factor -- but apparently to you, it is the sole, determining factor.  Good grief.

Relax Charlie Brown, hate to pull the football out on you last second but I didn’t claim height is the only factor. I’m just saying that he’s clearly a wing player and not a big man and that we should be patient and not expect anything from him in the near future 

[Clock_Tower]

1 hour ago, MichaelC said:

Comparing Hargrove to Hightower is apples to oranges, Hightower is neither behind or ahead of Hargrove, it's a positional/role thing. In the games in which Hightower has played Ford has inserted him as the Point Guard even in situations (like the Belmont game) when another PG (in this case Goodwin) was still in the game, in that instance Ford put Goodwin off the ball and let Hightower run the team. So in reality, Hightower is the 3rd PG behind Goodwin and Collins.  In the BeImont game, even though Hightower only saw 2 minutes of live ball action, due to free throws, etc. he played 9 possessions (5 on O, 4 on D) that allowed Ford to get Yuri got 5-6 minutes of valuable rest, I think that's pretty typical of what you would want from a 3rd stringer. If Ford was playing Hightower off the ball then it would be fair to question why him and not Hargrove but Hightower is filling a role Hargrove can't. 

I agree with your objective anaylsis -- but emotionally, I honestly don't like Coach Ford's decisions to even play Hightower - much less ahead of a guy like Hargrove.   Call him a 3rd PG if you want - but I would prefer Jacobs be our 3rd PG, and if Jacobs should be sitting at the end of the game, then make Jamison, Thatch or even Hargrove the PG.   Like many on this Board, I  simply don't like a walk-on getting more minutes than a scholarship guy we are pulling for - Hargrove.   If it's mop up role with the game out of reach, then who cares who the is playing the PG spot.  And if we ever had injury and/or foul trouble and needed to turn to our 3rd PG during a meaningful game, I sure hope it is NOT Hightower.    Again, Jacobs, Jamison, Thatch...

[glazedandconfused]

10 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

I agree with your objective anaylsis -- but emotionally, I honestly don't like Coach Ford's decisions to even play Hightower - much less ahead of a guy like Hargrove.   Call him a 3rd PG if you want - but I would prefer Jacobs be our 3rd PG, and if Jacobs should be sitting at the end of the game, then make Jamison, Thatch or even Hargrove the PG.   Like many on this Board, I  simply don't like a walk-on getting more minutes than a scholarship guy we are pulling for - Hargrove.   If it's mop up role with the game out of reach, then who cares who the is playing the PG spot.  And if we ever had injury and/or foul trouble and needed to turn to our 3rd PG during a meaningful game, I sure hope it is NOT Hightower.    Again, Jacobs, Jamison, Thatch...

I would say you’ve had one too many shots of Jimerson at the bar if you think Jamison should be a point guard

[Clock_Tower]

Just now, glazedandconfused said:

Relax Charlie Brown, hate to pull the football out on you last second but I didn’t claim height is the only factor. I’m just saying that he’s clearly a wing player and not a big man and that we should be patient and not expect anything from him in the near future 

Well... that didn't take long, but you're wrong again.  It is NOT clear that he is a wing (IMO, that's a 3).  You, though, look at his height and say he is a wing.   And his height has varied from 6'4" to 6'7".  I have not seen Hargrove demonstrate the guard/dribbling skills necessary for a wing.  Hope he can play wing.  Right now, though, he appears to be playing more of a back-up to French and others at the 4.  Either way, though, it is hard to say b/c he has honestly played so little.   And while I don't see Hargrove ever playing center (5) for us,  I do see him in the mix for lineups with two (2) big men:  meaning the 4 and 5 spot.

[3star_recruit]

12 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

I agree with your objective anaylsis -- but emotionally, I honestly don't like Coach Ford's decisions to even play Hightower - much less ahead of a guy like Hargrove.   Call him a 3rd PG if you want - but I would prefer Jacobs be our 3rd PG, and if Jacobs should be sitting at the end of the game, then make Jamison, Thatch or even Hargrove the PG.   Like many on this Board, I  simply don't like a walk-on getting more minutes than a scholarship guy we are pulling for - Hargrove.   If it's mop up role with the game out of reach, then who cares who the is playing the PG spot.  And if we ever had injury and/or foul trouble and needed to turn to our 3rd PG during a meaningful game, I sure hope it is NOT Hightower.    Again, Jacobs, Jamison, Thatch...

Hightower is a better ballhandler than all those guys.

