Will Robert Phinisee be the next to commit to IU.

[BoiledSteel]

This thread is a great reminder as to why none of us are qualified to coach at CMP's level and are not qualified to not only try and tell him who and how to recruit, but tell him how to coach this team. I understand that it's an "opinion" but some on here make it seem like it's 'their way' or CMP is a failure.

Which is why I default to what he does as the right answer. His overall record and ability to not only see talent and develop it shows he has us going in the right direction.

 

[Wolegib]

IMO Hunter will be the first off the bench to give Carsen a break. He could get starting time if he proves more consistent than Cline.

Henry is a good shooter and quick off the bounce so he can create his own. Not sure Rob was at his level and doubtful Painter is playing Rob and Nojel at the same time because Carsen is the only one of the 3 who can shoot.

Painter has shown to create minutes for guys with talent.

We are out on Embery at this point as well as Langford. If for some random reason he puts us in his cut list, I would put forth the effort to get an official but for all intensive purposes, we have 0 chance.

Painter has said the two most important pieces of this class are a C and a guard. With an official from Colin Castleton and hopefully another visit from Hayes and Kisunas we will have that taken care of. I prefer Castleton, Kisunas or Hayes over Dowuona because of their offensive skill set.

As for guard, sometimes you find a diamond in the rough that has a solid senior year. I like Xavies Castenadas who played with Damezi in AAU. Not sure how good of a shooter he is. Also Ahrens would be a good pick up and we are probably waiting to see if we can line up his official.

this is the type of reply I like to see. I fully agree we need to move on. But I like to see some specifics rather than the basic phrase, we'll be fine without him.

 

[Boilerman1973]

I would not say Isaiah is a lock. Nobody is a lock we're not duke or North Carolina or Kentucky.

 

[BoiledSteel]

we're not duke or North Carolina or Kentucky.

You're right, IU isn't.

 

[Fansince72]

Could we please end this thread ,I am tired of looking at it. I hope I'm at Mackey the first time he steps on the floor.

 

[Wolegib]

My definition of a PG is a guy who can run the show on the floor. a guy who knows the plays, and has the confidence from his teammates to direct their movements, and correct their positions. A guy who can direct the tempo. a guy who can sense when things are going bad, and make adjustments that do not require a time out.. I want a PG who can distribute the ball, but is a clutch shooter when the time clock expires, and can make clutch free throws within the last 30 seconds to seal a game. I want a PG who takes risks, but also protect the ball in crunch time. Fouls and turnovers and stupid mistakes are ok, but not in crunch time. I want a guy who is in control during crunch time. I also want a guy who is in sync with his team and their needs rather than just his position want a guy who could care less about his individual stats, and the only stat that matters is the W .

Admittedly, there are many talented players out there. Many 5 * star athletes available each year. But very few have ever come close to meeting all of those desires. I don't really want a Westbrook who can generate a triple double. What I want is a LeBron or Magic or Robertson who can lead a team. the BIG O's greatest accomplishment was not his triple double season, it was leading a young Lew Alcindor and the Bucks to a championship.

Langford has a lot of talent, but I don't feel he meets my definition. C Edwards has a lot of talent, and can handle the ball, but I see him more of a scorer than a creator for others. PJ probably comes the closest to my desires. he's usually clutch and under control down the stretch. he has made some clutch shots, and some clutch Fts. I'd like him to be faster on defense, and a little taller. but I ca n also remember the days several years ago, when Purdue could not get the ball through a press, and we could not make a "CLUTCH" FT t o secure a game. I have a lot more confidence in PJ than his predecessors.

and as part of this thread and recruiting somebody for 2018, combo guards are nice, but we already have two in Eastern and Edwards. Rather than a 25 ppg scoring PG who can also pass, i'd rather go after a 6-8 assist guy that led his team to a state championship and made the guys around him look better. and understandably, since recruiting ratings tend to rate guys who can shoot higher, the guy I want is probably some unheralded under the radar 3 * player. and as I look at previous very successful NCAA teams, their floor general and PG was a 3 *.

