UNC at Boston College

Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby GreenvilleEagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:54 am

claver2010 {l Wrote}:
Donahue's Disciples:
Tough game. Really proud of our guys. Hung tough even when the calls weren't goin our way. They gave us one good run and we played them point for point the rest of the way, it just wasn't enough to close the gap. Awesome crowd tonight hope to see more games as packed as tonight's. Up next, Clemson on Saturday! #WeAreBC


Vincent Higgins:
When are we going to give don the spaz treatment?

Donahue's Disciples:
Never.

Vincent Higgins:
Why. Everyone was so quick to be anti spaz. The Don has been as bad a failure.

Donahue's Disciples:
Every recruit skinner had left when he did. We even had guys transfer. This may be Donahue's third year, but its only his second year of recruits. We lost 3 starters from last year's team (Gabe, Humphrey, JD), and Cliff has been hurt almost the whole year. Not really Don's fault. He's a great guy and a great coach. The team WILL be good. We already are. Check the ACC games we've lost. Really close games. We will be a top 25 team next year. GUARANTEED.

Vincent Higgins:
I agree he is a great guy! So is spaz! But honestly there is a bit of a double standard with the two. The Don had not produced


:81


Did Vinny have anal sex with spaz in the bowels of Conte Forum?
GreenvilleEagle
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1033
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:59 pm
Karma: -31

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:18 am

claver2010 {l Wrote}:
Donahue's Disciples:
Tough game. Really proud of our guys. Hung tough even when the calls weren't goin our way. They gave us one good run and we played them point for point the rest of the way, it just wasn't enough to close the gap. Awesome crowd tonight hope to see more games as packed as tonight's. Up next, Clemson on Saturday! #WeAreBC


Vincent Higgins:
When are we going to give don the spaz treatment?

Donahue's Disciples:
Never.

Vincent Higgins:
Why. Everyone was so quick to be anti spaz. The Don has been as bad a failure.

Donahue's Disciples:
Every recruit skinner had left when he did. We even had guys transfer. This may be Donahue's third year, but its only his second year of recruits. We lost 3 starters from last year's team (Gabe, Humphrey, JD), and Cliff has been hurt almost the whole year. Not really Don's fault. He's a great guy and a great coach. The team WILL be good. We already are. Check the ACC games we've lost. Really close games. We will be a top 25 team next year. GUARANTEED.

Vincent Higgins:
I agree he is a great guy! So is spaz! But honestly there is a bit of a double standard with the two. The Don had not produced


:81


most of this board is as stupid as vinny.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby DavidGordonsFoot on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:47 am

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
most of this board is as stupid as vinny.


This board meaning the Conte board, or all of EO?
hello
User avatar
DavidGordonsFoot
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15042
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:56 pm
Location: Not tobaccoroad
Karma: 2942

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:56 am

gaelfu {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
gaelfu {l Wrote}:Are you saying the team is worse than last year's team? I think that's a stretch.

In any case, doesn't really matter, as I am predicting Donahue is not the coach for the 2015-16 season, and not because he leaves for a better job. Failure by a little or failure by a lot is still failure nonetheless.


I can never tell how much of this you watch as you came in earlier in the season and didn't comment for a few games, but while maybe I'm blinded by what I want to see happen, it has seemed very clear to me that this team was exponentially better than last year when they were running the limited bench and often looked like it was more talented than Wake, Maryland, Va Tech and even NC State but they only go about 4 and a percentage deep. Way too much depends on Clifford's health right now and if he can't play significant minutes I guess your earlier 18-20 game prediction seems right to me. If he can I think this has the potential to be a very good team with two more decent players preferably a big and a swing type.


I've watched about 75% of the games this year, and most of all of the ACC games except for UVA. The team is better than last year's team. Anyone who's watched them play this year will agree with that.

That said, let's look at the core of this team right now: Anderson, Hanlan, Rahon, Jackson, Clifford. Say what you want about the others, but I think the others are fringe ACC players at best.

that's pretty fair, I never want to see Danny Rubin ever again and obviously Caudill is a Erik Witt, Andrew Dudley (das-big man ommitted for U of Albany graduates benefits) non-entity, I still think Heckmann and maybe even more likely Odio can contribute

Anderson - I thought at the beginning of the year he was primed for a monster year. Really thought he could be the next Dudley for this program, same body type, same skill set, round out the 3ball as an upperclassman and turn into an ACC POY candidate. Statistically, at 16 and 9, he's lived up to expectations. I don't understand the inconsistency though. He seems to just disappear in certain games. But, he is the furthest thing from what's wrong with the team, and I'll say he's on schedule to develop into that player.

agreed, my only issue is I can't tell if he is soft or tired from playing out of position and surrounded by a bunch of sub 210 lb teamates and thus saddling way too much of the interior defensive load and rebounding, moreover I can't tell if he is actually a horrific interior defender or if it is again a product of the talent surrounding him

Rahon - Loved him at the beginning of the year, but the more I see him play, the lower I think his ceiling is. Think for a deep tourney run kind of team, he is a solid 7th man/glue guy. Have seen him miss way too many open shots this year. Maybe it's the ankle, but I see him as a nice bench piece, and not a starting 2 guard for a team making a deep tourney run. Smart defender and has taken a lot of charges, but I question his ability to effectively defend for 40 minutes (depth is an issue here to be fair).

