0
Started By
Message
re: Mizzou vs Creighton scrimmage from Saturday
Posted on 10/28/15 at 2:12 pm to the808bass
Posted on 10/28/15 at 2:12 pm to the808bass
All coaches "really like the freshman class."
Can you imagine one saying, "Whoa, we really fricked up recruiting these spastic idiots?"
Can you imagine one saying, "Whoa, we really fricked up recruiting these spastic idiots?"
Posted on 10/28/15 at 2:57 pm to the808bass
Behind the scenes last year the coaches were concerned about scoring and shooting. This year not really.
I think this is a 15 win team this year. Which will get KA a third season. If there are no defections from the critical players then year 3 Mizzou into the 20 win range.
I think this is a 15 win team this year. Which will get KA a third season. If there are no defections from the critical players then year 3 Mizzou into the 20 win range.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 2:58 pm to wubilli
Who scores on this team outside of Clark?
More importantly, who rebounds?
The same flaws from last years team still exist in this one. Except somehow we got even younger.
More importantly, who rebounds?
The same flaws from last years team still exist in this one. Except somehow we got even younger.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 3:36 pm to TigerCruise
Gant's development will be key to both of those questions. If he can match or come close to what J3 did last year.
Wright is also a likely candidate to be a double figure scorer.
Wright is also a likely candidate to be a double figure scorer.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 3:39 pm to TigerCruise
Rarely do shooters not improve their shooting% each year. So Namon and Tru should be better, that gives you 3.
I've also heard Walton can hit shots.
I've also heard Walton can hit shots.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 4:59 pm to wubilli
quote:
Behind the scenes last year the coaches were concerned about scoring and shooting. This year not really.
Is this inside info or hindsight is 20/20 information? Will we hear next year that "last year the coaches were concerned about rebounding and scoring?"
Posted on 10/28/15 at 5:01 pm to wubilli
If Gant can match JW3's production and Puryear can match Gant's and Walton can match Teki's and Isbell can match Shamburger and Rosburg can match Post's, we get another 9 win season.
We need quantum leaps. Not gradual improvements.
We need quantum leaps. Not gradual improvements.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 5:07 pm to the808bass
quote:
We need quantum leaps. Not gradual improvements.
Every year with gradual improvement gives HCKA another year...to a point.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 5:19 pm to the808bass
From what I have been told the offense will be much more efficient this year. J3 had good stats, but his efficiency was really bad. Supposedly Gant has improved so that he can get similar numbers in a far more efficient manner. He also had 6-7 blocks in the scrimmage.
Isabel's improvement in addition to newcomers Phillips & Walton will give Mizzou's offense a dynamic that it didn't have last year. This will require the finishers easier shots. Both Wright & Gant are expected to have to do less ball handling this year.
Isabel's improvement in addition to newcomers Phillips & Walton will give Mizzou's offense a dynamic that it didn't have last year. This will require the finishers easier shots. Both Wright & Gant are expected to have to do less ball handling this year.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 5:20 pm to wubilli
The offense has to be more efficient. It almost can't get worse. And I mean that quite literally.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 6:21 pm to the808bass
Gant will have to double his output to just match JW3, much less actually be any good. If JW3 was trash like many suggest, then I suppose if Gant only averages 11 ppg and 7 rpg he too will be trash. That's asking a lot of him to triple his output to be considered good.
And I'm a Gant fan. I thought he'd be one of our better players last year. Sitting out may have hampered that a bit.
And I'm a Gant fan. I thought he'd be one of our better players last year. Sitting out may have hampered that a bit.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 6:32 pm to reedus23
J3 & Clark both basically doubled their output from their freshman year.
Why couldn't Gant, Wright, & Isabel do the same? All have shown flashes of it, something that J3 & Clark did as freshmen as well.
I don't expect this team to be good, but do think they will be better than last year. Some of that is due to players developing, some the coaches developing.
Why couldn't Gant, Wright, & Isabel do the same? All have shown flashes of it, something that J3 & Clark did as freshmen as well.
I don't expect this team to be good, but do think they will be better than last year. Some of that is due to players developing, some the coaches developing.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 6:45 pm to wubilli
Well we do return 32.5 ppg. So there is that. If every one doubles their output and the freshmen contribute here and there we may be get as high as 234th nationally in ppg. Big improvement from 321st.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 6:46 pm to wubilli
quote:
Why couldn't Gant,
Didn't say he couldn't. I said according to some here, he would still be trash if he does that. J3 and all ya know.
Posted on 10/28/15 at 6:58 pm to reedus23
It's too bad J3 left. He was the best player on the team last year, and by his senior year will be an all-conference type of player. He was forced into a role last year that he wasn't ready for.
He averaged 18 & 10 during a majority of the noncon last year. Another year and he might of been able to do that all year.
He averaged 18 & 10 during a majority of the noncon last year. Another year and he might of been able to do that all year.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 2:04 am to reedus23
quote:
Well we do return 32.5 ppg. So there is that. If every one doubles their output and the freshmen contribute here and there we may be get as high as 234th nationally in ppg. Big improvement from 321st.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 11:36 am to wubilli
quote:
It's too bad J3 left. He was the best player on the team last year, and by his senior year will be an all-conference type of player. He was forced into a role last year that he wasn't ready for.
He averaged 18 & 10 during a majority of the noncon last year. Another year and he might of been able to do that all year.
No, No, NO. Do you mean 18 shot attempts and 10 turnvoers? Maybe then
JW3 was soft. Not a post player and thought of himself as a SF who could shoot 3's. He was lucky he wasn't called for traveling more...because he did that all the time.
Role? He is 6'9" and should have been playing in the post. But he sucked in the post.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 11:42 am to mutigerz
People love to hate in J3 because he was smart and left a sinking ship. He has a very similar game to Bowers, who was universally loved by Mizzou fans. It's always the same, we hate the ones who leave and pretend they sucked even though it was clear they were the best we had. You wanna blame someone for sucking, blame the other players around him and KA for his crappy scheme.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 12:00 pm to mosoblkcougar
WRONG, my disliking of JW3 was never questioned. I would have never recruited him. He wasn't a good player and to even slightly compare him to Bowers is ridiculous
Posted on 10/29/15 at 12:02 pm to mutigerz
quote:
He wasn't a good player and to even slightly compare him to Bowers is ridiculous
His production as a sophomore was higher than Bowers. His range as a sophomore was probably better than Bowers.
He'll be a really solid addition to Gonzaga. But they have a D1 coach.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News