That's why I like Wheeler. I like him because throughout high school, he was the #2 guy on his team. He put the needs of his team first. And because of that , both his individual stats and rankings fell. But in his state championship game when his team's #1 option failed, he stepped up. I have no doubt 12 of Purdue's current players could score 20 points a game. but that would be at the expense of winning.

I've looked at our targets,, both the ones who have signed elsewhere and the ones still considering us. there are some good ones still undecided.

Phinisee seemed to meet some of my previously stated desires. there are others out there under the radar that might be an even better fit. I used to watch the AAU circuit, but I don't anymore. To be truthful, I wasn't that impressed with Stephens or Jabari Parker. You could see their obvious talent, and athletic ability. But they also had lapses. There is no perfect player. I preferred guys like Sichting over guys like Macy, Parker and Isiah Thomas.

 

[Wolegib]

Could we please end this thread ,I am tired of looking at it. I hope I'm at Mackey the first time he steps on the floor.

simply stated : then don't look at it. !!! The thread has kind of evolved. Phinisee is gone. he was a decent player, but he went elsewhere. My point has always been we need to sign a pg in the 2018 class and not wait until 2019. We need to move on and find that player. . and who are those players?

 

[tynd10]

simply stated : then don't look at it. !!! The thread has kind of evolved. Phinisee is gone. he was a decent player, but he went elsewhere. My point has always been we need to sign a pg in the 2018 class and not wait until 2019. We need to move on and find that player. . and who are those players?

This is what I have been stating all along. We need a PG in this class. As for who those players are.... I don't see us in good position with anyone outside of Hunter at the guard position.

 

[tjreese]

My definition of a PG is a guy who can run the show on the floor. a guy who knows the plays, and has the confidence from his teammates to direct their movements, and correct their positions. A guy who can direct the tempo. a guy who can sense when things are going bad, and make adjustments that do not require a time out.. I want a PG who can distribute the ball, but is a clutch shooter when the time clock expires, and can make clutch free throws within the last 30 seconds to seal a game. I want a PG who takes risks, but also protect the ball in crunch time. Fouls and turnovers and stupid mistakes are ok, but not in crunch time. I want a guy who is in control during crunch time. I also want a guy who is in sync with his team and their needs rather than just his position want a guy who could care less about his individual stats, and the only stat that matters is the W .

Admittedly, there are many talented players out there. Many 5 * star athletes available each year. But very few have ever come close to meeting all of those desires. I don't really want a Westbrook who can generate a triple double. What I want is a LeBron or Magic or Robertson who can lead a team. the BIG O's greatest accomplishment was not his triple double season, it was leading a young Lew Alcindor and the Bucks to a championship.

Langford has a lot of talent, but I don't feel he meets my definition. C Edwards has a lot of talent, and can handle the ball, but I see him more of a scorer than a creator for others. PJ probably comes the closest to my desires. he's usually clutch and under control down the stretch. he has made some clutch shots, and some clutch Fts. I'd like him to be faster on defense, and a little taller. but I ca n also remember the days several years ago, when Purdue could not get the ball through a press, and we could not make a "CLUTCH" FT t o secure a game. I have a lot more confidence in PJ than his predecessors.

and as part of this thread and recruiting somebody for 2018, combo guards are nice, but we already have two in Eastern and Edwards. Rather than a 25 ppg scoring PG who can also pass, i'd rather go after a 6-8 assist guy that led his team to a state championship and made the guys around him look better. and understandably, since recruiting ratings tend to rate guys who can shoot higher, the guy I want is probably some unheralded under the radar 3 * player. and as I look at previous very successful NCAA teams, their floor general and PG was a 3 *.

That's why I like Wheeler. I like him because throughout high school, he was the #2 guy on his team. He put the needs of his team first. And because of that , both his individual stats and rankings fell. But in his state championship game when his team's #1 option failed, he stepped up. I have no doubt 12 of Purdue's current players could score 20 points a game. but that would be at the expense of winning.