If he is either injured or just out of gas, I still think his smart play, size (he's one of our few guards who isn't a stick figure and effort (yes, I went there) to be a four year starter who is a plus in multiple categories. He should not be playing 40 minutes a game, that is a huge problem. He was really just too good in the stretch from the charleston tournament through Wake for me to just assume he's gotten shitty or that the ACC is too talented. But I readily admit it has been ugly since wake and maybe I'm wrong and the athleticism of ACC guards are too much for him

Hanlan - Think he's a bulldog. Really tough, love his ability to attack the basket. Another guy who I worry about his shooting from deep, but overall happy with him. He'll need to take a massive leap for this team to have a shot at making the tourney next year.

My favorite player by far, I worry more about his FTs than the outside shot, the outside shot would be more of a plus than anything.

Jackson - Has proven me wrong in that he's bounced back from an awful start. Ultimately, I think another 6th/7th man on a good team however, because he's a one-dimensional player. Doesn't bring anything to the table off the bounce, and is a minus defender. Great shooter though, and a guy I'd like to have coming off the bench to heat up and lead the 2nd unit.

I think this is somewhat lazy analysis, and I say that relative to the others which I think are good. He is a very good shooter but he can dribble and pass a little bit too. He is not Rice or Jackson obviously, but he is not a guy who you smack your forehead when he gets the ball at times other than when he is wide open and ready to shoot. I haven't noticed the poor defense since early in the season where there were some very visible blown responsibilities

Clifford - This is where we probably most disagree. A huge question mark in my eyes. For all the shit CAG has been getting, I don't know how we can think we can depend on him when you consider how prone to chronic injury big men can be, especially with the knees. I don't think he's a particularly good rebounder for his size, and another thing I'll say is that he doesn't strike me as a particularly intelligent player. I will say that he shows nice touch on his J, but his post moves are a work in progress, and after 2 years, he's just a big ? to me.

I think you said you didn't watch last year, correct me if I'm wrong (again, if this is me confusing you with someone else, possible CAG, apologies. But Clifford had some really nice post moves last year. In fact that and his ability to move well for a 7 footer were the reasons for the optimism. He is not a good rebounder for a 7 footer, but his rebounding would be the difference between us losing or not losing rebounding margins this year. Moreover it would mean Anderson didn't have to defend the 5 and often times play with Odio or Heckmann as the next biggest BC guy on the floor, which would have -I believe- a huge effect. My issue with this whole argument is that I have never said Clifford will be healthy and therefore we will make the Tournament next year, I have said if Clifford is healthy I think we will make the tournament next year. People on the CAG side have insisted there is no way he will be healthy because they are assholes

So we finally come to Donahue. In year 3, what has he done with the foundation? We have one good to potentially great player in Anderson. We have potential, but ultimately question marks, all over the floor everywhere else. We have a team devoid (for the most part) of consistent outside shooters in a system that demands them. Inconsistency and stretches of downright putrid play characterize our team's defense. We have significant depth issues in both the frontcourt and the backcourt, with only one swingman signed for next year. We might sign more players, but who knows? We have walk-ons playing meaningful minutes night after night.

If you don't think Hanlan is a good player, I don't know what to tell you. If you don't think Jackson is a good outside shooter I have the same issue. Defensive lapses and inconsistency could pretty easily relate to having no bench, no? We have two swingmen coming in next year Owens and Dragevich. One who has shown the ability to shoot from the outside in comparable league play, one who is pegged to be the athletic and strong 2/3 we don't have now. I hope for additional recruits in this class. This should be the last year of walk ons. If Heckmann leaves, I'm sure he will all of a sudden become an "ACC player" again posthumously, and I hope it doesn't happen.

Then you have the potential for improvement of players on the roster. Stupid posters said that the freshman last year wouldn't ever be much better than they were. This was obviously ridiculous. Eddie Odio is still not ready to play that kind of minutes against a team like UNC, but did you ever think you'd see him contributing at all last year? Beerbohm was a very useful piece on the 2000 team. Odio is looking like he could be on a similar trajectory, an athletic project who finally puts it together. You've acknowledged that Anderson has improved, even if not to the level you expect, it could happen again if he gets stronger. I said earlier I don't think Jackson is the defensive minus he's been made out to be, but he is certainly a better defender this year than last year. I am nearly certain Hanlan and Rahon will improve conditioning if nothing else.


Most importantly, I get the feeling that this team's ceiling is far lower than some of the yahoo's on this site would have you believe. One really good player (Anderson), one solid starter (Hanlan) and a few nice role players does not make a tourney team. Donahue said it himself, give this squad 50 games. It's been 50 games. We know what we have. And what we have is a team that's 9-11, 1-6 in conference, and going nowhere fast.

Getting back to the tournament is the short term goal, right? What was the last BC team to make the tournament? 2008-09? That team had one really good player, Rice, one solid starter, Trap, and a few nice role players, Sanders, Raji, Freshman Jackson. That team was hardly the 83 Sixers. As to 50 games, I'm not happy where we are right now. I think we are poised to be fine later though.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 9:59 am

DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
most of this board is as stupid as vinny.


