Bean

This forum is for Basketball discussion only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
JonnyCienPesos
Posts: 2175
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 6:21 pm

Re: Bean

Post by JonnyCienPesos » January 6th, 2019, 10:44 am

USUBlue wrote:
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:24 am
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:19 am
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:10 am
I love the direction this thread is trending. For the record, you are all vastly inferior to me, so don’t get too excited about how much you know or have forgotten.

Additionally, all generations suck except mine. Chew on that for a minute.

Finally, I feel bean and Taylor have gotten the proper wrath they deserve for playing decently. Let’s talk more about Cru. Why does he get a pass?
Good point Ben Lomond, but it's spelled Crew and I think he gets a pass because his dad is going to fund in full a new BBall arena. :)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.celebr ... h/%3famp=1
According to the website above, Danny ainge has a net worth of $10M. That’s a good chunk of money, but certainly not enough that he would fund a basketball arena. I would imagine there are a good number of alumni with a $10M net worth. I know at least a few personally. But who knows if that website is even reliable. $10M seems low based on his career.
Dang you mean we've been giving Ainge a pass for nothing :stirpot: You know Ben Lomond, one of my favorite Aggie players of all time (a guy named Youngblood) played at BL; he had all the skills and that night against UNLV was an epic thing of beauty. Maybe we could hit him up for the money that Ainge is short on that new arena?
Pretty sure Kendall played at Bonneville.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm actually really smart, probably smarter than you are so if you disagree with what I have stated in this post, you are likely wrong (and dumb).

sneed
Posts: 556
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 2:32 am

Re: Bean

Post by sneed » January 6th, 2019, 10:44 am

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:19 am
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:10 am
I love the direction this thread is trending. For the record, you are all vastly inferior to me, so don’t get too excited about how much you know or have forgotten.

Additionally, all generations suck except mine. Chew on that for a minute.

Finally, I feel bean and Taylor have gotten the proper wrath they deserve for playing decently. Let’s talk more about Cru. Why does he get a pass?
Good point Ben Lomond, but it's spelled Crew and I think he gets a pass because his dad is going to fund in full a new BBall arena. :)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.celebr ... h/%3famp=1
According to the website above, Danny ainge has a net worth of $10M. That’s a good chunk of money, but certainly not enough that he would fund a basketball arena. I would imagine there are a good number of alumni with a $10M net worth. I know at least a few personally. But who knows if that website is even reliable. $10M seems low based on his career.
I agree, that seems very low for his career. Top GMs make over $5mil / year. One makes over $10 mil /year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



User avatar
MrBiggle
Posts: 920
Joined: October 10th, 2013, 12:15 pm

Re: Bean

Post by MrBiggle » January 6th, 2019, 11:37 am

sneed wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:44 am
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:19 am
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:10 am
I love the direction this thread is trending. For the record, you are all vastly inferior to me, so don’t get too excited about how much you know or have forgotten.

Additionally, all generations suck except mine. Chew on that for a minute.

Finally, I feel bean and Taylor have gotten the proper wrath they deserve for playing decently. Let’s talk more about Cru. Why does he get a pass?
Good point Ben Lomond, but it's spelled Crew and I think he gets a pass because his dad is going to fund in full a new BBall arena. :)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.celebr ... h/%3famp=1
According to the website above, Danny ainge has a net worth of $10M. That’s a good chunk of money, but certainly not enough that he would fund a basketball arena. I would imagine there are a good number of alumni with a $10M net worth. I know at least a few personally. But who knows if that website is even reliable. $10M seems low based on his career.
I agree, that seems very low for his career. Top GMs make over $5mil / year. One makes over $10 mil /year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Someone probably got net worth confused for yearly income.

Not saying one couldn’t spend that much just as fast as it comes in 🤑


Where only sage brush grows

User avatar
brownjeans
Flatulent
Posts: 12451
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am

Re: Bean

Post by brownjeans » January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm

USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm

brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
Last edited by USUBlue on January 6th, 2019, 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 1:10 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:44 am
USUBlue wrote:
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:24 am
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:19 am
flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:10 am
I love the direction this thread is trending. For the record, you are all vastly inferior to me, so don’t get too excited about how much you know or have forgotten.

Additionally, all generations suck except mine. Chew on that for a minute.