I've looked at our targets,, both the ones who have signed elsewhere and the ones still considering us. there are some good ones still undecided.

Phinisee seemed to meet some of my previously stated desires. there are others out there under the radar that might be an even better fit. I used to watch the AAU circuit, but I don't anymore. To be truthful, I wasn't that impressed with Stephens or Jabari Parker. You could see their obvious talent, and athletic ability. But they also had lapses. There is no perfect player. I preferred guys like Sichting over guys like Macy, Parker and Isiah Thomas.

I think every coach in the country is looking for the same player. Only thing I would add is that Purdue doesn't run many plays. Purdue runs a read offense...which reads the D and adjusts accordingly. Now a leader...preferably one with the ball most the time may help balance the court and control tempo, but Purdue's approach is not like when Yogi pounded the ball for long possessions under crean. Purdue looks for versatility in players that can shoot, pass, dribble and defend and as the size goes up...the dribble is less important. Purdue wants to exploit whereever the weakness is in the opposing team and to do ...players need to be skilled in doing more than a clearly defined role so that adjustments can take place as needed as they read the D and attack accordingly. On the other side, the clock has prevented some of the advantages of motion in the past. I have stated many times that I prefer two fours about 6'9" that are athletic and three guards for all the things you can do offensively. However, that is more popular today due to rule emphasis and clock and so a lot of teams are competing for similar skills.

Matt is in a contrarian mode at this time. He has a back to the basket big and runs a lot of off ball screens. Preparing for Purdue is different than many teams. Along with that Matt and Purdue has a reputation for bigs and since the competition for back to the basket bigs is not as great as years ago...that puts Purdue in a very good spot for those players day in and day out...and that then flows to different skillsets with a less open lane and perimeter players.

 

[Wolegib]

I think every coach in the country is looking for the same player. Only thing I would add is that Purdue doesn't run many plays. Purdue runs a read offense...which reads the D and adjusts accordingly. Now a leader...preferably one with the ball most the time may help balance the court and control tempo, but Purdue's approach is not like when Yogi pounded the ball for long possessions under crean. Purdue looks for versatility in players that can shoot, pass, dribble and defend and as the size goes up...the dribble is less important. Purdue wants to exploit whereever the weakness is in the opposing team and to do ...players need to be skilled in doing more than a clearly defined role so that adjustments can take place as needed as they read the D and attack accordingly. On the other side, the clock has prevented some of the advantages of motion in the past. I have stated many times that I prefer two fours about 6'9" that are athletic and three guards for all the things you can do offensively. However, that is more popular today due to rule emphasis and clock and so a lot of teams are competing for similar skills.

Matt is in a contrarian mode at this time. He has a back to the basket big and runs a lot of off ball screens. Preparing for Purdue is different than many teams. Along with that Matt and Purdue has a reputation for bigs and since the competition for back to the basket bigs is not as great as years ago...that puts Purdue in a very good spot for those players day in and day out...and that then flows to different skillsets with a less open lane and perimeter players.

I can see where that would provide us an advantage over many teams, and would be very attractive to landing a big recruit. but on the other hand, I don't see many teams focused on a big man leading the way winning a championship. I see elite guards making three point shots or free throws at critical junctures to seal a victory. And if you attract quality big men, I could see quality guards looking elsewhere to teams that feature and also showcase their talents.

Admittedly, Purdue is known as BIG MAN U. and that will lead to many victories over lesser opponents. But can that philosophy with its recruiting advantages and disadvantages take Purdue to that next level? I was kind of surprised with the success Swanigan enjoyed, that Purdue was not able to sign a one and done elite player to pair with him last year. I was also kind of surprised no one and done type player wanted to sign with us to fill his void.

and admittedly, when you have an offense that spreads the ball around and looks for weakness, that's not that attractive to a one and done player who wants to be a featured player.