This board meaning the Conte board, or all of EO?


I meant the conte board, but there is some merit to the other claim.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby joemack13 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:08 am

While I think most of this thread is over-reaction, if the Don doesn't bring in some kind of big man for 2013 that could be the beginning of the end. There's just no justification for us not to have shored up that issue by next year, and from what little i can gather in the recruiting thread the Don is behind the ball on that one. We'll see, I think the Don can ride the excuse train until about this time next year though.
joemack13
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:40 am
Karma: 127

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:12 am

claver2010 {l Wrote}:
Donahue's Disciples:
Tough game. Really proud of our guys. Hung tough even when the calls weren't goin our way. They gave us one good run and we played them point for point the rest of the way, it just wasn't enough to close the gap. Awesome crowd tonight hope to see more games as packed as tonight's. Up next, Clemson on Saturday! #WeAreBC


Vincent Higgins:
When are we going to give don the spaz treatment?

Donahue's Disciples:
Never.

Vincent Higgins:
Why. Everyone was so quick to be anti spaz. The Don has been as bad a failure.

Donahue's Disciples:
Every recruit skinner had left when he did. We even had guys transfer. This may be Donahue's third year, but its only his second year of recruits. We lost 3 starters from last year's team (Gabe, Humphrey, JD), and Cliff has been hurt almost the whole year. Not really Don's fault. He's a great guy and a great coach. The team WILL be good. We already are. Check the ACC games we've lost. Really close games. We will be a top 25 team next year. GUARANTEED.

Vincent Higgins:
I agree he is a great guy! So is spaz! But honestly there is a bit of a double standard with the two. The Don had not produced


:81


i need a link to this discussion A-MEEDIATELY!
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:41 am

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:I remember when I thought the Don was a good coach. He's more checked out than Heckmann at this point. Nice work letting UNC have a 2 minute possession with no fouls.

Ryan Anderson is too good to be this tentative. And they need to start knocking down jumpers. The streaky shooting is tired.


This was a ridiculously bad coaching performance, mostly due to the timing of the bench expansion. I see that Heckman may have reacted positively to benching, which is great and everything, but this is the one game where our asshole student body shows up - not to watch BC, but to act like assholes, mimic basketball fans at teams that don't have as pathetic student bodies and see UNC - so this was not a good game to essentially tank by starting Odio and having him play 28 and playing Van Nest for 14 of the most god awful overmatched minutes I've ever seen and Rubin for any time ever. The morgue is a fickle awful environment under the best of circumstances but this should not have been tinkering with the lineup or even worse making the not even close to potential contributors feel good about the effort they put in at practice game.

Also his non reaction to the officiating was infuriating.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:46 am

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:...but this is the one game where our asshole student body shows up - not to watch BC, but to act like assholes, mimic basketball fans at teams that don't have as pathetic student bodies and see UNC...


nice work. this almost gets you graduated out of fucking nerd status.

some more work like this and i'll welcome you gladly into the limbo between nerd and whalepants. as you've noted previously, i like to call it "1994."
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby DavidGordonsFoot on Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:56 am

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
claver2010 {l Wrote}:
Donahue's Disciples:
Tough game. Really proud of our guys. Hung tough even when the calls weren't goin our way. They gave us one good run and we played them point for point the rest of the way, it just wasn't enough to close the gap. Awesome crowd tonight hope to see more games as packed as tonight's. Up next, Clemson on Saturday! #WeAreBC


Vincent Higgins:
When are we going to give don the spaz treatment?

Donahue's Disciples:
Never.

Vincent Higgins:
Why. Everyone was so quick to be anti spaz. The Don has been as bad a failure.

Donahue's Disciples:
Every recruit skinner had left when he did. We even had guys transfer. This may be Donahue's third year, but its only his second year of recruits. We lost 3 starters from last year's team (Gabe, Humphrey, JD), and Cliff has been hurt almost the whole year. Not really Don's fault. He's a great guy and a great coach. The team WILL be good. We already are. Check the ACC games we've lost. Really close games. We will be a top 25 team next year. GUARANTEED.

Vincent Higgins:
I agree he is a great guy! So is spaz! But honestly there is a bit of a double standard with the two. The Don had not produced


:81


i need a link to this discussion A-MEEDIATELY!


It must be on Facebook. It's not on Twitter or BCI.
hello
User avatar
DavidGordonsFoot
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15042
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:56 pm
Location: Not tobaccoroad
Karma: 2942

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eepstein0 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:06 am

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:I remember when I thought the Don was a good coach. He's more checked out than Heckmann at this point. Nice work letting UNC have a 2 minute possession with no fouls.

Ryan Anderson is too good to be this tentative. And they need to start knocking down jumpers. The streaky shooting is tired.


