Breaking News: Sanders Doesn't Fix This Teams Problem!

[apbc12]

Classic OJ.

1. Make ill-informed, poorly-conceived argument.
2. View all posts which contradict and disprove your argument.
3. Realize you have no support for your argument.
4. Repeat ill-informed, poorly-conceived argument.

[Eagledom]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

[pick6pedro]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

[Eagledom]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

I did watch the game (and the repeated replays shown on the video screen are not "boilerplate". If you had seen the broadcast, you would understand what I am talking about..... Anyway, so yes, I saw the game. Apparently so did you. And in your assessment, Southern played a very good game on defense in the low post?

I never said he was the only one who sucked. The whole D sucked. We should have switched to zone. But to say he is a good low post defender is completely retarded.

[twballgame9]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Yup. Sanders is the only legit shut down defender on the team. Dunn is the best team defender. Trapani and Roche are liabilities. Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

[Eagledom]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

Hmmm. Just a day or two ago, he was "great"

[apbc12]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

Hmmm. Just a day or two ago, he was "great"

If you were any stupider you'd be dead.

[twballgame9]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

Was Southern covering Lin? Big man points due to penetration by guards are on the guy covering the guard, not the guy covering the big man. The guard made the play - that's why they have this statistic called "assists". I know the average BC fan can't look past anything that doesn't say "points" when evaluating a player, but trust me, that one is important.

[twballgame9]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

Hmmm. Just a day or two ago, he was "great"

He is a great one-on-one low post defender. He gave Tyler Hansbrough fits last season. Last night there were no low post moves, Southern's job was to get in the way of all of the guys blowing past the perimeter defenders. He is only average at that.

[Eagledom]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

Hmmm. Just a day or two ago, he was "great"

He is a great one-on-one low post defender. He gave Tyler Hansbrough fits last season. Last night there were no low post moves, Southern's job was to get in the way of all of the guys blowing past the perimeter defenders. He is only average at that.

A. He is not even a good "one on one" low post defender
B. The fact that you have to qualify your statements more and more to justify them when presented with things he sucks at proves my point. OK, he sucks at help defense, and yeah he sucks away from the basket, and yeah, he is slow, and yeah he is terrible at positioning on defensive rebounds, and yeah, he can't block shots...but he is pretty good in the ONE SPECIFIC part of his D game.... Thanks for proving my point. Case closed.

[pick6pedro]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

I did watch the game (and the repeated replays shown on the video screen are not "boilerplate". If you had seen the broadcast, you would understand what I am talking about..... Anyway, so yes, I saw the game. Apparently so did you. And in your assessment, Southern played a very good game on defense in the low post?

I never said he was the only one who sucked. The whole D sucked. We should have switched to zone. But to say he is a good low post defender is completely retarded.

Guess you missed the "are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season." Try reading. Pretty predictable ANY college basketball team would advertise the bowl game of their football team during the basketball game.

I didn't say Southern played a good game on D. You are the one attributing all 21 points scored by the opposing center to him. If you watched the game, you'd know those points by his counterpart came as a result of Southern having to step up and leave his man due to penetration - which has nothing to do with low post defense. Which is what the argument is all about. You're such a dope.

[twballgame9]

Everyone wants to blame either Al Skinner or the absence of Rakim Sanders for the loss to Harvard last night. I'll leave the Skinner thing alone for the sake of this post.

But, people who think that Rakim Sanders returning makes this team infinitely better are kidding themselves. This teams problem is not its ability to put the ball in the basket. They've done that quite well to this point with Reggie Jackson doing more things than Sanders can and will do (scoring AND rebounding/passing). This teams problem is DEFENSE. Nobody on the team (Jackson included) could guard you or me at this point on the perimeter and there isn't a shot blocker ala *** ******* or Tyrelle Blair back there to erase those mistakes on defense. Sanders returning doesn't help that. In fact, it likely exacerbates it. Forget just this team, Rakim might be the worst defensive player in Division 1 basketball.