 

[tjreese]

I can see where that would provide us an advantage over many teams, and would be very attractive to landing a big recruit. but on the other hand, I don't see many teams focused on a big man leading the way winning a championship. I see elite guards making three point shots or free throws at critical junctures to seal a victory. And if you attract quality big men, I could see quality guards looking elsewhere to teams that feature and also showcase their talents.

Admittedly, Purdue is known as BIG MAN U. and that will lead to many victories over lesser opponents. But can that philosophy with its recruiting advantages and disadvantages take Purdue to that next level? I was kind of surprised with the success Swanigan enjoyed, that Purdue was not able to sign a one and done elite player to pair with him last year. I was also kind of surprised no one and done type player wanted to sign with us to fill his void.

and admittedly, when you have an offense that spreads the ball around and looks for weakness, that's not that attractive to a one and done player who wants to be a featured player.

I personally think there is some infatuation with guard play in the general public due to exactly what you say. To your thoughts...having a player that can create for himself (guards generally) and make the shot is important in that you do not have to include others needing to properly screen, properly read the screen, properly set up the screen or just others in general that could mess up and increase the odds of an error in judgment and skill. In close games that player "can be" cruciual as you have stated. The rules on teh offensive end and perimeter play enhances that player as well. All these things are easily observed and popular among the fans.

On the other side what took place for the 38 minutes before that heroic play came into being? Do we get more points for that single play that the other baskets? Without the bigs, the guards will not win and without the guards the bigs definitely won't win...since you have to get the ball down the court and get a shot. The teams where the guards make a play at the end only are able to do so due to competent bigs playing. The population has an average size and deviations from that size. Most guards playing and making the plays you remember are probably in the 5'10-6'3". If you looked at the area under the curve or some standarized score on male heights you would find a much larger population of guards in that size than Bigs above 6'8" for example and so what I guess I'm saying is that if you can lock down the bigs, there is a lot larger pool of guards to choose. Do bigs give you better defense or good guard give you better D.

Don't get me wrong...IF a game gets to a final possession I prefer that special guard over a big that needs to receive the ball! However, is is easier to prevent it getting to a single possession with a special big and so there is reason to love a good guard, but not to get infatuated with it.

 

[Dakota Girl]

I agree with this. Given the current roster and our recruiting "pipeline" I expect at least one 5th year transfer.

You do realize he is currently playing PG, right?

Good point. i've watched two games against a very solid Canada team and NE was very good as a PG. I have no reservations about him whatsoever.

 

[Dakota Girl]

I can see where that would provide us an advantage over many teams, and would be very attractive to landing a big recruit. but on the other hand, I don't see many teams focused on a big man leading the way winning a championship. I see elite guards making three point shots or free throws at critical junctures to seal a victory. And if you attract quality big men, I could see quality guards looking elsewhere to teams that feature and also showcase their talents.

Admittedly, Purdue is known as BIG MAN U. and that will lead to many victories over lesser opponents. But can that philosophy with its recruiting advantages and disadvantages take Purdue to that next level? I was kind of surprised with the success Swanigan enjoyed, that Purdue was not able to sign a one and done elite player to pair with him last year. I was also kind of surprised no one and done type player wanted to sign with us to fill his void.

and admittedly, when you have an offense that spreads the ball around and looks for weakness, that's not that attractive to a one and done player who wants to be a featured player.

So Your assumption was that having a two and done player would assure us a one and done player to replace him. I would be more inclined to bet the trend which is a heavy dose of top 150's, a few top 50's and an occasional top 25 type player.

 

[tynd10]

Good point. i've watched two games against a very solid Canada team and NE was very good as a PG. I have no reservations about him whatsoever.

You do realize prior to playing the worst team in the whole tournament NE had 1 assist to 10 turnovers. Yes, he had 9 assists and 1 turnover against little sister of the poor. That brings his assist total to 10 and turnovers to 11. Not exactly outstanding PG numbers.