This was a ridiculously bad coaching performance, mostly due to the timing of the bench expansion. I see that Heckman may have reacted positively to benching, which is great and everything, but this is the one game where our asshole student body shows up - not to watch BC, but to act like assholes, mimic basketball fans at teams that don't have as pathetic student bodies and see UNC - so this was not a good game to essentially tank by starting Odio and having him play 28 and playing Van Nest for 14 of the most god awful overmatched minutes I've ever seen and Rubin for any time ever. The morgue is a fickle awful environment under the best of circumstances but this should not have been tinkering with the lineup or even worse making the not even close to potential contributors feel good about the effort they put in at practice game.

Also his non reaction to the officiating was infuriating.


Rubin, Caudill and the walk-ons should never see the court, ever. Divide the minutes up amongst the other 8 so maybe Rahon doesn't have to play 40 minutes. Clifford and Van Nest need to play at least 30 combined minutes. Anderson and Odio can play the other 50.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17672
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:14 am

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:I remember when I thought the Don was a good coach. He's more checked out than Heckmann at this point. Nice work letting UNC have a 2 minute possession with no fouls.

Ryan Anderson is too good to be this tentative. And they need to start knocking down jumpers. The streaky shooting is tired.


This was a ridiculously bad coaching performance, mostly due to the timing of the bench expansion. I see that Heckman may have reacted positively to benching, which is great and everything, but this is the one game where our asshole student body shows up - not to watch BC, but to act like assholes, mimic basketball fans at teams that don't have as pathetic student bodies and see UNC - so this was not a good game to essentially tank by starting Odio and having him play 28 and playing Van Nest for 14 of the most god awful overmatched minutes I've ever seen and Rubin for any time ever. The morgue is a fickle awful environment under the best of circumstances but this should not have been tinkering with the lineup or even worse making the not even close to potential contributors feel good about the effort they put in at practice game.

Also his non reaction to the officiating was infuriating.


Rubin, Caudill and the walk-ons should never see the court, ever. Divide the minutes up amongst the other 8 so maybe Rahon doesn't have to play 40 minutes. Clifford and Van Nest need to play at least 30 combined minutes. Anderson and Odio can play the other 50.


I now believe that Van Nest should be in the Rubin and Caudill category. What's extra annoying is just increasing Odio's minutes might have actually had a positive impact but emptying the entire basketball talent short bus on to the court in this game made no sense to me. It is also possible Clifford is about ready to call this season which would make this board extra intolerable but might be good for the long term.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eepstein0 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:29 am

They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17672
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:32 am

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby 2001Eagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:56 am

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Still don't know why they bothered playing Clifford in all of the non-conference games when he was clearly hurt. I'm too lazy to look up what I said back then, but if he had rested, perhaps he could have been healthy for ACC games and, if not, he should have sat the whole fucking year and gotten surgery. Dumb.
Coach hard. Love hard.
User avatar
2001Eagle
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:26 pm
Karma: 123

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eepstein0 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:59 am

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.


I agree with you that we're screwed either way. The collection of talent Donhue has to chose from is laughable.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17672
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby twballgame9 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:09 pm

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.


I agree with you that we're screwed either way. The collection of talent Donhue has to chose from is laughable.


And who bears the burden of collecting that talent?

Frankly, the problem is not the talent, but the fact that the talent is not deep enough to do anything that Don wants to do. If Clifford were healthy and Daniels still here, they could get away with these lineups with Anderson at the 5 for 10 minutes a game. But they can't because the guards have to play 35 minutes a game, as does Anderson.

And they can't go bigger to take pressure off of the guards because they have 1.5 guys over 6'7 that can play, and a nice hustle guy that shouldn't get more than 10 mins a game.

In short, a present Daniels and a healthy Clifford, and they probably win 3-4 more games. FTs go down without tired legs, and there would be some semblance of interior defense and rebounding. You could have started Rahon, Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson and Clifford and had Daniels, Heckmann and Odio off of the bench.

That said, transfers and injuries happen. Thus the core of the problem is more that players like Caudill and Moten have been complete busts, and that given what he saw of Caudill last season, the Don failed to target one decent athletic big man that he could land. Wasting time on Nerlens Noel and the kid from Hampton without a viable option is terrible. And he STILL hasn't landed a big in this class.

I have said Courtney Dunn before, and maybe that is an exaggeration, but if he could get even a serviceable shotblocker/rebounder things would look a lot different. It astounds me that he fails to realize this.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34344
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:22 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.


I agree with you that we're screwed either way. The collection of talent Donhue has to chose from is laughable.


And who bears the burden of collecting that talent?

Frankly, the problem is not the talent, but the fact that the talent is not deep enough to do anything that Don wants to do. If Clifford were healthy and Daniels still here, they could get away with these lineups with Anderson at the 5 for 10 minutes a game. But they can't because the guards have to play 35 minutes a game, as does Anderson.

And they can't go bigger to take pressure off of the guards because they have 1.5 guys over 6'7 that can play, and a nice hustle guy that shouldn't get more than 10 mins a game.

In short, a present Daniels and a healthy Clifford, and they probably win 3-4 more games. FTs go down without tired legs, and there would be some semblance of interior defense and rebounding. You could have started Rahon, Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson and Clifford and had Daniels, Heckmann and Odio off of the bench.