Finally, I feel bean and Taylor have gotten the proper wrath they deserve for playing decently. Let’s talk more about Cru. Why does he get a pass?
Good point Ben Lomond, but it's spelled Crew and I think he gets a pass because his dad is going to fund in full a new BBall arena. :)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.celebr ... h/%3famp=1
According to the website above, Danny ainge has a net worth of $10M. That’s a good chunk of money, but certainly not enough that he would fund a basketball arena. I would imagine there are a good number of alumni with a $10M net worth. I know at least a few personally. But who knows if that website is even reliable. $10M seems low based on his career.
Dang you mean we've been giving Ainge a pass for nothing :stirpot: You know Ben Lomond, one of my favorite Aggie players of all time (a guy named Youngblood) played at BL; he had all the skills and that night against UNLV was an epic thing of beauty. Maybe we could hit him up for the money that Ainge is short on that new arena?
Pretty sure Kendall played at Bonneville.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are right; you know those Ogden High Schools all seem the same to me. :)



User avatar
Mysterion
Posts: 41
Joined: May 12th, 2011, 1:39 pm

Re: Bean

Post by Mysterion » January 6th, 2019, 2:04 pm

Image



User avatar
ChicAggie
Posts: 2064
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Bean

Post by ChicAggie » January 6th, 2019, 2:06 pm

I posted this in another thread, but it seems particularly apt here as well. In limited minutes (only 64 minutes so far, the 2nd fewest minutes on the team ahead of only Alek Johnson), Bean has the highest Net Rating on the season and in the Aggie's two conference games so far. He seems to be our Dennis Rodman: not the most gifted offensive player, but his activity has been amazing and he absolutely wins the GATA belt for the season to date. He leads the team in PER (Player Efficiency Rating) at 34.3 (Merrill is 2nd at 25.1); ORtg (points produced per 100 possessions) at 137 (Merrill is 2nd at 132); DRtg (points allowed per 100 possessions) at 80 (Queta is 2nd at 82.7); NetRtg (the difference between ORtg and DRtg) at 57 (Merrill is 2nd at 37.7); plus/minus at 14.3 (Queta is 2nd at 10.2); Win Shares/40 at .335 (Merrill is 2nd at .268); rebounds per 100 possessions with 29.2 TRB (Queta is 2nd with 19.2 TRB); and steals per 100 possessions at 4.3 (JK3 is 2nd at 3.7). He is 2nd on the team in fewest turnovers per 100 possessions at 1.7 (Miller is 1st at 1.0); blocks per 100 possessions at 1.7 (Queta is 1st at 5.6); and free throw attempts per 100 possessions at 8.6 (JK3 is 1st at 11). He is also 5th on the team in FG% at .500 (behind Queta, Brown, Taylor, and Merrill). Not sure what happens to these numbers with increased playing time, but he has gotten real minutes against starters in the past couple of games (23 minutes - which is more than Ainge, TK, Fakira, and Johnson and nearly the same as Brown and Brito), and his numbers have stayed at or near the top of the pack in every one of these categories.


"Good is the enemy of great.” ~ Jim Collins

User avatar
MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 5743
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am

Re: Bean

Post by MetsJetsAggies » January 6th, 2019, 2:21 pm

USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
The 2nd leading scorer in the country right now is actually a walk on



User avatar
MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 5743
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am

Re: Bean

Post by MetsJetsAggies » January 6th, 2019, 2:22 pm

Mysterion wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 2:04 pm
Image
He stepped on that guy that fell in front of him (or tried to avoid him), which caused that butt plant. But yeah



User avatar
treesap32
Moderator
Posts: 14056
Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
Location: Washington D.C.
Contact:

Re: Bean

Post by treesap32 » January 6th, 2019, 2:51 pm

I can't stop watching that GIF.

Can't wait until Bean gets another shot at an in game dunk. The preseason dunk contest gave us a taste of what he's capable of.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk




USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 4:40 pm

MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 2:21 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
The 2nd leading scorer in the country right now is actually a walk on
Misleading and disingenuous MJA; you are better than that.

Antoine Davis for Detroit Mercy is indeed the second leading scorer in the country, But what you didn’t mention is he was a three star recruit, had many options to play on scholarship, and was a top 15 player in Houston. Instead, he chose to play for his dad, the head coach of Detroit Mercy. I’m sure his dad can afford to pay any tuition he may have there, but there may also be tuition waivers or partial waivers for children of full-time employees.