[glazedandconfused]

11 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Well... that didn't take long, but you're wrong again.  It is NOT clear that he is a wing (IMO, that's a 3).  You, though, look at his height and say he is a wing.   And his height has varied from 6'4" to 6'7".  I have not seen Hargrove demonstrate the guard/dribbling skills necessary for a wing.  Hope he can play wing.  Right now, though, he appears to be playing more of a back-up to French and others at the 4.  Either way, though, it is hard to say b/c he has honestly played so little.   And while I don't see Hargrove ever playing center (5) for us,  I do see him in the mix for lineups with two (2) big men:  meaning the 4 and 5 spot.

He was listed as up to 6’7 in high school but i would guess the SLU roster (6’4”) is a little more accurate.

2 points: (1.) Ford isn’t playing him for a reason. And there’s no signs that it’s a non basketball reason that he’s not playing and (2.) you’re proving the point why he isn’t playing yet. Yes he has incredible athleticism as seen in his highlight reel, but he doesn’t have the ball handling dribbling skills to play yet. And realistically without an outside shot, his game (and others in the same boat) will always be limited in their contributions to this team as it currently exists...the offense will run through Goodwin French and Collins and others need to create space/hit shots and play good defense

[Quality Is Job 1]

If Hines could transcend walk-on status, why can't Hightower?

I understand that people struggle to spell Gibson's last name, because while it sounds like it should be "Jimmerson," it's actually Jimerson, but how anyone can misconstrue it as "Jamison" boggles my mind.

[Clock_Tower]

44 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

If Hines could transcend walk-on status, why can't Hightower?

I understand that people struggle to spell Gibson's last name, because while it sounds like it should be "Jimmerson," it's actually Jimerson, but how anyone can misconstrue it as "Jamison" boggles my mind.

Because we were so short-handed, Hines got playing time. We are not now shorthanded.  

And I am tired of hearing what our guys cannot do --especially the Frosh and Sophs.  Time for an opportunity.   Based upon last year, many thought Jacobs and Hankton were both recruited over and some even starting to talk about them both transferring.   Glad they are still here and contributing - and improved from their Freshman year.

And don't give up on Sophomore dribbling skills.  As a Sophomore, French could not drive and slash to the basket like he has shown this year.  Goodwin's decision making has improved since last year.  Bess sure improved over his time at SLU.  Isabell sure improved over his year.  Maybe Thatch and Jacobs both need a little time handling the ball and running the team as PG instead of a walkon.

And yes, the status of Hargrove is basketball related, I am not suggesting he play right now and I am not sure what his ideal position is/will be.  No hurry.  Time is always available for really good players.

And yes, the spelling of Jimerson was either an auto correct or a Freudian slip - as I do love to sip, Jameson, and Bush Mills, and Knob Creek, and Jack Daniels and...

[HoosierPal]

1 hour ago, Clock_Tower said:

I agree with your objective anaylsis -- but emotionally, I honestly don't like Coach Ford's decisions to even play Hightower - much less ahead of a guy like Hargrove.   Call him a 3rd PG if you want - but I would prefer Jacobs be our 3rd PG, and if Jacobs should be sitting at the end of the game, then make Jamison, Thatch or even Hargrove the PG.   Like many on this Board, I  simply don't like a walk-on getting more minutes than a scholarship guy we are pulling for - Hargrove.   If it's mop up role with the game out of reach, then who cares who the is playing the PG spot.  And if we ever had injury and/or foul trouble and needed to turn to our 3rd PG during a meaningful game, I sure hope it is NOT Hightower.    Again, Jacobs, Jamison, Thatch...

Would you feel better if Ford took Rabion’s scholarship and gave it to Hightower? 

[glazedandconfused]

The premise is flawed anyways. There are endless examples of walk-ons who have contributed and also been great college (and even a few NBA stars). Not saying hightower is that at all, but the idea a guy shouldn’t be playing because he doesn’t have a scholarship is misguided. That’s like saying a pro-sports team should play whoever gets paid the most.

 

Also, this team has two point guards (Goodwin and Collins). They will handle 98% of the time at that position. If they aren’t in, French will be initiating the offense. Hightower might get a few minutes but he’s not going to be the focal point of the offense either way.

[willie]

51 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

The premise is flawed anyways. There are endless examples of walk-ons who have contributed and also been great college (and even a few NBA stars). Not saying hightower is that at all, but the idea a guy shouldn’t be playing because he doesn’t have a scholarship is misguided. That’s like saying a pro-sports team should play whoever gets paid the most.

 

Also, this team has two point guards (Goodwin and Collins). They will handle 98% of the time at that position. If they aren’t in, French will be initiating the offense. Hightower might get a few minutes but he’s not going to be the focal point of the offense either way.

Who was the white kid who was a walk on at SLU who transferred to Texas and became a starter or near starter?

[Quality Is Job 1]

50 minutes ago, willie said:

Who was the white kid who was a walk on at SLU who transferred to Texas and became a starter or near starter?

Ian Mooney.

[almaman]

 I thought we gave Hightower a scholly?