That said, transfers and injuries happen. Thus the core of the problem is more that players like Caudill and Moten have been complete busts, and that given what he saw of Caudill last season, the Don failed to target one decent athletic big man that he could land. Wasting time on Nerlens Noel and the kid from Hampton without a viable option is terrible. And he STILL hasn't landed a big in this class.

I have said Courtney Dunn before, and maybe that is an exaggeration, but if he could get even a serviceable shotblocker/rebounder things would look a lot different. It astounds me that he fails to realize this.


If you care about ws and ls this year, I agree now that Daniels would be a difference maker and Clifford's injury has made the big depth very apparent. He needs a big, but it really shouldn't be all that difficult to come by (yes this makes it worse if he fails). I think Dunn is an exaggeration albeit only slight. Bottomline, agree 100% the problem is depth not top end talent or even general talent. I think its fixable, many do not.

As an aside, there are several posters here who think every NCAA tournament team is built like the 2005-2006 BC team where you have 3 go-to scorers and an athletic freak big and plus players like senior hinant and Marshall rounding them out, when the reality is that level of talent at each position has been abnormal for BC tournament teams, again see 2008 or 2002 for examples of this.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:23 pm

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me.


do you think he could be groomed to take random 3 point shots with plenty of time left on the clock and stay as far away from the basket as possible in rebounding situations.

follow up question - do you think van nest has ever been to key west?
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:25 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me.


do you think he could be groomed to take random 3 point shots with plenty of time left on the clock and stay as far away from the basket as possible in rebounding situations.

follow up question - do you think van nest has ever been to key west?


question right back at you, do you think Oates taught McClain how to hide the counterfeit bills (allegedly)?
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:28 pm

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me.


do you think he could be groomed to take random 3 point shots with plenty of time left on the clock and stay as far away from the basket as possible in rebounding situations.

follow up question - do you think van nest has ever been to key west?


question right back at you, do you think Oates taught McClain how to hide the counterfeit bills (allegedly)?


maybe indirectly but probably not directly
now in the street there is violence
and, and a lots of work to be done
no place to hang out our washing
and, and i can't blame all on the sun
good god we gonna rock down to electric avenue
and then we'll take it higher
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
BC Guy
 
Posts: 24016
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 6074

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby gaelfu on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:33 pm

9903, don't want to quote your post as that would be obnoxiously long. You made some good points on evaluating the players, but let's compare the teams as a whole.

The way I see it, the 09 team went 9 deep: Rice, Trap, Cheesesteak, Raji, Reggie, Southern, Paris, Roche, and Dunn. You can quibble with my placement, but I would put their relative importance to the team in that order.

Now let's look at next year's team. Again, you can quibble with the placement, but I see: Anderson, Hanlan, Clifford, Lonnie, Rahon, Owens, Dragicevich, Odio, Heckmann as the corresponding 9 (assuming we even go that deep).

When I compare those 2 teams going down the line, I'd take the 09 squad 8 days a week, even accounting for some level of improvement between this year and next. Let's say for argument's sake that Hanlan and Anderson compare should perform at the same level next year as Rice and Trapani did in 09. I think this is reasonable.

The difference is the supporting cast from 09 blows away next year's supporting cast looking behind the top 2. Now if we land Jorgenson and a good big, maybe this changes. But I'm not inclined to give Don the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him close on a highly regarded prospect without Joe Jones on the bench.

I think you're really stretching it if you insist that the above 9 is going to make the tourney next year.
tobaccoroadeagle is a giant flaming tool, Fight the good fight 74!
gaelfu
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:56 pm
Karma: -170

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby twballgame9 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:38 pm

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.


I agree with you that we're screwed either way. The collection of talent Donhue has to chose from is laughable.


And who bears the burden of collecting that talent?

Frankly, the problem is not the talent, but the fact that the talent is not deep enough to do anything that Don wants to do. If Clifford were healthy and Daniels still here, they could get away with these lineups with Anderson at the 5 for 10 minutes a game. But they can't because the guards have to play 35 minutes a game, as does Anderson.

And they can't go bigger to take pressure off of the guards because they have 1.5 guys over 6'7 that can play, and a nice hustle guy that shouldn't get more than 10 mins a game.

In short, a present Daniels and a healthy Clifford, and they probably win 3-4 more games. FTs go down without tired legs, and there would be some semblance of interior defense and rebounding. You could have started Rahon, Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson and Clifford and had Daniels, Heckmann and Odio off of the bench.

That said, transfers and injuries happen. Thus the core of the problem is more that players like Caudill and Moten have been complete busts, and that given what he saw of Caudill last season, the Don failed to target one decent athletic big man that he could land. Wasting time on Nerlens Noel and the kid from Hampton without a viable option is terrible. And he STILL hasn't landed a big in this class.

I have said Courtney Dunn before, and maybe that is an exaggeration, but if he could get even a serviceable shotblocker/rebounder things would look a lot different. It astounds me that he fails to realize this.


If you care about ws and ls this year, I agree now that Daniels would be a difference maker and Clifford's injury has made the big depth very apparent. He needs a big, but it really shouldn't be all that difficult to come by (yes this makes it worse if he fails). I think Dunn is an exaggeration albeit only slight. Bottomline, agree 100% the problem is depth not top end talent or even general talent. I think its fixable, many do not.