User avatar
brownjeans
Flatulent
Posts: 12451
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am

Re: Bean

Post by brownjeans » January 6th, 2019, 5:49 pm

USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
Saying walk-on is not analysis, it's dismissive and lazy. Our team has scholarship players that wouldn't even be accepted as walk-ons at many places. Bean is better than many of them. Did you look at his HS videos? Did you look at his HS stats? Did you consider the facts about his story? Did you compare him with his current teammates? After all that, what is your assessment?

People aren't touting Bean as the next great Aggie, they're just saying he looks better than some of the guys getting more time. They're also saying the team plays better when he's on the floor. I say he's currently about the 6th- or 7th-best player on this team. Do you think that's rediculous, or a fair assessment?



Jjoey53
Posts: 906
Joined: January 9th, 2018, 4:28 pm

Re: Bean

Post by Jjoey53 » January 6th, 2019, 6:23 pm

MetsJetsAggies wrote:
Jjoey53 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:00 am
Can someone tell me why the Knights are not playing?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
JK3 academics, TK because he's not very good yet. True freshman who needs time for the game to slow down for him, I think he will be good in 1-2 years though
Thx.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 10:32 pm

brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 5:49 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
Saying walk-on is not analysis, it's dismissive and lazy. Our team has scholarship players that wouldn't even be accepted as walk-ons at many places. Bean is better than many of them. Did you look at his HS videos? Did you look at his HS stats? Did you consider the facts about his story? Did you compare him with his current teammates? After all that, what is your assessment?

People aren't touting Bean as the next great Aggie, they're just saying he looks better than some of the guys getting more time. They're also saying the team plays better when he's on the floor. I say he's currently about the 6th- or 7th-best player on this team. Do you think that's rediculous, or a fair assessment?
Maybe 7th or 8th and that just makes me sad that our recruiting has been so poor that Bean is the 7th or 8th most productive player. Smith has a lot of recruiting to do, and some cuts of the current scholarship guys to make.



bluegrouse
Posts: 2286
Joined: November 9th, 2010, 5:04 pm

Re: Bean

Post by bluegrouse » January 6th, 2019, 10:53 pm

Just hoping I can get this scintillating thread to 6 pages.....



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 11:00 pm

bluegrouse wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:53 pm
Just hoping I can get this scintillating thread to 6 pages.....
I'll work with you :cool2:



sancho839
Posts: 573
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 8:32 pm

Re: Bean

Post by sancho839 » January 6th, 2019, 11:05 pm

You'll work with a stranger to get to six pages, while belittling current Aggies who are doing what they can in the position they are in. You're the worst haha.
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:00 pm
bluegrouse wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 10:53 pm
Just hoping I can get this scintillating thread to 6 pages.....
I'll work with you :cool2:



aggieup15
Posts: 60
Joined: January 4th, 2019, 6:29 pm

Re: Bean

Post by aggieup15 » January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm

USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 6th, 2019, 11:38 pm

aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone). Of course we could look at Quinn's Nevada game Net Rankings if you want. :)
Last edited by USUBlue on January 6th, 2019, 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.



aggieup15
Posts: 60
Joined: January 4th, 2019, 6:29 pm

Re: Bean

Post by aggieup15 » January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm

USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



User avatar
MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 5743
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am

Re: Bean

Post by MetsJetsAggies » January 6th, 2019, 11:50 pm

USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 4:40 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 2:21 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
The 2nd leading scorer in the country right now is actually a walk on
Misleading and disingenuous MJA; you are better than that.

Antoine Davis for Detroit Mercy is indeed the second leading scorer in the country, But what you didn’t mention is he was a three star recruit, had many options to play on scholarship, and was a top 15 player in Houston. Instead, he chose to play for his dad, the head coach of Detroit Mercy. I’m sure his dad can afford to pay any tuition he may have there, but there may also be tuition waivers or partial waivers for children of full-time employees.
Still a walk on :)

Also Bean probably would have gotten schollie offers if he didnt tear his ACL before his SR season. Between that and going on a mission, it's hard to get any college to commit to a scholarship. He certainly has the frame and potential to be a scholarship-level player though. Your argument is that since he is a walk-on that can't possibly be true, which is a terrible argument that I rebutted with a disingenuous comment that the 2nd leading scorer in the country is also a walk-on, which is true.