 

[mathboy]

You do realize prior to playing the worst team in the whole tournament NE had 1 assist to 10 turnovers. Yes, he had 9 assists and 1 turnover against little sister of the poor. That brings his assist total to 10 and turnovers to 11. Not exactly outstanding PG numbers.

So his very first game, he struggled a bit. By his second game he turned those numbers around. Care to graph those two data points and project where he will be by the end of this season? That would mean about as much as averaging two games.... LOL.

 

[tynd10]

So his very first game, he struggled a bit. By his second game he turned those numbers around. Care to graph those two data points and project where he will be by the end of this season? That would mean about as much as averaging two games.... LOL.

Those numbers show 5 games. (2 scrimmages against Canada, 1 against Norway, Argentina, and UAE). I was simply responding to her assertion that "NE has been very good as a PG so far..."

 

[Dakota Girl]

You do realize prior to playing the worst team in the whole tournament NE had 1 assist to 10 turnovers. Yes, he had 9 assists and 1 turnover against little sister of the poor. That brings his assist total to 10 and turnovers to 11. Not exactly outstanding PG numbers.

I sat in the gym and watched him play Canada and have seen his skill set and physical tools. He can do the job. Will it take awhile for a freshman to become a starting caliber point? Yes. Does one bad game (statistically) against Argentina mean he should be relegated to the wing? No. Did you see the Argentina game? If so, how did he play? What drove the turnovers? Did he impact the game in other ways than your two stats? Did he play well defensively?
You are basing your assessment on two hand picked stats from one game to support your argument with someone else.
I am basing mine on watching him from 20 feet away and then again the next day. He has the talent. Now he needs experience. And by the way it's the end of August. The kid just graduated three months ago. Maybe some time before tossing out of the point position would be appropriate.

 

[tynd10]

I sat in the gym and watched him play Canada and have seen his skill set and physical tools. He can do the job. Will it take awhile for a freshman to become a starting caliber point? Yes. Does one bad game (statistically) against Argentina mean he should be relegated to the wing? No. Did you see the Argentina game? If so, how did he play? What drove the turnovers? Did he impact the game in other ways than your two stats? Did he play well defensively?
You are basing your assessment on two hand picked stats from one game to support your argument with someone else.
I am basing mine on watching him from 20 feet away and then again the next day. He has the talent. Now he needs experience. And by the way it's the end of August. The kid just graduated three months ago. Maybe some time before tossing out of the point position would be appropriate.

First of all, I never said he shouldn't play PG. I said based on what we have seen currently (5 games not 1 like you said), it's a stretch at best to call him "very good at PG". He definitely could develop into that no doubt. For the record, I streamed the two games against Canada, so yes I have seen him play live.

 

[Bigt40s2002]

Eastern is going to be a great player. I have played enough basketball to know. This thread is garbage and I too wish it would go away.

 

[Wolegib]

I'm just a happy guy to see Eastern play point guard rather than seeing Painter go small ball and try to make him into a small forward.

It appears to me as if C Edwards, Mathias, and PJ are going to be this year's backcourt; with Eastern backing up at PG and Cline backing up at SG.

 

[Wolegib]

Eastern is going to be a great player. I have played enough basketball to know. This thread is garbage and I too wish it would go away.

what's with all these people constantly calling threads garbage and wishing they would go away? This is about the 4th thread somebody wanted deleted. this thread has kind of evolved with some good points made lately.

 

[Dakota Girl]

First of all, I never said he shouldn't play PG. I said based on what we have seen currently (5 games not 1 like you said), it's a stretch at best to call him "very good at PG". He definitely could develop into that no doubt. For the record, I streamed the two games against Canada, so yes I have seen him play live.

Okay.. Then I have no idea what it is that you ARE trying to say.

what's with all these people constantly calling threads garbage and wishing they would go away? This is about the 4th thread somebody wanted deleted. this thread has kind of evolved with some good points made lately.

i don't know. It's kind of a free market system. It will live or die as it should.