If this team doesn't improve defensively, especially against even semi-decent teams they've got no shot. The Michigan and Providence wins were mirages. Both of those teams did nothing but bomb away from deep (at least 60 3's between them). It's pretty clear that any team that tries to take the ball into the paint can beat BC without breaking a sweat.

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

You're insane. Sanders was the best on-ball defender on the roster each of the last two years. Biko is next. Jackson has terrible defensive fundamentals but makes up for it with athleticism.

Biko is good, Raji, Jackson and Southern are average defensively.

Hmmm. Just a day or two ago, he was "great"

He is a great one-on-one low post defender. He gave Tyler Hansbrough fits last season. Last night there were no low post moves, Southern's job was to get in the way of all of the guys blowing past the perimeter defenders. He is only average at that.

A. He is not even a good "one on one" low post defender
B. The fact that you have to qualify your statements more and more to justify them when presented with things he sucks at proves my point. OK, he sucks at help defense, and yeah he sucks away from the basket, and yeah, he is slow, and yeah he is terrible at positioning on defensive rebounds, and yeah, he can't block shots...but he is pretty good in the ONE SPECIFIC part of his D game.... Thanks for proving my point. Case closed.

Kendrick Perkins sucks at help defense and defense away from the basket and doesn't block many shots, but is universally considered one of the best one on one low post defenders in the NBA. That's his job, because the rest of the team plays defense on their own guys.

BC needs *** ******* instead of Josh Southern because the perimeter defenders can't cover their men, not because Southern can't cover his.

[Eagledom]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

I did watch the game (and the repeated replays shown on the video screen are not "boilerplate". If you had seen the broadcast, you would understand what I am talking about..... Anyway, so yes, I saw the game. Apparently so did you. And in your assessment, Southern played a very good game on defense in the low post?

I never said he was the only one who sucked. The whole D sucked. We should have switched to zone. But to say he is a good low post defender is completely retarded.

Guess you missed the "are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season." Try reading. Pretty predictable ANY college basketball team would advertise the bowl game of their football team during the basketball game.

I didn't say Southern played a good game on D. You are the one attributing all 21 points scored by the opposing center to him. If you watched the game, you'd know those points by his counterpart came as a result of Southern having to step up and leave his man due to penetration - which has nothing to do with low post defense. Which is what the argument is all about. You're such a dope.

What the fuck are you talking about? The reading comprehension comment is a bit ironic when my response was talking about the REPLAYS, not the Emeral Bowl ad. Douchebag. Learn to read.

[pick6pedro]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

I did watch the game (and the repeated replays shown on the video screen are not "boilerplate". If you had seen the broadcast, you would understand what I am talking about..... Anyway, so yes, I saw the game. Apparently so did you. And in your assessment, Southern played a very good game on defense in the low post?

I never said he was the only one who sucked. The whole D sucked. We should have switched to zone. But to say he is a good low post defender is completely retarded.

Guess you missed the "are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season." Try reading. Pretty predictable ANY college basketball team would advertise the bowl game of their football team during the basketball game.

I didn't say Southern played a good game on D. You are the one attributing all 21 points scored by the opposing center to him. If you watched the game, you'd know those points by his counterpart came as a result of Southern having to step up and leave his man due to penetration - which has nothing to do with low post defense. Which is what the argument is all about. You're such a dope.

What the fuck are you talking about? The reading comprehension comment is a bit ironic when my response was talking about the REPLAYS, not the Emeral Bowl ad. Douchebag. Learn to read.

Yup, I misread that. See...I'm man enough to admit it. Notice you didn't mention anything about constantly attributing the 21 point game to Southern. Ah, because you can't because it would ruin your "hard-earned" argument. Makes sense you would focus on the completely irrelevant part of what I said.

[Eagledom]

Still trying to find that double double? You didn't really watch the game, did you? It's ok to say yes.

you're right - no double double....just a career high in points against our sick low post defender.

You definitely didn't watch the game. I wish you weren't a liar.

I didn't? You mean I wasn't subjectd to the repeated replays on the video screen? I didn't hear the announcers repeatedly saying in the second half that BC "couldn't stop Lin" and that BC "was still sticking to the man to man and not changing to zone"? I missed the long shot of the Emerald Bowl advertisement on the video screen in the first half?

You're right...I must be lying since it was so hard to click the Channelsurfing link on this board and wtach the game.

No you must be lying because your repeated statements that Southern's a bad defender based on a guy scoring 21 points are either being 1) over simplistic or 2) completely biased.

I have no way to verify your statements about the broadcast. I was at the game. Yet the statements and the screenshots of which you speak are extremely predictable and are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season. How about something that doesn't fall into boilerplate remark status?

Essentially though it comes down to two things: 1) if you didn't watch the game, you're just a baffoon or 2) if you did watch the game, your basketball IQ is no higher than your dipstick length.

I did watch the game (and the repeated replays shown on the video screen are not "boilerplate". If you had seen the broadcast, you would understand what I am talking about..... Anyway, so yes, I saw the game. Apparently so did you. And in your assessment, Southern played a very good game on defense in the low post?

I never said he was the only one who sucked. The whole D sucked. We should have switched to zone. But to say he is a good low post defender is completely retarded.

Guess you missed the "are a fill-in-the-blank of a college basketball game during bowl season." Try reading. Pretty predictable ANY college basketball team would advertise the bowl game of their football team during the basketball game.

I didn't say Southern played a good game on D. You are the one attributing all 21 points scored by the opposing center to him. If you watched the game, you'd know those points by his counterpart came as a result of Southern having to step up and leave his man due to penetration - which has nothing to do with low post defense. Which is what the argument is all about. You're such a dope.

What the fuck are you talking about? The reading comprehension comment is a bit ironic when my response was talking about the REPLAYS, not the Emeral Bowl ad. Douchebag. Learn to read.

Yup, I misread that. See...I'm man enough to admit it. Notice you didn't mention anything about constantly attributing the 21 point game to Southern. Ah, because you can't because it would ruin your "hard-earned" argument. Makes sense you would focus on the completely irrelevant part of what I said.

My argument is that southern sucks on D. My argument was not BECAUSE of last night's game, it is because what I have seen over the last 2 years. And last night certainly did nothing to disprove that. Were the 21 or 25 points the guy scored as a result of typical feed the post and make a one on one move? No. But, Southern was slow as dirt reacting when he did get the feed and did not challenege any of his shots.

[pick6pedro]

Yup, I misread that. See...I'm man enough to admit it. Notice you didn't mention anything about constantly attributing the 21 point game to Southern. Ah, because you can't because it would ruin your "hard-earned" argument. Makes sense you would focus on the completely irrelevant part of what I said.

My argument is that southern sucks on D. My argument was not BECAUSE of last night's game, it is because what I have seen over the last 2 years. And last night certainly did nothing to disprove that. Were the 21 or 25 points the guy scored as a result of typical feed the post and make a one on one move? No. But, Southern was slow as dirt reacting when he did get the feed and did not challenege any of his shots.

No argument there. See what happens when you stick on point? You sound fairly rational.

It would have been tough for just about any defender to challenge the shots the underneath guy was getting last night. Unless he could magically pass one's hand through the rim, then rematerialize in time to get a hand on the ball. Pesky rim.

[auggiebc]

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

they will be better with Sanders. Mark it down.

[Eagledom]

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

they will be better with Sanders. Mark it down.

brilliant post. could they be worse?

[auggiebc]

BC is not better with Sanders, because he's an extension of their problems. That is all.

they will be better with Sanders. Mark it down.

brilliant post. could they be worse?

I was mocking the "brilliance" of the original post.