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am

aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm
USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.



brian5562
Posts: 1288
Joined: November 18th, 2010, 8:08 am

Re: Bean

Post by brian5562 » January 7th, 2019, 7:12 am

USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm
USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.
And here is the problem with your post. You get personal. No need to call a guy an idiot.



NVAggie
Posts: 14183
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!

Re: Bean

Post by NVAggie » January 7th, 2019, 7:53 am

This argument has nothing on the old "Hats in the Mall" arguments.



User avatar
ChicAggie
Posts: 2064
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Bean

Post by ChicAggie » January 7th, 2019, 8:21 am

Welcome to the feminine hygiene store. Anyone need a douchebag?


"Good is the enemy of great.” ~ Jim Collins

dirtnsnow
Posts: 143
Joined: August 26th, 2011, 11:54 pm

Re: Bean

Post by dirtnsnow » January 7th, 2019, 8:26 am

USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 4:40 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 2:21 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 1:09 pm
brownjeans wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 12:26 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:47 pm
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:42 pm
It's hilarious how we are actually having a good year (by several metrics, not even an opinion) for the first time in 7-8 years, and the miserables on the board still can't take 2 seconds away from pissing all over literally any basketball talk that isn't negative/bashing a player about something. It's really showing their true colors, it made a little more sense when we sucked...that anyone who tried to be positive about anything were cheerleaders, now we are a top 40-50 team and we can't talk about a surprisingly good walk on freshman without being cheerleaders. Let's go back to bitching about the 3rd best player on a top 50 team instead
Nobody's bitching MJA, just analyzing the coaches, players, and games. Sorry it doesn't meet with you cheerleader approach. Smith's a stud -- there does that help you.
Is repeatedly saying the words "walk on" analysis?
Yup, there is even an award in football that distinguishes a walkon from others. Not sure about BBall where walkons don't usually have the same impact. For those that want to keep this thread going on forever, here are some interesting articles on BBall walkons.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/168 ... ll-history

https://theundefeated.com/features/why- ... ons-white/
The 2nd leading scorer in the country right now is actually a walk on
Misleading and disingenuous MJA; you are better than that.

Antoine Davis for Detroit Mercy is indeed the second leading scorer in the country, But what you didn’t mention is he was a three star recruit, had many options to play on scholarship, and was a top 15 player in Houston. Instead, he chose to play for his dad, the head coach of Detroit Mercy. I’m sure his dad can afford to pay any tuition he may have there, but there may also be tuition waivers or partial waivers for children of full-time employees.
Your argument actually proved his point. There are circumstances under which a good player (even one good enough to be a scholarship player) will become a walk on. Maybe it's finances, maybe it's high school injuries, maybe it's a lack of AAU exposure. Bean isn't the next Tai Wesley, but he could very well be an actual asset to the team. Agreed that he needs to polish his offensive game, and with his high school numbers, I actually expect to see him do just that once the game slows down for him.


Aggies All the Way!

NVAggie
Posts: 14183
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!

Re: Bean

Post by NVAggie » January 7th, 2019, 8:38 am

Have we ever had so much to say about a freshman walk-on?



gametime12
Posts: 112
Joined: February 1st, 2018, 8:50 am

Re: Bean

Post by gametime12 » January 7th, 2019, 9:18 am

USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm
USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.

Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 7th, 2019, 10:32 am

gametime12 wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 9:18 am
Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism. I will make sure to do this from now on! Specific criticisms it will be.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.



AggieBlueMint
Posts: 20
Joined: January 4th, 2019, 11:27 pm

Re: Bean

Post by AggieBlueMint » January 7th, 2019, 11:01 am

gametime12 wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 9:18 am
USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm
USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.

Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.
Gametime12, your post was so refreshing. It is easy to make claims without any data. You hit the nail on the head with your use of data verses the "because I said so" logic of others. I don't know why there is so much hate towards these guys who walked on to the team and contribute productively. Maybe others tried and failed, who knows. I haven't been watching the Aggies for 55 years, just the last 30, but I like facts that back things up. All we can do is wait and see with Bean, So far I like the numbers.



