2019 recruiting

Savior? Who knows if he can be quality depth? We have Sam, how do these guys differ if their styles?

You missed a large percentage of the post BTW. I am going to assume you agree to those points or have no rebuttal.
I didn't "miss your post", just chose not to respond to it. You clearly like to be long-winded to prove your points and get bent out of shape like a pre-pubescent girl when someone doesnt give you the answer you're looking for.

The modern big (watch any game in pro and college) likes to play on the perimeter. Do we need more rebounding and size? absolutely, but let's not pretend that someone with his skill set doesn't have a place on a roster. Oh and you clearly haven't watched a second of his film if you think he compares to Sam W outside of the fact that he likes to shoot.
 
Advertisement
Yep. I've thought from the start that we need a grad transfer center if we could find one. Unless Miller takes a huge step forward, and that doesn't seem to be expected.

I expect more from Gak over Miller. Gak at least showed flashes of ability but greatly undersized.
 
I didn't "miss your post", just chose not to respond to it.

Got it. No retort.


Oh and you clearly havent watched a second of his film if you think he compares to Sam W.

You're wrong. But I find it comical you yourself call him as follows...

He is a depth take and someone who can play the stretch 4 (a position Larranaga values).

Which is exactly what Sam is for us.

One last time, why did Stone's production go down before the injury? Why were his minutes being taken by a 6'5 freshman before the injury?
 
Advertisement
Got it. No retort.

You're wrong. But I find it comical you yourself call him as follows...

Which is exactly what Sam is for us.

One last time, why did Stone's production go down before the injury? Why were his minutes being taken by a 6'5 freshman before the injury?

I don't know, because anyone who has watched/played basketball/any sport understands that development and production do not always improve linearly? That there are natural ebbs and flows, and that 17 mediocre games last year don't mean that he can't provide solid off-the-bench production for 30 games next year? That could be why.

Unless you want Sam playing 40 minutes per game next year, a 2nd stretch 4 fits this roster well.

Warning in advance: if I choose not to respond to your response to this message, it doesn't mean I have "no retort". It just reflects that you're a curmudgeon that always emphasizes the worst, and therefore do not justify my sustained attention.
 
I don't know, because anyone who has watched/played basketball/any sport understands that development and production do not always improve linearly? That there are natural ebbs and flows, and that 17 mediocre games last year don't mean that he can't provide solid off-the-bench production for 30 games next year? That could be why.

So it isn't concerning that an undersized freshman was taking his minutes before he was injured? Interesting.

Perhaps he should have progressed and not regressed. Perhaps an undersized freshman shouldn't take his minutes and be more productive. Now he has an ACL tear. Who knows when he will be ready and in what form?

Unless you want Sam playing 40 minutes per game next year, a 2nd stretch 4 fits this roster well.

Warning Sarcasm...I didn't realize the ONLY options were Sam playing 40 minutes or take Stone (second stretch 4). My bad.

I guess since those are the ONLY options, let's take Stone.

No. I don't want that. I want an actual big man since we have no proven ones. Stone isn't a big man who can bang and neither is Sam. There must be an alternative. Oh yeah, there are alternatives since those aren't the only options.

I don't mind taking Stone provided we get actual big men. Play Stone as a back up 3, when healthy and productive.


Warning in advance: if I choose not to respond to your response to this message, it doesn't mean I have "no retort". It just reflects that you're a curmudgeon that always emphasizes the worst, and therefore do not justify my sustained attention.

I appreciate the kind words.

I don't have a response because you're a "curmudgeon". I like that.
 
Advertisement
I don’t know what a “true SF”. I do think we need another eligible guard/wing.

When we ran Angel (PG), Sheldon and Reed, that was great. Those guys were 6’5 and under.

Someone like Amp Lawrence. Reed and McClellan were 6'5 but rebounded pretty well.
 
I don't know, because anyone who has watched/played basketball/any sport understands that development and production do not always improve linearly? That there are natural ebbs and flows, and that 17 mediocre games last year don't mean that he can't provide solid off-the-bench production for 30 games next year? That could be why.

Unless you want Sam playing 40 minutes per game next year, a 2nd stretch 4 fits this roster well.

Warning in advance: if I choose not to respond to your response to this message, it doesn't mean I have "no retort". It just reflects that you're a curmudgeon that always emphasizes the worst, and therefore do not justify my sustained attention.
Again, don't try to talk sense into this guy. Apparently you aren't allowed to have a small sampling of regression in your 4 year career.
 