As an aside, there are several posters here who think every NCAA tournament team is built like the 2005-2006 BC team where you have 3 go-to scorers and an athletic freak big and plus players like senior hinant and Marshall rounding them out, when the reality is that level of talent at each position has been abnormal for BC tournament teams, again see 2008 or 2002 for examples of this.


Any coach that doesn't care about ws and ls for two whole seasons should be fired.

I agree with your other points, especially the last one. That said, having no bigs at all is a recipe for disaster, especially when you have to ask your best player (who is really a back to the basket small forward) to play center and cover athletic bigs all night with no rest.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34344
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby twballgame9 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:43 pm

gaelfu {l Wrote}:9903, don't want to quote your post as that would be obnoxiously long. You made some good points on evaluating the players, but let's compare the teams as a whole.

The way I see it, the 09 team went 9 deep: Rice, Trap, Cheesesteak, Raji, Reggie, Southern, Paris, Roche, and Dunn. You can quibble with my placement, but I would put their relative importance to the team in that order.

Now let's look at next year's team. Again, you can quibble with the placement, but I see: Anderson, Hanlan, Clifford, Lonnie, Rahon, Owens, Dragicevich, Odio, Heckmann as the corresponding 9 (assuming we even go that deep).

When I compare those 2 teams going down the line, I'd take the 09 squad 8 days a week, even accounting for some level of improvement between this year and next. Let's say for argument's sake that Hanlan and Anderson compare should perform at the same level next year as Rice and Trapani did in 09. I think this is reasonable.

The difference is the supporting cast from 09 blows away next year's supporting cast looking behind the top 2. Now if we land Jorgenson and a good big, maybe this changes. But I'm not inclined to give Don the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him close on a highly regarded prospect without Joe Jones on the bench.

I think you're really stretching it if you insist that the above 9 is going to make the tourney next year.


The above 9 is certainly capable of making the tourney if Clifford is healthy and they can at least go 20 mins a game with he and Anderson on the floor at the same time. My problem is that that 9 has no contingency for an unhealthy Clifford, leaving Odio playing too many minutes. It's also a team that still only has 3 real guards that plays a 3 guard offense. In short, Don has not addressed the problems for next year that are killing them this year. Improvement will win a few more games, but sans a healthy Clifford and another guard, they won't make a huge leap next season.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34344
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:45 pm

gaelfu {l Wrote}:9903, don't want to quote your post as that would be obnoxiously long. You made some good points on evaluating the players, but let's compare the teams as a whole.

The way I see it, the 09 team went 9 deep: Rice, Trap, Cheesesteak, Raji, Reggie, Southern, Paris, Roche, and Dunn. You can quibble with my placement, but I would put their relative importance to the team in that order.

Now let's look at next year's team. Again, you can quibble with the placement, but I see: Anderson, Hanlan, Clifford, Lonnie, Rahon, Owens, Dragicevich, Odio, Heckmann as the corresponding 9 (assuming we even go that deep).

When I compare those 2 teams going down the line, I'd take the 09 squad 8 days a week, even accounting for some level of improvement between this year and next. Let's say for argument's sake that Hanlan and Anderson compare should perform at the same level next year as Rice and Trapani did in 09. I think this is reasonable.

The difference is the supporting cast from 09 blows away next year's supporting cast looking behind the top 2. Now if we land Jorgenson and a good big, maybe this changes. But I'm not inclined to give Don the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him close on a highly regarded prospect without Joe Jones on the bench.

I think you're really stretching it if you insist that the above 9 is going to make the tourney next year.


It all depends on progression, health and who gets added. Would you agree Anderson is better than Trap today? I think I would. Rice is a nice player and took over games but he's hardly an unattainable height for Hanlan to strive for. So yeah it comes down to their progression and then the depth players. Its all speculative at this point but I can very easily see this years group being better than that group by next year. Sophomore Southern, Paris, Dunn, and Junior Roche were all awful, awful players. Like no better than the Odio, Heckmann current level. Paris got better, the others really didn't. Reggie wasn't really there yet but obviously made incredible strides and Raji and Sanders were both very flawed but useful players. I just don't see the gap between the groups.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:47 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:They need to tell Clifford to go get the surgery and not play anymore this year. 4 minutes a game isn't helping matters. Just call it a season and get healthy.

I don't think Van Nest is terrible. He needs to play more to get back to game shape. I know an Odio/Van Nest front court doesn't excite people, but I bet we'd be better on defense.

Start Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson, Odio and Van Nest. Use Rahon and Heckmann off the bench. Just play 7, no more of stupid Rubin of Caudill.


Van Nest is one of the worst rebounders at 6'10+ I have ever seen. He's also a crappy interior defender. That makes him more or less useless to me. He is OK at not screwing up the flow of the offense (which unfortunately I can't say for Odio and the three or four times he had to hand the ball off to a guard because his spacing was all F'd up) and earlier in the year was good for the occasional garbage point; provided he didn't actually have to box out to get the ball to score said garbage point.

That said, I tend to agree on Clifford, so I don't know what else you can do.


I agree with you that we're screwed either way. The collection of talent Donhue has to chose from is laughable.


And who bears the burden of collecting that talent?

Frankly, the problem is not the talent, but the fact that the talent is not deep enough to do anything that Don wants to do. If Clifford were healthy and Daniels still here, they could get away with these lineups with Anderson at the 5 for 10 minutes a game. But they can't because the guards have to play 35 minutes a game, as does Anderson.

And they can't go bigger to take pressure off of the guards because they have 1.5 guys over 6'7 that can play, and a nice hustle guy that shouldn't get more than 10 mins a game.

In short, a present Daniels and a healthy Clifford, and they probably win 3-4 more games. FTs go down without tired legs, and there would be some semblance of interior defense and rebounding. You could have started Rahon, Hanlan, Jackson, Anderson and Clifford and had Daniels, Heckmann and Odio off of the bench.

That said, transfers and injuries happen. Thus the core of the problem is more that players like Caudill and Moten have been complete busts, and that given what he saw of Caudill last season, the Don failed to target one decent athletic big man that he could land. Wasting time on Nerlens Noel and the kid from Hampton without a viable option is terrible. And he STILL hasn't landed a big in this class.

I have said Courtney Dunn before, and maybe that is an exaggeration, but if he could get even a serviceable shotblocker/rebounder things would look a lot different. It astounds me that he fails to realize this.


If you care about ws and ls this year, I agree now that Daniels would be a difference maker and Clifford's injury has made the big depth very apparent. He needs a big, but it really shouldn't be all that difficult to come by (yes this makes it worse if he fails). I think Dunn is an exaggeration albeit only slight. Bottomline, agree 100% the problem is depth not top end talent or even general talent. I think its fixable, many do not.

As an aside, there are several posters here who think every NCAA tournament team is built like the 2005-2006 BC team where you have 3 go-to scorers and an athletic freak big and plus players like senior hinant and Marshall rounding them out, when the reality is that level of talent at each position has been abnormal for BC tournament teams, again see 2008 or 2002 for examples of this.


Any coach that doesn't care about ws and ls for two whole seasons should be fired.

I agree with your other points, especially the last one. That said, having no bigs at all is a recipe for disaster, especially when you have to ask your best player (who is really a back to the basket small forward) to play center and cover athletic bigs all night with no rest.


I meant as fans re: ws and ls. I continue to hope Donahue didn't run off Daniels and in fact tried to keep him, if not I agree it was stupid and he is reaping the results.

As to the other part, right we need to get a big.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby twballgame9 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:49 pm

eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
gaelfu {l Wrote}:9903, don't want to quote your post as that would be obnoxiously long. You made some good points on evaluating the players, but let's compare the teams as a whole.

The way I see it, the 09 team went 9 deep: Rice, Trap, Cheesesteak, Raji, Reggie, Southern, Paris, Roche, and Dunn. You can quibble with my placement, but I would put their relative importance to the team in that order.

Now let's look at next year's team. Again, you can quibble with the placement, but I see: Anderson, Hanlan, Clifford, Lonnie, Rahon, Owens, Dragicevich, Odio, Heckmann as the corresponding 9 (assuming we even go that deep).

When I compare those 2 teams going down the line, I'd take the 09 squad 8 days a week, even accounting for some level of improvement between this year and next. Let's say for argument's sake that Hanlan and Anderson compare should perform at the same level next year as Rice and Trapani did in 09. I think this is reasonable.

The difference is the supporting cast from 09 blows away next year's supporting cast looking behind the top 2. Now if we land Jorgenson and a good big, maybe this changes. But I'm not inclined to give Don the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him close on a highly regarded prospect without Joe Jones on the bench.

I think you're really stretching it if you insist that the above 9 is going to make the tourney next year.


It all depends on progression, health and who gets added. Would you agree Anderson is better than Trap today? I think I would. Rice is a nice player and took over games but he's hardly an unattainable height for Hanlan to strive for. So yeah it comes down to their progression and then the depth players. Its all speculative at this point but I can very easily see this years group being better than that group by next year. Sophomore Southern, Paris, Dunn, and Junior Roche were all awful, awful players. Like no better than the Odio, Heckmann current level. Paris got better, the others really didn't. Reggie wasn't really there yet but obviously made incredible strides and Raji and Sanders were both very flawed but useful players. I just don't see the gap between the groups.


I can't agree with this at all. And results kind of back up the point. I don't see this team coming close to 09, and the current scrubs are no where near as good as those scrubs.

Also, one guy like Rice that can completely take over a game is a huge weight in favor of that team. Hanlan could be as good or better a player, but he hasn't proven he can drop 40+ on Carolina yet. And he hasn't proven he can go 6-6 at the FT line like Rice after a run of 40 mins. He has plenty of time to prove it, but that bar is higher than you give Rice credit for.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34344
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby claver2010 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:15 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
claver2010 {l Wrote}:
Donahue's Disciples:
Tough game. Really proud of our guys. Hung tough even when the calls weren't goin our way. They gave us one good run and we played them point for point the rest of the way, it just wasn't enough to close the gap. Awesome crowd tonight hope to see more games as packed as tonight's. Up next, Clemson on Saturday! #WeAreBC


Vincent Higgins:
When are we going to give don the spaz treatment?

Donahue's Disciples:
Never.

Vincent Higgins:
Why. Everyone was so quick to be anti spaz. The Don has been as bad a failure.

Donahue's Disciples:
Every recruit skinner had left when he did. We even had guys transfer. This may be Donahue's third year, but its only his second year of recruits. We lost 3 starters from last year's team (Gabe, Humphrey, JD), and Cliff has been hurt almost the whole year. Not really Don's fault. He's a great guy and a great coach. The team WILL be good. We already are. Check the ACC games we've lost. Really close games. We will be a top 25 team next year. GUARANTEED.

Vincent Higgins:
I agree he is a great guy! So is spaz! But honestly there is a bit of a double standard with the two. The Don had not produced


:81


i need a link to this discussion A-MEEDIATELY!


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Donahues-Disciples/290623637614348?fref=ts
Bush, George H W
Cosby, Bill
Disick, Scott
Flair, Ric
Griffin, Kathy
Khamenei, Ali
McCain, John
Pele
Soros, George
User avatar
claver2010
BC Guy
 
Posts: 20301
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:55 pm
Karma: 3380

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby gaelfu on Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:23 pm

I think Anderson will be better than Trap, and perhaps is today. But I think Trap brought a toughness and intensity to the team that I don't think Anderson has yet.

I agree with ballgame in that Hanlan has a long way to go to get to where Rice was, and I don't know if he'll get there next year. Thus my point of saying I think the 2 best players on the team are kind of a wash.

I'll say this for the 09 scrubs (or at least Paris, Southern, and Dunn), they might have sucked on offense, but they could guard and they could bang. Our current scrubs suck on offense and are turnstiles on defense too.

And perhaps the biggest point to me: I would trade Rahon, Clifford, and Lonnie Jackson (yes, next year's versions) as the primary supporting cast for Sanders, Raji, and Reggie Jackson all day. There's a talent disparity there in favor of the 09 team, and if you don't think so, I'd be interested to hear why.

So when you look at the supporting cast, I just don't see there being enough talent (unless Owens is the second coming) to really get this team to the tourney next year.
tobaccoroadeagle is a giant flaming tool, Fight the good fight 74!
gaelfu
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:56 pm
Karma: -170

Re: UNC at Boston College

Postby eagle9903 on Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:23 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:
gaelfu {l Wrote}:9903, don't want to quote your post as that would be obnoxiously long. You made some good points on evaluating the players, but let's compare the teams as a whole.

The way I see it, the 09 team went 9 deep: Rice, Trap, Cheesesteak, Raji, Reggie, Southern, Paris, Roche, and Dunn. You can quibble with my placement, but I would put their relative importance to the team in that order.

Now let's look at next year's team. Again, you can quibble with the placement, but I see: Anderson, Hanlan, Clifford, Lonnie, Rahon, Owens, Dragicevich, Odio, Heckmann as the corresponding 9 (assuming we even go that deep).

When I compare those 2 teams going down the line, I'd take the 09 squad 8 days a week, even accounting for some level of improvement between this year and next. Let's say for argument's sake that Hanlan and Anderson compare should perform at the same level next year as Rice and Trapani did in 09. I think this is reasonable.

The difference is the supporting cast from 09 blows away next year's supporting cast looking behind the top 2. Now if we land Jorgenson and a good big, maybe this changes. But I'm not inclined to give Don the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him close on a highly regarded prospect without Joe Jones on the bench.

I think you're really stretching it if you insist that the above 9 is going to make the tourney next year.


It all depends on progression, health and who gets added. Would you agree Anderson is better than Trap today? I think I would. Rice is a nice player and took over games but he's hardly an unattainable height for Hanlan to strive for. So yeah it comes down to their progression and then the depth players. Its all speculative at this point but I can very easily see this years group being better than that group by next year. Sophomore Southern, Paris, Dunn, and Junior Roche were all awful, awful players. Like no better than the Odio, Heckmann current level. Paris got better, the others really didn't. Reggie wasn't really there yet but obviously made incredible strides and Raji and Sanders were both very flawed but useful players. I just don't see the gap between the groups.


I can't agree with this at all. And results kind of back up the point. I don't see this team coming close to 09, and the current scrubs are no where near as good as those scrubs.

Also, one guy like Rice that can completely take over a game is a huge weight in favor of that team. Hanlan could be as good or better a player, but he hasn't proven he can drop 40+ on Carolina yet. And he hasn't proven he can go 6-6 at the FT line like Rice after a run of 40 mins. He has plenty of time to prove it, but that bar is higher than you give Rice credit for.


Clearly we disagree on the quality of the 2008-09 scrubs relative to the current group. I don't think results back anything because it hasn't played out yet. Maybe going back to 2007-2008 is a better comparison for showing how the current scrubs could be better than those scrubs. Rice wasn't good enough to carry a team until he was a senior.
domingoortiz
eepstein0
corporal funishment
innocentbystander
davidgordonswang
maybe hansen
User avatar
eagle9903
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 14311
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm
Karma: 1728

PreviousNext

Return to Conte Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Untitled document