User avatar
pharquar
Posts: 139
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:27 pm

Re: Bean

Post by pharquar » January 7th, 2019, 1:28 pm

AggieBlueMint wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 11:01 am
Gametime12, your post was so refreshing. It is easy to make claims without any data. You hit the nail on the head with your use of data verses the "because I said so" logic of others. I don't know why there is so much hate towards these guys who walked on to the team and contribute productively. Maybe others tried and failed, who knows. I haven't been watching the Aggies for 55 years, just the last 30, but I like facts that back things up. All we can do is wait and see with Bean, So far I like the numbers.
Bingo. The success of walk-ons appears to hit way too close to home for certain posters on this board.



aggieup15
Posts: 60
Joined: January 4th, 2019, 6:29 pm

Re: Bean

Post by aggieup15 » January 7th, 2019, 2:55 pm

gametime12 wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm
USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:10 pm
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 11:09 pm
USUBlue wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 10:31 pm
treesap32 wrote:
January 5th, 2019, 8:58 pm
Bean's line:

2 points
1-2 from the field
7 Rebounds
1 assist
2 blocks

15 minutes played.

Taylor's line:

16 points
7-8 from the field
2-3 from 3 point range
6 Rebounds
4 Assists
1 Block
2 Steals

31 Minutes played.
Make sure to list the turnovers and how many points they gave up to the guy they were guarding.
Lol.

Lots of 3s tonight from AF in the 2nd half, most with Bean on the bench to start the 2H
Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight. He scored about 16, but he must have given up 30. Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot. So let's play Bean -- he's no better, but at least he can get some more stats. I want better players, but that's just me. So for this year, I don't really care who plays except that I'd like to see TKnight get more time to develop.
This is a great example of where you are wrong. Defense liability? 30 points on him? No, that’s completely wrong and if you want me to pull up the stats and net ranking for when Taylor was in and counts the points we can totally do that. In fact he actually was in position and played SMART defense by not fouling since earlier this year and the previous home game he was getting quick fouls. Plus those AirForce guys got some lucky shots, they were shooting 1/2 the time without even looking.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I believe it's time for you to get off the thread aggieup; you're not objective and you lack insights. There were a group of us that kept noticing that Quinn was getting worked in the 2nd half; many of us were talking about it. Lucky 3's -- hardly. At least 3 of those "lucky 3's" were with Quinn several feet off his man. Step into the defense and move your feet to avoid fouling; get into a defensive stance instead of standing too upright. Simply stated aggieup, you don't want to go down this path -- Quinn's defense particularly in the 2nd half last night was poor. Even when he switched, he let his man score. I thought he played much better in the other parts of his game though -- shooting, passing, rebounding, and even the turnovers were a little less.\

And one more thing, this isn't about Net Rankings - which looks at all points scored by teams when a player is on the floor. No this is specifically about Quinn giving up far too many points to the man he was covering (we didn't play much zone).
It’s called help defense when he wasn’t “back on his player”, if you know so much about basketball you clearly should’ve seen that & you would notice their players never even looked when shooting, they hucked it up, that’s not him getting worked, you and your group of guys should know better than that and yes #44 had lucky three’s.

Also I’m not family I’m a family-friend and I can still watch the game and be objective and report. I don’t understand your need for threatening. What I’ve said thus far is accurate, unlike your point of views most of the time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.

Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.
USUBlue, you should refer to this comment as the point I was trying to make. I was not trying to be a cheerleader, I was simply trying to correct you on your mistake. I’m sure you know a lot about basketball and that is great, but here are some accurate statistics and facts compared to things you have said.

It’s true, if people have thin skin they should not be on this thread. Therefore, if you cannot handle people also voicing their opinions then you shouldn’t be on here. Don’t let what others say make you feel threatened, everyone is just talking and trying to show things from their point of view. I’m sorry if you got the idea that I was only on here for praising players, I was just simply just trying to correct you where I felt you were factually wrong.

I look forward to many more basketball post from you and others. Talking sports and different point of views from others is fun and it’s nice to see different thoughts, don’t let it hurt your feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4149
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm

Re: Bean

Post by USUBlue » January 7th, 2019, 3:12 pm

aggieup15 wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 2:55 pm
gametime12 wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm

You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.

Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.
USUBlue, you should refer to this comment as the point I was trying to make. I was not trying to be a cheerleader, I was simply trying to correct you on your mistake. I’m sure you know a lot about basketball and that is great, but here are some accurate statistics and facts compared to things you have said.