Again, don't try to talk sense into this guy. Apparently you aren't allowed to have a small sampling of regression in your 4 year career.

Yup. That was the only point made during the whole post. Maybe you two simps should take a reading comprehension class together.
 
I guess you're talking to me but instead of calling me out, you just make a random porst that is covered with horsechit. So, you're horsechit cracks me up. Maybe you will actually read my post and respond.

There are a couple of other posters who complain about not filling every single roster spot, but you are by far the most whiny and obnoxious of them all.



1. As to filling the class, yes. It is important that we fill the class. It is important that we bring in players who can actually play at positions of need. It is important that if we're relying on players to play immediately that they can actually play.
I agree

2. My concern is that we still have no big men who are proven and can actually play. Ignoring Stone's ACL tear, he is not a traditional big man. He likes to shoot. He likes to shoot 3s. He is not a strong rebounder either. He is 6'8 and his game is similar to Omar Sherman. We have a big man that likes too shoot already. We currently have a player with a game similar to Stone's (Sam). So now we have two players who aren't traditional big men.
Valid concern, but who's to say L and co aren't done with big men? They know their roster more than anyone, they know there are still holes to fill.

I have no problem taking Stone as depth. I think it is early to take filler like Stone. I think we still have time. I have a problem if he is our only eligible big man we take via grad transfer. So we wait on a player to recover from an ACL tear in 2019.
It's not too early. We still have 3 open scholarships

3. Can you explain why Stone was losing his minutes to a 6'5 freshman before his injury? Can you explain why Stone's production regressed so much?
No clue, but I trust L in his staff. They clearly think he can help

4. Can you please find a post where someone expects the part in bold? Is this just more horsechit you're making up? There is a tremendous gap between EVERY player must be a top 50 prospect and bringing in quality grad transfers at positions of need.

5. Instead of taking Stone, why not take a chance on a low risk big man? Maybe a center who received some inferior coaching, like Dominik Olejniczak who can actually play 15MPG at center.
We can still take him or someone like him, too.


Are you concerned with the following quote...

Stone had gotten off to a relatively poor start to the 2018-19 season before his injury. He averaged just 6.1 points and 3.9 rebounds per game, losing out on some of his minutes to freshman Keyontae Johnson.

Though Johnson was signed as a guard and views himself as one, Florida was forced to play him at power forward for much of the season. He did well in Stone's stead, averaging 8.1 points and 6.4 rebounds per game as a true freshman.


Again, I have no problem taking Stone at the end as filler. I have a problem with taking him and relying on him as an actual big man. Why not take a "low risk" player who can actually play the center position?

Worst case scenario - he comes in for a few minutes a game, takes a couple 3's, grabs a couple rebounds and maybe draws a charge here and there
Best case scenario - He provides much needed experience to the roster and develops into a key role player
It's a low risk high reward scenario. He also doesn't impact our 2020 recruiting numbers. There's little if anything to lose here.
 
Advertisement
There are a couple of other posters who complain about not filling every single roster spot, but you are by far the most whiny and obnoxious of them all.

Is this the ONLY part of the post you responded to? Nothing of substance, just you bltching about my posts. Click ignore.

Please let me know which other spot we filled this past season and this off-season I made an issue with.
 
Worst case scenario - he comes in for a few minutes a game, takes a couple 3's, grabs a couple rebounds and maybe draws a charge here and there
Best case scenario - He provides much needed experience to the roster and develops into a key role player
It's a low risk high reward scenario. He also doesn't impact our 2020 recruiting numbers. There's little if anything to lose here.

He’s not that type of player, he isn’t the glue guy like Amp who is going to come in play defense, rebounded and take charges. He is an offense first type of player who will rebound his area and provide average at best defense.
 
Is this the ONLY part of the post you responded to? Nothing of substance, just you bltching about my posts. Click ignore.

Please let me know which other spot we filled this past season and this off-season I made an issue with.
I replied to practically your entire post.
 
Advertisement
I doubt he has that athleticism. I would gladly have Amp back especially over Stone.
I agree that Stone will likely NOT be anywhere near as productive as Amp was. As far as athleticism I haven't seen enough of Stone to judge that. I never thought Amp was particularly athletic either though; actually, he seemed sorta stiff, not much of a vertical, etc. .
 
Advertisement
Back
Top