 

[tjreese]

I'm just a happy guy to see Eastern play point guard rather than seeing Painter go small ball and try to make him into a small forward.

It appears to me as if C Edwards, Mathias, and PJ are going to be this year's backcourt; with Eastern backing up at PG and Cline backing up at SG.

A cursory view as I haven't really reviewed the data, but not sure Cline isn't doing better so far than Carsen..on stats...can't see the fricking games for a more informed opinion. I know Cline struggled the "first half" with quickness in the very first game with Canada, but data wise has been "maybe" better lately

 

[Wolegib]

A cursory view as I haven't really reviewed the data, but not sure Cline isn't doing better so far than Carsen..on stats...can't see the fricking games for a more informed opinion. I know Cline struggled the "first half" with quickness in the very first game with Canada, but data wise has been "maybe" better lately

I would agree Cline's stats with the exception of that 0 for 6 game look better. He appears to be more under control than Edwards. But I've always viewed Cline as more of a of a catch and shoot player like Reggie Miller. And in that vein I would not expect many turnovers or assists fro him. And I kind of view Carsen as a slasher and creator, but he needs to get more under control and also improve his decision making and shot selection. Carsen's under 19 tourney games also reflected an at times out of control style.

It appears Mathias is sort of taking a back seat and creating for others. I know he can shoot, but it appears for the good of the team, he's allowing others to do their thing - sort of like a second pg and distributer on the floor. He's becoming the glue.

 

[tjreese]

I would agree Cline's stats with the exception of that 0 for 6 game look better. He appears to be more under control than Edwards. But I've always viewed Cline as more of a of a catch and shoot player like Reggie Miller. And in that vein I would not expect many turnovers or assists fro him. And I kind of view Carsen as a slasher and creator, but he needs to get more under control and also improve his decision making and shot selection. Carsen's under 19 tourney games also reflected an at times out of control style.

It appears Mathias is sort of taking a back seat and creating for others. I know he can shoot, but it appears for the good of the team, he's allowing others to do their thing - sort of like a second pg and distributer on the floor. He's becoming the glue.

Cline is a catch and shoot player...but has added "some" drive to his game. Carsen is a shooter..his slashing is quick and many times that finish is quick as well...missed. Carsen's quickness allows him to create his own shots easier, but is that always a good thing? Carsen has always been "more" out of control than some others, but most of us attribute that to youth coupled with his natural aggressiveness adn confidence. Lot of games leff to see how this team gets molded, but there is a nice upside for this team to get better

 

[Dakota Girl]

I would agree Cline's stats with the exception of that 0 for 6 game look better. He appears to be more under control than Edwards. But I've always viewed Cline as more of a of a catch and shoot player like Reggie Miller. And in that vein I would not expect many turnovers or assists fro him. And I kind of view Carsen as a slasher and creator, but he needs to get more under control and also improve his decision making and shot selection. Carsen's under 19 tourney games also reflected an at times out of control style.

It appears Mathias is sort of taking a back seat and creating for others. I know he can shoot, but it appears for the good of the team, he's allowing others to do their thing - sort of like a second pg and distributer on the floor. He's becoming the glue.

Wole, you and TJ are making some good observations from the stats here.
In general though one must be careful not to rely solely on stats as they don't have a stat categorie for many of the things that make for a great team game or individual performance. To TJ's point, it's hard to asses a game or a player without watching the game itself.
That said, good points.

 

[Wolegib]

Wole, you and TJ are making some good observations from the stats here.
In general though one must be careful not to rely solely on stats as they don't have a stat categorie for many of the things that make for a great team game or individual performance. To TJ's point, it's hard to asses a game or a player without watching the game itself.
That said, good points.

I like to look at obscure things and trends. Sometimes they both become factors of greater success or problems. Stats are only data points from which to speculate and reach conclusions.

Thanks for the complement.

 

[Dakota Girl]

Cline is a catch and shoot player...but has added "some" drive to his game. Carsen is a shooter..his slashing is quick and many times that finish is quick as well...missed. Carsen's quickness allows him to create his own shots easier, but is that always a good thing? Carsen has always been "more" out of control than some others, but most of us attribute that to youth coupled with his natural aggressiveness adn confidence. Lot of games leff to see how this team gets molded, but there is a nice upside for this team to get better

Give me the talented athlete that I have to "slow down" because he's high risk versus a solid player who just doesn't have the tools.
Kind like a smart drunk and a stupid drunk...in the morning they are both sober, but one is still stupid.
A good mix of the two players is great and we may have just that now.

 

[tjreese]

I like to look at obscure things and trends. Sometimes they both become factors of greater success or problems. Stats are only data points from which to speculate and reach conclusions.

Thanks for the complement.

consider this...stats are measurements on items measured of conditions encountered or created. They describe those conditions with the measurements taken and may or may not lead to accurate assumptions outside the population of consideration for a different set of conditions. Course it stops here as I'm not getting into global temperatures and or carbon dating...

 

[tjreese]

Give me the talented athlete that I have to "slow down" because he's high risk versus a solid player who just doesn't have the tools.
Kind like a smart drunk and a stupid drunk...in the morning they are both sober, but one is still stupid.
A good mix of the two players is great and we may have just that now.

course I would be happy with one...a hybrid. 6'6" quick, that can drive AND finish, rebound, play perimeter D and somewhat selective in his shots....but we will have to settle for two...

 

[Dakota Girl]

I like to look at obscure things and trends. Sometimes they both become factors of greater success or problems. Stats are only data points from which to speculate and reach conclusions.

Thanks for the complement.

You are welcome. I'll rip you for something soon so you don't worry about me.

 

[Dakota Girl]

course I would be happy with one...a hybrid. 6'6" quick, that can drive AND finish, rebound, play perimeter D and somewhat selective in his shots....but we will have to settle for two...

Two works!

 

[Do Dah Day]

I like to look at obscure things and trends. Sometimes they both become factors of greater success or problems. Stats are only data points from which to speculate and reach conclusions.

Thanks for the complement.

I concur, although I still believe in the 80/20 rule -- a LOT. So, obscure may indicate something, but if the less obscure don't support the same trend, then I tend to diminish the importance.

 

[mathboy]

Those numbers show 5 games. (2 scrimmages against Canada, 1 against Norway, Argentina, and UAE). I was simply responding to her assertion that "NE has been very good as a PG so far..."

The graph would have looked the same - 6 games or 2). You get the idea. I was just noting that the sample size is too small too soon to be of any value in assessing his ability to play PG.

 

[tynd10]

The graph would have looked the same - 6 games or 2). You get the idea. I was just noting that the sample size is too small too soon to be of any value in assessing his ability to play PG.

I completely agree. That goes both ways though. I was responding to a poster that said he looks like a "great PG". I think it's too early for that talk.

 

[The one and only ACE]

Phinisee can't shoot, doesn't possess elite speed/quickness and is small for a point. Have been saying for a while that I didn't want him (go back and look at my posts, IU trolls). Again, if Phinisee was from Georgia, no one would give a crap.

Lol. We shall see

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I completely agree. That goes both ways though. I was responding to a poster that said he looks like a "great PG". I think it's too early for that talk.

Of course you do.

 

[BoilerBulldog]

I completely agree. That goes both ways though. I was responding to a poster that said he looks like a "great PG". I think it's too early for that talk.

I'm pretty sure CMP has already assessed his ability to play PG. So you don't have to.

 

[Wolegib]

Ok, I'm kind of dense sometimes. somebody please tell me why tynd10 is giving a like to a post -several of them - that are mocking, berating and dissing himself? That just seems odd.

 

[tynd10]

Ok, I'm kind of dense sometimes. somebody please tell me why tynd10 is giving a like to a post -several of them - that are mocking, berating and dissing himself? That just seems odd.

I'm tired of responding to them. The "Like" was to acknowledge I saw the post. If you want, I will like your post as well.