It’s true, if people have thin skin they should not be on this thread. Therefore, if you cannot handle people also voicing their opinions then you shouldn’t be on here. Don’t let what others say make you feel threatened, everyone is just talking and trying to show things from their point of view. I’m sorry if you got the idea that I was only on here for praising players, I was just simply just trying to correct you where I felt you were factually wrong. And yet you never did. If what you didn't like was the hyperbole, say so like GameTime did.

I look forward to many more basketball post from you and others. Talking sports and different point of views from others is fun and it’s nice to see different thoughts, don’t let it hurt your feelings.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GameTime made a solid post about excessive hyperbole in my posts. Therefore I will be far more specific in the negatives I see. So for correction purposes:
1. If our recruiting steps up like I expect with Smith, Bean should not be playing more than an average of 8-10 minutes per game next year, which is more than he's currently averaging this year. By the way, since we'll have plenty of scholarships available next year (probably 3-4 still), if Smith really wants and is impressed with Bean, he could just give him one of those scholarships.
2. That behind the back dribble move by Bean was terrible; many AAU 8th graders make that dribble move with ease. He wasn't show boating -- he did it in the flow, but couldn't pull it off without almost stopping and looking down for the ball. It shows a lack of ball skills that most skill athletes that aren't a center do easily.
3. I'm not sure the 30 points against Taylor was an exaggeration. I'm going to review the film and see. But I remember 13 points very specifically in about 10 minutes of the 2nd half alone. No "help defense" issues; straight up Quinn's man scoring in his face. "Lucky 3's" - what may have been lucky was that Quinn was the one guarding him. I wonder if every 3 Quinn makes is defined by the other team as a Lucky 3. Given his 0-fer game at Nevada, Air Force may have thought Quinn's shooting was lucky also.

I actually like Quinn's game mostly, but I feel the need to separate the "positive v. negative" drivel and be specific. I'll keep a counter going forward. There, everyone more satisfied.



aggieup15
Posts: 60
Joined: January 4th, 2019, 6:29 pm

Re: Bean

Post by aggieup15 » January 7th, 2019, 3:20 pm

USUBlue wrote:
aggieup15 wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 2:55 pm
gametime12 wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
January 7th, 2019, 12:09 am
aggieup15 wrote:
January 6th, 2019, 11:47 pm

You have no objectivity or credibility aggieup -- just hanging with Quinn's family stroking each other's egos. As for help defense, you idiot, these were not help defense situations, this is when Quinn's man had the ball and just shot it in his face for 3's. Quinn knew he got lit up -- you could watch it as he went back down the court. He also got beat on a switch later in the 2nd half. Again, you don't want to go down this road. I've been fair with Quinn, but I can find his defensive faults minute by minute if you'd like.

Funny how this thread has gone. I actually think Quinn is a decent, not great player, but one of our best 5. But I'll make sure to watch every missed rebound, shot, turnover, pts. scored against him, and simply poor play by Quinn from now on and report it. This should be fun. Is that what you wanted aggieup? I still haven't seen one inaccurate thing I've said about Quinn -- he is not a great defensive player. Lacks lateral quickness and because of that can't guard as close without fouling, thereby giving up uncontested 3's like last night.

Blue...I personally don't have any issue with analysis grounded in numbers or reality (i.e. breaking down film), critical or not. As I said before this thread got out of control, much of your commentary falls under the category of "hot takes" - opinions just thrown out there without anything of substance to back it up. Just from this thread, I'll provide some examples:

"Bean will not even average 8 minutes a game next year."
- Where did that come from, outside the fact that he's a walk on? This was right after the Eastern Oregon game, in which he played 18 minutes. You said this, I have to presume, without any knowledge of his background (HS stats or story) or watching any of his HS film. Any reasonable person (as evidenced by the majority of people in this thread) can see that based on the current roster construction, Bean has a chance to contribute. That's it - not become the next great Aggie, etc. Just to carve out a steady role (10-15 minutes/game) on this team. This was a "hot take".

"Except he can't shoot, can't dribble, and can't pass." (Referring again to Bean)
- Once again...where is your basis for this? He canned his only 3 in the Eastern Oregon game with a nice-looking jump shot. He shot 45% from 3 per the high school stats that several people have posted in this thread. Who knows how he will shoot in college??? I'd say based on the limited stuff I've seen in his highlights and games that he has a chance to be a good shooter. I don't think any reasonable person would say he can't shoot. There's just not any data out there that backs that up. Just because he hasn't shot outside much doesn't mean he "can't". Same goes for dribbling/passing. He had nice passes to Quinn and Queta that I can remember off the top of my head against Nevada and Air Force. He only has 2 turnovers in the minutes he has played.

"Taylor was a huge defensive liability tonight...he must have given up 30...Taylor just doesn't stay in position or close enough to his man to stop an open shot."
- 30 points was an exaggeration and again a "hot take". If you wanna go back and re-watch the game and count every bucket Taylor's guy scored, then I would be fine with that criticism.
-The rest of that post is a little more forgivable, but still just a misunderstanding of the defense and personnel. The player you're referring to that made a lot of those threes was Keaton Van Soelen (he went 4-5 from 3 against us). This is from Coach Smith post game: "They made some tough twos and then they were drilling every three. We’ve been able to defend very well. I thought a lot of those shots were tough shots and guarded shots. You have to give credit to No. 44 for them, Keaton Van Soelen, who made a three against New Mexico the other night, but he had three the whole year coming into tonight and goes 4-for-5 for 16 points and put a lot of pressure on us." Air Force is ranked 252nd in the nation in 3PM and 272nd in 3P%. In short, the Aggies strategy was to prevent paint shots and layups that are staples of the Princeton offense. They were not concerned with running them off of the 3 pt line. They wanted Air Force to take those 3s. To call the makes "lucky" would be disrespectful, but they were absolutely unexpected and caught the Aggies off-guard - particularly from Van Soelen who had only made 3 all year coming into the game.

In summary, Blue, if your analysis is critical but it's grounded in data or film, etc. I don't think most people will have an issue with it. When you say things like I've pointed out above, you come across as being negative in order to provoke someone else or because you're just a negative person.

Furthermore, when you call someone an idiot for calling you out, and then threaten to analyze every single mistake of a player who has given a lot of time and effort to this program, you once again come across as just a generally negative person who likes to provoke, get attention, and has an ego.
USUBlue, you should refer to this comment as the point I was trying to make. I was not trying to be a cheerleader, I was simply trying to correct you on your mistake. I’m sure you know a lot about basketball and that is great, but here are some accurate statistics and facts compared to things you have said.

It’s true, if people have thin skin they should not be on this thread. Therefore, if you cannot handle people also voicing their opinions then you shouldn’t be on here. Don’t let what others say make you feel threatened, everyone is just talking and trying to show things from their point of view. I’m sorry if you got the idea that I was only on here for praising players, I was just simply just trying to correct you where I felt you were factually wrong.

I look forward to many more basketball post from you and others. Talking sports and different point of views from others is fun and it’s nice to see different thoughts, don’t let it hurt your feelings.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GameTime made a solid post about excessive hyperbole in my posts. Therefore I will be far more specific in the negatives I see. So for correction purposes:
1. If our recruiting steps up like I expect with Smith, Bean should not be playing more than an average of 8 minutes per game next year, which is more than he's currently averaging this year. By the way, since we'll have plenty of scholarships available next year (probably 3-4 still), if Smith really wants and is impressed with Bean, he could just give him one of those scholarships.
2. That behind the back dribble move by Bean was terrible; many AAU 8th graders make that dribble move with ease. He wasn't show boating -- he did it in the flow, but couldn't pull it off without almost stopping and looking down for the ball. It shows a lack of ball skills that most skill athletes that aren't a center do easily.
3. I'm not sure the 30 points against Taylor was an exaggeration. I'm going to review the film and see. But I remember 13 points very specifically in about 10 minutes of the 2nd half alone. No "help defense" issues; straight up Quinn's man scoring in his face. "Lucky 3's" - what was lucky was that Quinn was the one guarding him. I wonder if every 3 Quinn makes is defined by the other team as a Lucky 3. Given his 0-fer game at Nevada, Air Force may have thought Quinn's shooting was lucky also.

There, everyone more satisfied.
I understand that it would be annoying to feel like you have to please people, but you are right in the aspect that you don’t. But with this statement you just made, it is a WAY better explanation of your thoughts and I now can see better where you’re trying to come from. You should see the statement after the game by Coach Smith that I think helps people better understand the defense they were shooting for and what he had to his players. But I do appreciate your better feedback on this point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic