MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: brewcity77 on November 22, 2017, 09:13:21 PM
-
I'm going Rowsey. Turnovers sucked, but 30 points and 16/16 FTs.
-
Rowsey
Sam
-
Anyone know the Marquette record for made FTs in a game?
-
Rowsey for sure. Frustrating first half. Less silliness and valued the ball more in the second half, points came easy from there.
Runner up Heldt.
-
I'm going with Anim on this one. His energy and baskets in the second half really recaptured the momentum for us when it was looking iffy.
-
Anim
The ANSWER
-
Rowsey
Sacar
Heldt
-
I'm going with Anim on this one. His energy and baskets in the second half really recaptured the momentum for us when it was looking iffy.
Hauser or Anim for sure.
Rowsey was AMAZING. But the last 3 min of the first half may have been the worst PG play I've seen in years. Love him. But that was rough on my life span sheesh.
-
Automatic Rousey!
-
Waters...wait, wrong board. Rowsey despite TOs. At least he wasn't just chucking in the first half.
-
Sacar. He stopped Waters way better than anyone else. Double digit scoring on 5-7 with 3 steals. Without slowing that Frosh down we don't win. Had Rowsey not committed 6 turnovers, he would have been my choice.
-
Loved the way Matty Heldt played on both ends.
Gotta go Rowsey.
-
Hauser or Anim for sure.
Rowsey was AMAZING. But the last 3 min of the first half may have been the worst PG play I've seen in years. Love him. But that was rough on my life span sheesh.
Wojo benched him at one point he got so loose with the ball.
-
Hauser or Anim for sure.
Rowsey was AMAZING. But the last 3 min of the first half may have been the worst PG play I've seen in years. Love him. But that was rough on my life span sheesh.
This is the second poster who mentions Sam. ???? Awesome start, yes - then he totally disappeared. Not in my top 3.
-
Rowsey won the game with his scoring in the second half.
Sacar and Sam get honorable mention. Heldt played well at times, too.
-
Waters...wait, wrong board. Rowsey despite TOs. At least he wasn't just chucking in the first half.
According to half time show he was an MU playa
-
Loved the way Matty Heldt played on both ends.
Gotta go Rowsey.
Heldt was solid on both ends. Different body styles, but he's our Sean O'Mara. Solid but unspectacular.
-
Tale of two halves. First half Sam / second half Rowsey #Thething
-
Loved the way Matty Heldt played on both ends.
Gotta go Rowsey.
Matty was so very solid. As Bilas said, Wojo wouldn't want anyone else. Kid does more with his God given skills than anyone I remember playing for MU in recent times.
-
I'm looking past the points and going with Matt. Really Solid.
-
Gotta be Rowsey.
Oh, and where’s Sacar? On defense, baby!
-
Easily Rowsey.
Yes, he was horrible for a few minutes there, but he pulled himself together and put the team on his back in the critical stage of the game. Then he clinched it by swishing 5,883 straight free throws. Besides, was there any MU player who was perfect every minute he was in the game?
IMHO, some Scoopers have a tendency to want to give it to somebody other than the obvious player, I assume in an effort to spread SOTG around. It's that good ol' MU generosity! Heldt, Sam and Sacar did well. Howard had his moments, and even Elliottt did.
But come on.
-
Rowsey's first half was so absolutely awful I am not going with him. He also got a lot of points from the line while LSU was fouling to extend the game.
1a) Heldt
1b) Anim
2) Sam
3) Rowsey
HM) GE
-
Didn’t hear or see most of this so based on box its Rowsy.
-
Drewski. Needs to clean up the turnovers
-
Matty was so very solid. As Bilas said, Wojo wouldn't want anyone else.
Yeah, that was a nice tribute, but c'mon. Assuming Wojo wants to win basketball games there are 50 -100 college centers he'd rather have than Matty.
-
Easily Rowsey.
Yes, he was horrible for a few minutes there, but he pulled himself together and put the team on his back in the critical stage of the game. Then he clinched it by swishing 5,883 straight free throws. Besides, was there any MU player who was perfect every minute he was in the game?
IMHO, some Scoopers have a tendency to want to give it to somebody other than the obvious player, I assume in an effort to spread SOTG around. It's that good ol' MU generosity! Heldt, Sam and Sacar did well. Howard had his moments, and even Elliottt did.
But come on.
+1
-
Gotta go with Rowsey. It's scary when he goes to the hoop - the outcome is too often a block that should be called a TO, or a straight TO, which becomes the opponents' first pass on a break. He can find someone in the corner sometimes, and then there are occasional baskets. Nevertheless, 30 is 30, and he brought the ball up most of the time. Good performance from the line maintained the lead.
Flawed, but Rowsey gets the nod.
-
Rowsey was terrible in the first half. Hauser was amazing.
Rowsy was amazing in the 2nd half. Hauser kind of vanished.
Sacar played great the entire time. I'm giving it to Sacar.
-
1. #thething
Carried our offense down the stretch. When the rest of our team was starting to tire and come up short on shots, Rowsey was at his best. Swishing 3's, drawing fouls, driving to the hoop; just a scoring machine.
2. Doogie Hauser
Sure he did the bulk of his damage early but he was so good in that time he's still #2. Plus it's not his fault the refs called him for a bogus 4th foul and caused him to sit much of the 2nd half.
3. Anim/Heldt
Both really hustled and added some much needed scoring to go along with there solid defense.
HM: Elliott
Solid D and hustle to go along with his 4 points. Once he get some muscle and refines his skill set, watch out. High ceiling.
-
PS- Why do some Scoopers favor steady but unspectacular play? Some are penalizing Rowsey tonight because he wasn't perfect. But his good was way better than his bad and better than anyone else's good. Rowsey, Howard, and Hauser are also asked to do the heavy lifting so of course they're going to make more mistakes than the role players. But they're asked to do more for a reason.
-
PS- Why do some Scoopers favor steady but unspectacular play?
FWIW I called Heldt solid but unspectacular, but further up Rowsey was my SOTG pick.
-
Lot’s of good performances, but this one goes to Rowsy.
-
Rowsey was terrible in the first half.
Incorrect.
While we were building a 37-24 lead in the first 11 minutes, Rowsey was 2-for-2 (both 3s), and also had 2A, 1 reb and only 1 TO. If every Warrior is that "terrible" the rest of the season, we will win the Big East.
Stretch it out 3 more minutes and Rowsey was 2-for-3 with 3A and 1 TO through 14 minutes, after which we led 42-32. Again, I'd take such "terribleness" from everybody.
He sucked over the final few minutes of the first half and, like the rest of his teammates, he let LSU back in the game. As I said earlier, "he was horrible for a few minutes there."
But he shook it off and carried us in the second half.
So he was very good to excellent for 26-27 of his 31 minutes and finished with 30 effen points.
It's fun to tout some of the new guys, but please don't build your case on alternative facts.
-
It's fun to tout some of the new guys, but please don't build your case on alternative facts.
Fake news is a staple on Scoop. Sad.
-
MUBB says Sacar.
-
MUBB says Sacar.
Totally. Great energy and effort. When he went on Waters he was 8-9 with 2 assists accounting for all of LSU's offense. Runner up was Matt who got three of their bigs in foul trouble. Liked Elliott's effort too. Good poise and playmaking instincts.
Wojo reamed Andrew in the first and he responded like a leader. I might add Markus, who is banged up, led MU in rebounding.
-
Incorrect.
While we were building a 37-24 lead in the first 11 minutes, Rowsey was 2-for-2 (both 3s), and also had 2A, 1 reb and only 1 TO. If every Warrior is that "terrible" the rest of the season, we will win the Big East.
Stretch it out 3 more minutes and Rowsey was 2-for-3 with 3A and 1 TO through 14 minutes, after which we led 42-32. Again, I'd take such "terribleness" from everybody.
He sucked over the final few minutes of the first half and, like the rest of his teammates, he let LSU back in the game. As I said earlier, "he was horrible for a few minutes there."
But he shook it off and carried us in the second half.
So he was very good to excellent for 26-27 of his 31 minutes and finished with 30 effen points.
It's fun to tout some of the new guys, but please don't build your case on alternative facts.
He started the game with a TO on the 2nd play of the game, basically handed the ball to LSU. He played loose with the ball the entire first half, made poor decisions and was lazy with the ball. Lots of TOs, and not hustling on D. That's why he had 5 first half turnovers.
You are looking at boxscore elements and forgetting that there is a heck of a lot more to the game than that.
-
Anyone who doesn't say Wowsey doesn't know basketball.
-
Rowsey
-
Anyone who doesn't say Wowsey doesn't know basketball.
The guy single handedly kept LSU in the game in the first half.
-
Anim was the only one that slowed Waters, and was one of the only players that showed a reliability to get to the rim.
Anim is gong to be nasty with another year of development, boy does he look smooth.
-
The guy single handedly kept LSU in the game in the first half.
Ha. No. A man who handles as much possesions as Rowsey is allowed to have 5 turnovers a half. If this was derrick wilson you have a case. A guy who literally is 70% of Marquette's offense is allowed to have a few mistakes.
-
Anim. Thought he played a great game tonight
-
Anyone who doesn't say Wowsey doesn't know basketball.
So, MUBB doesn't know basketball?
-
Ha. No. A man who handles as much possesions as Rowsey is allowed to have 5 turnovers a half. If this was derrick wilson you have a case. A guy who literally is 70% of Marquette's offense is allowed to have a few mistakes.
70% of the offense?
-
Rowsey's first half was so absolutely awful I am not going with him. He also got a lot of points from the line while LSU was fouling to extend the game.
1a) Heldt
1b) Anim
2) Sam
3) Rowsey
HM) GE
This is pure insanity. Just trying to be unconventional. Any time a guy puts up 30 and is perfect from the FT line, he's the unquestioned SOTG. No questions asked.
Heldt wasn't a star, he just didn't screw up. Drawing a walk with the bases loaded is not the same as home runs. Anim played well for a freshman, but he still had some issues to be worked out. Sam didn't do anything in the second half. This one is a no brainer.
-
Rowsey.
-
This is pure insanity. Just trying to be unconventional. Any time a guy puts up 30 and is perfect from the FT line, he's the unquestioned SOTG. No questions asked.
Heldt wasn't a star, he just didn't screw up. Drawing a walk with the bases loaded is not the same as home runs. Anim played well for a freshman, but he still had some issues to be worked out. Sam didn't do anything in the second half. This one is a no brainer.
MUBB disagrees.
Rowsey and Waters were the only 2 reasons LSU was ever in the game at any point. Had Rowsey simply played bad in the first half we would've been up 15. Sam may have done nothing in the second half, but at least he wasn't a net negative in the second half like Rowsey was in the first half.
Sacar and Matt were by far our 2 best defenders today, with Greg being our 3rd best defender.
-
MUBB disagrees.
Rowsey and Waters were the only 2 reasons LSU was ever in the game at any point. Had Rowsey simply played bad in the first half we would've been up 15. Sam may have done nothing in the second half, but at least he wasn't a net negative in the second half like Rowsey was in the first half.
Sacar and Matt were by far our 2 best defenders today, with Greg being our 3rd best defender.
If you're giving out awards for best performance based on a defense that allowed 84 points, you might want to rethink your evaluation criteria. This team is 100% about offense. Defense is bad and doesn't appear to be trending in a positive direction from last year. Saying that Anim played good D on a kid that put up 40 is an awfully low bar.
-
Sacar.
Rowsey was doing Rowsey things but when Howard wasn't doing what he does best, Sacar stepped it up for this game.
-
If you're giving out awards for best performance based on a defense that allowed 84 points, you might want to rethink your evaluation criteria. This team is 100% about offense. Defense is bad and doesn't appear to be trending in a positive direction from last year. Saying that Anim played good D on a kid that put up 40 is an awfully low bar.
Did the kid put up 40 on Anim? Or was he on pace for like 60 until Anim was assigned to him?
Also is Anim a freshman or a redshirt sophomore?
Rowsey was great in the second half. He was absolutely terrible in the first half. Without Rowsey’s bad first half this game was never a game at all.
-
Greg Elliot. Made multiple huge plays when we needed it. The glue guy.
Tough not to give it to Rowsey and he certainly deserves it as well, but Greg gave us what we needed to win.
-
Sacar The Answer Anim
-
I don't know why this board is against high volume point guards. We saw the hatred with Carlino, now we see it with Rowsey. Next year I'm sure we will see it Howard.
4-6 from 3pt. 16-16 from the line. 5 assists. Yes you are going to have turnovers with a point guard like that.
-
I don't know why this board is against high volume point guards. We saw the hatred with Carlino, now we see it with Rowsey. Next year I'm sure we will see it Howard.
4-6 from 3pt. 16-16 from the line. 5 assists. Yes you are going to have turnovers with a point guard like that.
Curious, who is “against” high volume point guards?
-
Curious, who is “against” high volume point guards?
PGsHeroes32, fjm, Wades (who probably also thinks Rowsey's on roids)
I'm sure if you check the Purdue game thread, or tons from last year or Carlino's year you will find a lot more examples.
-
1. #thething
Carried our offense down the stretch. When the rest of our team was starting to tire and come up short on shots, Rowsey was at his best. Swishing 3's, drawing fouls, driving to the hoop; just a scoring machine.
2. Doogie Hauser
Sure he did the bulk of his damage early but he was so good in that time he's still #2. Plus it's not his fault the refs called him for a bogus 4th foul and caused him to sit much of the 2nd half.
3. Anim/Heldt
Both really hustled and added some much needed scoring to go along with there solid defense.
HM: Elliott
Solid D and hustle to go along with his 4 points. Once he get some muscle and refines his skill set, watch out. High ceiling.
At the end, #The Thing controlled it: even Waters was copying it.
-
Rowsey, but I know what I am going to name my next puppy. Theo.
-
Some of you guys can argue about everything. There is no 'right' answer here. Some think Rowsey's outstanding offensive contributions and improved second half ball security are enough to justify SOTG. Others believe that Sacar's steady D on Waters was central to the victory and more worthy. Either position is legitimate. This isn't some zero sum gain where some of you clowns need to defend your view to the death. You think they are arguing about who had the better game?
R-E-L-A-X. We won. And either is a worthy choice. Happy Thanksgiving.
-
PGsHeroes32, fjm, Wades (who probably also thinks Rowsey's on roids)
I'm sure if you check the Purdue game thread, or tons from last year or Carlino's year you will find a lot more examples.
Whoa whoa whoa. Como what?
I'm not against high volume guards. I loved rowsey, he had a great game. But come on man...
I get it, a lot of you are box score SOTG pickers. And even some watched the whole game etc.
But there were parts of the game where rowsey cleared out the lane, stood with the ball until 3 seconds left on the clock, then cut to the hoop and just threw the ball out of bounds. Then got pissed that heldt wasn't standing there with .5 left on the shot clock...
He is an amazing player. One of my favorites. But he did make some really weird freshman type mistakes/turnovers in the last 4 min of the first half. And a lot of them were just plain unnecessary.
Was his second half Fuggin amazing? YES! It was insane and totally great!
Even had a buddy say "if he wasn't on our team, I would hate him". Because of his play style.
So no. I'm not against high volume PG's, and just cause you have rowsey in your name doesn't mean you like him more than everyone else. And just because I didn't pick him for SOTG doesn't mean I don't like high volume PG's, it just means I viewed the game a bit differently.
-
Whoa whoa whoa. Como what?
I'm not against high volume guards. I loved rowsey, he had a great game. But come on man...
I get it, a lot of you are box score SOTG pickers. And even some watched the whole game etc.
But there were parts of the game where rowsey cleared out the lane, stood with the ball until 3 seconds left on the clock, then cut to the hoop and just threw the ball out of bounds. Then got pissed that heldt wasn't standing there with .5 left on the shot clock...
He is an amazing player. One of my favorites. But he did make some really weird freshman type mistakes/turnovers in the last 4 min of the first half. And a lot of them were just plain unnecessary.
Was his second half Fuggin amazing? YES! It was insane and totally great!
Even had a buddy say "if he wasn't on our team, I would hate him". Because of his play style.
So no. I'm not against high volume PG's, and just cause you have rowsey in your name doesn't mean you like him more than everyone else. And just because I didn't pick him for SOTG doesn't mean I don't like high volume PG's, it just means I viewed the game a bit differently.
The interesting thing about Rowsey (and Wojo's handling of him) is that nobody gets upset about the shortcomings he exhibits that he can't do anything about. The fact that he simply couldn't handle Waters doesn't bother me at all. Rather, it was the looseness with the ball that exhibited a lack of attention and discipline that bothered many including coach. Rowsey is a committed scraper. He came out in the second half and with the exception of the very first stupid play that literally had me swearing at the TV played outstanding ball.
-
The interesting thing about Rowsey (and Wojo's handling of him) is that nobody gets upset about the shortcomings he exhibits that he can't do anything about. The fact that he simply couldn't handle Waters doesn't bother me at all. Rather, it was the looseness with the ball that exhibited a lack of attention and discipline that bothered many including coach. Rowsey is a committed scraper. He came out in the second half and with the exception of the very first stupid play that literally had me swearing at the TV played outstanding ball.
Absolutely correct.
-
The interesting thing about Rowsey (and Wojo's handling of him) is that nobody gets upset about the shortcomings he exhibits that he can't do anything about. The fact that he simply couldn't handle Waters doesn't bother me at all. Rather, it was the looseness with the ball that exhibited a lack of attention and discipline that bothered many including coach. Rowsey is a committed scraper. He came out in the second half and with the exception of the very first stupid play that literally had me swearing at the TV played outstanding ball.
Agree with this 100%. And yes, I also literally screamed an unprintable word (a couple of them, actually) when Rowsey effed up at the start of the second half. My poor dog ran out of the room and went under the desk in my office.
I just object to the characterization that Rowsey was "terrible" for the entire first half. Both the box score and the play-by-play (and my eye test) say differently. Through 14 minutes, he was 2-for-3 (both 3s) with 3A and only 1 TO and we were up 42-32. Please, somebody, explain how that was "terrible"; please, somebody, explain how that was the entire half.
I also agree Sacar had a fine game, and I wouldn't be the least bit upset if he was SOTG. I never get worked up about such silly stuff. I just think it's funny how some can casually dismiss the performance of a guy who scored 30 points and largely carried us in the second half to a very important win.
-
I also think we're taking Matty for granted. He's going to start the next 55 games for MU earning 20+ minutes per game. And every game, he'll play to the gameplan bringing the very best he has to the floor every one of those 1,100 minutes he earns. But I guess that could be a new thread.
-
PGsHeroes32, fjm, Wades (who probably also thinks Rowsey's on roids)
I'm sure if you check the Purdue game thread, or tons from last year or Carlino's year you will find a lot more examples.
Rowsey is my favorite MU player in years. Possibly ever. But thanks for telling me that I’m against him.
On steroids? Uhh, nope? That’s weird.
When a player sucks I’ll say he sucks, whether I’m for him, against him, or neutral to him. If not for his godawful play to close out the first half, we’re never in a position to need 16 free throws from him.
-
Rowsey was the SOTG yesterday. Yeah he can drive you crazy with TOs and yeah Sacars effort was great. But we still win that game without Sacar. We don’t come close without Rowsey.
-
Rowsey is my favorite MU player in years. Possibly ever. But thanks for telling me that I’m against him.
On steroids? Uhh, nope? That’s weird.
When a player sucks I’ll say he sucks, whether I’m for him, against him, or neutral to him. If not for his godawful play to close out the first half, we’re never in a position to need 16 free throws from him.
I'm with you. I think #unleashrowsey just doesn't handle rowsey critiscism best? I get what he's saying it I also feel like most here never said we didn't like him. We just disagree that he is far and away the SOTG for one game due to some poor decision making.
Was his 30 points amazing? YUP!
-
Since I only was able to watch some of it, I’m late to the party. But from what I saw,
1. AR
2. Sammola
3. The guy no one can find.
Good win. Go Warriors!
-
The team is making these decisions tough. So, I turned to KenPom - who lists WATERS as the MVP. Ok, that's no help. I need to be thankful for someone on MU's squad today. Rowsey it is...
-
Agree with this 100%. And yes, I also literally screamed an unprintable word (a couple of them, actually) when Rowsey effed up at the start of the second half. My poor dog ran out of the room and went under the desk in my office.
My dogs do not enjoy watching Marquette basketball with me, that's for sure.
-
I also think we're taking Matty for granted. He's going to start the next 55 games for MU earning 20+ minutes per game. And every game, he'll play to the gameplan bringing the very best he has to the floor every one of those 1,100 minutes he earns. But I guess that could be a new thread.
After watching him get humiliated by South Carolina in the NCAA game and then overpowered by Purdue, I admit I was very worried about Matt. But he had a very solid Maui tournament, and I feel better about him. There probably will be some big men he cannot compete against, but it appears he'll be able to hang in there with most. And once Froling arrives (and then Joey and Morrow next year, as well as a more mature Theo), he'll have more help down low.
All right, now that Rocky made the right choice, time to watch some pigskin and enjoy a malt beverage (or 3). Happy Turkey Day to you and chickadee, and to all Scoopers everywhere!
-
My dogs do not enjoy watching Marquette basketball with me, that's for sure.
It's funny. I'll normally cheer and complain like the next guy (or that lady at the other end of the couch) but rarely will I swear at sports. I know I let go some 'colorful metaphors' with that opening second half play.
-
Rowsey was the SOTG yesterday. Yeah he can drive you crazy with TOs and yeah Sacars effort was great. But we still win that game without Sacar. We don’t come close without Rowsey.
This is the only assessment needed for this conversation. Saying that Sacar or Heldt were the best guys on the floor because they played well given their abilities is a bad way to judge players, in my opinion. Rowsey is the main reason we won the game, plain and simple.
-
We need to have a new award for unsung hero of the game if people keep going with the answers that aren't obvious. How is Rowsey NOT stud of the game? Agree with Sultan / skianth16.
-
We need to have a new award for unsung hero of the game if people keep going with the answers that aren't obvious. How is Rowsey NOT stud of the game? Agree with Sultan / skianth16.
Because again, sure if it’s a 2 point game at half and Rowsey doesn’t have the second half he does we don’t win, but the only reason it wasn’t a 15 point game at half was because Rowsey was absolutely horrendous down the stretch of the first half. Waters was absolutely lighting us up...and it didn’t matter at all. We had a double digit lead the entire first half...until Rowsey started playing like he’d never played beyond the high school freshman level. I’m glad he got hot in the second half and went to the line a ton. I’m disappointed his play made the second half something it didn’t need to be.
MU is up 10 with 6 minutes left in the first half. Back to back turnover by Rowsey lead to back to back buckets by LSU to cut the game to 6. From there we score 4 more points the rest of the half, Rowsey turns the ball over once more, and then he opens up the second half with a turnover and I believe Wojo went to the bench right away. He was the only reason the game ever got close, and then yes he did help lead us to victory after that, but he was BAAAAAAAAD in letting them cut into a double digit lead.
-
PGsHeroes32, fjm, Wades (who probably also thinks Rowsey's on roids)
I'm sure if you check the Purdue game thread, or tons from last year or Carlino's year you will find a lot more examples.
I think by this you mean
You enjoy rowseys balls on your chin...while me, FJM and Wades will point out poor play when it happens.
Did I seriously read a post from you saying "we will take 5 TOs a half" from 1 player???
You realize 10 turnovers from 1 guy in a game would be absolutely awful right?
-
It we use thr NBA 2K rating scale, I'd say we have 2 guys in the upper 80s to maybe low 90s - clear leaders and the guys you want to have the ball with the game on the line. We expect 22 and 8 out of these guys each night, fairly or not. So if they put up 25 and 10, we have people on the boards saying this is basically par for the course; we expect this.
Then, we have lots of guys in the 60s and 70s who may average 6 and 3 with 4 fouls and a few TOs. If one of these guys has 12 points, there are people who think this is an All American type performance, simply because he played better than his average.
SOTG shouldn't be a handicap kind of conversation, at least for me. It's about who made the biggest contribution in winning the game. Effort and heart matter, but in most cases, they don't make up the difference between a guy off the bench and a star. Apparently my criteria is different than some other people, though. Then again, I've always despised participation trophies too.
-
It we use thr NBA 2K rating scale, I'd say we have 2 guys in the upper 80s to maybe low 90s - clear leaders and the guys you want to have the ball with the game on the line. We expect 22 and 8 out of these guys each night, fairly or not. So if they put up 25 and 10, we have people on the boards saying this is basically par for the course; we expect this.
Then, we have lots of guys in the 60s and 70s who may average 6 and 3 with 4 fouls and a few TOs. If one of these guys has 12 points, there are people who think this is an All American type performance, simply because he played better than his average.
SOTG shouldn't be a handicap kind of conversation, at least for me. It's about who made the biggest contribution in winning the game. Effort and heart matter, but in most cases, they don't make up the difference between a guy off the bench and a star. Apparently my criteria is different than some other people, though. Then again, I've always despised participation trophies too.
I guess the program is into handicapping and participation trophies. Damn millennials. They're everywhere.
-
The program has reasons for naming players of the game. Don’t read too much into it.
-
The program has reasons for naming players of the game. Don’t read too much into it.
Agreed. Statements from the coaching staff are often very intentional and directed more toward the team than fans or the press.
-
The program has reasons for naming players of the game. Don’t read too much into it.
Or they are evaluating the most important contributor to that game, period.
Reading too much into it is trying to come up with hidden reasons/meanings instead of the simplest explanation.
Strange argument on here. Sacar would have been a very deserving SOTG. Rowsey was also. Many of our opinions were that Sacar's well rounded and consistent effort was more deserving. So did MUBB. Simple, no need for arguments or criticisms.
-
Rowsey was benched for poor play, Sacar wasn't. Argument over.
-
Or they are evaluating the most important contributor to that game, period.
Reading too much into it is trying to come up with hidden reasons/meanings instead of the simplest explanation.
Strange argument on here. Sacar would have been a very deserving SOTG. Rowsey was also. Many of our opinions were that Sacar's well rounded and consistent effort was more deserving. So did MUBB. Simple, no need for arguments or criticisms.
+1 Call it a day on this boys.
-
Rowsey was benched for poor play, Sacar wasn't. Argument over.
Exactly. I’m glad the message got through to Rowsey and he had a great second half. I even understand thinking he deserves SOTG. But anybody who claims that anyone who suggests anyone other than Rowsey doesn’t know basketball or that we have come to take for granted 30 point performances just didn’t watch the game or doesn’t understand that you can fill up the score column and still not have played amazing. In my opinion we’re in big, big trouble if this is the kind of play we’re going to get from Rowsey this year. He’s a much better player than how he played yesterday, 30 points or not.
-
Rowsey was benched for poor play, Sacar wasn't. Argument over.
That’s pretty dumb reasoning. So someone who is benched for poor play is automatically disqualified? They can’t regroup and be the most important player in a game?
Or they are evaluating the most important contributor to that game, period.
Reading too much into it is trying to come up with hidden reasons/meanings instead of the simplest explanation.
So we shouldn’t have opinions on this? It should simply be left up to mubb?
The explanation is simple. We win even without Sacar. We lose without Rowsey.
-
Because again, sure if it’s a 2 point game at half and Rowsey doesn’t have the second half he does we don’t win, but the only reason it wasn’t a 15 point game at half was because Rowsey was absolutely horrendous down the stretch of the first half. Waters was absolutely lighting us up...and it didn’t matter at all. We had a double digit lead the entire first half...until Rowsey started playing like he’d never played beyond the high school freshman level. I’m glad he got hot in the second half and went to the line a ton. I’m disappointed his play made the second half something it didn’t need to be.
MU is up 10 with 6 minutes left in the first half. Back to back turnover by Rowsey lead to back to back buckets by LSU to cut the game to 6. From there we score 4 more points the rest of the half, Rowsey turns the ball over once more, and then he opens up the second half with a turnover and I believe Wojo went to the bench right away. He was the only reason the game ever got close, and then yes he did help lead us to victory after that, but he was BAAAAAAAAD in letting them cut into a double digit lead.
First, thanks for changing your narrative on Rowsey. In your first post, it was "Rowsey's first half was so absolutely awful." Later, you said: "He was absolutely terrible in the first half." But then when statistics were provided to show that no, Rowsey was neither awful nor absolutely terrible more most of the first half, you switched to "his godawful play to close out the first half," and "absolutely horrendous down the stretch of the first half." In today's fact-averse world, it's nice to see somebody accept facts as facts and alter his viewpoint.
However ...
Let's say I give you the argument that Rowsey's horrible play at the end of the first half was the only reason the game was close. Does he not get some of the credit for us building our 10-point lead with 6 minutes to go in the half? In the first 14 minutes, he was 2-3 (both 3s) with 3A and 1 TO to that point and the offense was running pretty smoothly with him at the helm. And you have already acknowledged the obvious - that he carried us in the second half.
So Rowsey was one of our best players as we built a double-digit lead, he was bad - or even godawful and horrendous - as we blew most of it, but he was great as we pulled away to an impressive victory. He played 31 minutes, all but 5-6 outstanding minutes, and finished with a very efficient 30 points. That's STOG stuff.
Using 20/20 hindsight, I will now acknowledge that if I had it to do over again, I wouldn't make it seem crazy to have even considered Sacar or Matt. They played well, too.
That's all I've got on the subject. Enjoy the rest of your Thanksgiving!
-
It we use thr NBA 2K rating scale, I'd say we have 2 guys in the upper 80s to maybe low 90s - clear leaders and the guys you want to have the ball with the game on the line. We expect 22 and 8 out of these guys each night, fairly or not. So if they put up 25 and 10, we have people on the boards saying this is basically par for the course; we expect this.
Then, we have lots of guys in the 60s and 70s who may average 6 and 3 with 4 fouls and a few TOs. If one of these guys has 12 points, there are people who think this is an All American type performance, simply because he played better than his average.
SOTG shouldn't be a handicap kind of conversation, at least for me. It's about who made the biggest contribution in winning the game. Effort and heart matter, but in most cases, they don't make up the difference between a guy off the bench and a star. Apparently my criteria is different than some other people, though. Then again, I've always despised participation trophies too.
Agree 100%.
If the criterion for SOTG is who was the MVP Rowsey wins hands down. If the criterion is who, in victory, played the best relative to their average game then the winner is Sacar. For me it's always been the former.
-
Because again, sure if it’s a 2 point game at half and Rowsey doesn’t have the second half he does we don’t win, but the only reason it wasn’t a 15 point game at half was because Rowsey was absolutely horrendous down the stretch of the first half. Waters was absolutely lighting us up...and it didn’t matter at all. We had a double digit lead the entire first half...until Rowsey started playing like he’d never played beyond the high school freshman level. I’m glad he got hot in the second half and went to the line a ton. I’m disappointed his play made the second half something it didn’t need to be.
MU is up 10 with 6 minutes left in the first half. Back to back turnover by Rowsey lead to back to back buckets by LSU to cut the game to 6. From there we score 4 more points the rest of the half, Rowsey turns the ball over once more, and then he opens up the second half with a turnover and I believe Wojo went to the bench right away. He was the only reason the game ever got close, and then yes he did help lead us to victory after that, but he was BAAAAAAAAD in letting them cut into a double digit lead.
And as studs do they lead us back to victory. He made some mistakes but made up for them. I also don't think he was the "only" reason the game ever got close. Then I could argue he's the only reason we ended up winning. SOTG, Rowsey.
-
That’s pretty dumb reasoning. So someone who is benched for poor play is automatically disqualified? They can’t regroup and be the most important player in a game?
So we shouldn’t have opinions on this? It should simply be left up to mubb?
The explanation is simple. We win even without Sacar. We lose without Rowsey.
At least you're getting it.
-
Ask anyone within the Warriors organization who their most important player is. Surely it has to be KD or Steph, right? Nope. That’s nuts, it has to be one of those two, but fine then it’s clearly Klay. Oh no? Nope, it’s not the 26 PPG, 25 PPG, or 20 PPG guys. It’s the guy averaging 10 PPG.
The guy who scores a lot of points isn’t always the best player on the court. There’s no way to know we don’t win without Rowsey. Without him, we’re most likely up double digits going into the half instead of up 2. To go along with his 5 first half turnovers he also tried to force #thething and didn’t get the defender jumping into him, which in my opinion should’ve been a 6th turnover by goes as a missed field goal. Whole different ballgame if we’re up 10+ to start the second half.
-
Ask anyone within the Warriors organization who their most important player is. Surely it has to be KD or Steph, right? Nope. That’s nuts, it has to be one of those two, but fine then it’s clearly Klay. Oh no? Nope, it’s not the 26 PPG, 25 PPG, or 20 PPG guys. It’s the guy averaging 10 PPG.
Michael used to say that Scottie was the Bulls' MVP. Do you believe him?
-
Michael used to say that Scottie was the Bulls' MVP. Do you believe him?
Michael might’ve. But did Phil, Kerr, the owners, the GM?
-
Michael used to say that Scottie was the Bulls' MVP. Do you believe him?
I'd say Jordan was the MVP, but they don't win those titles without Scottie there too.
-
Ask anyone within the Warriors organization who their most important player is. Surely it has to be KD or Steph, right? Nope. That’s nuts, it has to be one of those two, but fine then it’s clearly Klay. Oh no? Nope, it’s not the 26 PPG, 25 PPG, or 20 PPG guys. It’s the guy averaging 10 PPG.
The guy who scores a lot of points isn’t always the best player on the court. There’s no way to know we don’t win without Rowsey. Without him, we’re most likely up double digits going into the half instead of up 2. To go along with his 5 first half turnovers he also tried to force #thething and didn’t get the defender jumping into him, which in my opinion should’ve been a 6th turnover by goes as a missed field goal. Whole different ballgame if we’re up 10+ to start the second half.
KD is more important to the Warriors than Draymond. Rowsey is currently our best player. He was the main factor leading to the win yesterday. The efficiency and bounce back in the second half was huge. Sacar Anim played great relative to Anim. To say we don't know what would have happened without him...well we probably would have lost by at least 10 if I had to guess on this hypothetical. Let's revisit SOTG in March and see the standings.
-
KD is more important to the Warriors than Draymond. Rowsey is currently our best player. He was the main factor leading to the win yesterday. The efficiency and bounce back in the second half was huge. Sacar Anim played great relative to Anim. To say we don't know what would have happened without him...well we probably would have lost by at least 10 if I had to guess on this hypothetical. Let's revisit SOTG in March and see the standings.
Revisit for what reason? If Rowsey has more SOTGs than Anim it clears up who was SOTG for this game? Okay I guess...?
-
Revisit for what reason? If Rowsey has more SOTGs than Anim it clears up who was SOTG for this game? Okay I guess...?
No you just started arguing two separate points. A player's importance to their team regardless of the game vs. a single game stud. Judging by the latest SOTG you're in the minority anyway. Anim played his best game as a golden eagle. I'll leave it as that.
-
::)
-
Ask anyone within the Warriors organization who their most important player is. Surely it has to be KD or Steph, right? Nope. That’s nuts, it has to be one of those two, but fine then it’s clearly Klay. Oh no? Nope, it’s not the 26 PPG, 25 PPG, or 20 PPG guys. It’s the guy averaging 10 PPG.
The guy who scores a lot of points isn’t always the best player on the court. There’s no way to know we don’t win without Rowsey. Without him, we’re most likely up double digits going into the half instead of up 2. To go along with his 5 first half turnovers he also tried to force #thething and didn’t get the defender jumping into him, which in my opinion should’ve been a 6th turnover by goes as a missed field goal. Whole different ballgame if we’re up 10+ to start the second half.
You are right. The guy who scores the most points isn’t always the SOTG.
Yesterday he was though.
-
Being in Maui and watching live versus watching on tv really gives varied perspectives. I will bet if we had a poll here on MVP segmented by where you watched the game, Sacar wins hands down by those in the stands, and it wouldn't even be close. No one else could shut down Waters, and he hit some key shots on offense. I know everyone I talked with after the game felt the same (including the coaches).
That's is not to diminish Andrew's great play in the tournament. In fact, he was the only Warrior named to the All Tournament team.
-
The all tourney team seems fair. One each from 3rd and 4th.
-
Ask anyone within the Warriors organization who their most important player is. Surely it has to be KD or Steph, right? Nope. That’s nuts, it has to be one of those two, but fine then it’s clearly Klay. Oh no? Nope, it’s not the 26 PPG, 25 PPG, or 20 PPG guys. It’s the guy averaging 10 PPG.
The guy who scores a lot of points isn’t always the best player on the court. There’s no way to know we don’t win without Rowsey. Without him, we’re most likely up double digits going into the half instead of up 2. To go along with his 5 first half turnovers he also tried to force #thething and didn’t get the defender jumping into him, which in my opinion should’ve been a 6th turnover by goes as a missed field goal. Whole different ballgame if we’re up 10+ to start the second half.
You can't really believe this garbage you're spewing, can you? You think without our best ball handler and leading scorer we would have played better? Sure, he had some bad TOs and defensive miscues, but to say we'd be better without him is just flat out stupid. I want to like other MU fans, but this level of ignorance is just too much.
Anim's defense was great, but he also got his shot with fresher legs and some new strategy from the coaches. And as good as his defense was, to only contribute a single rebound, no assists, and then to foul out in 24 minutes is not ideal. Again, if that's your bar for excellent play, I'll be happy to disagree with you all year long.
-
You can't really believe this garbage you're spewing, can you? You think without our best ball handler and leading scorer we would have played better? Sure, he had some bad TOs and defensive miscues, but to say we'd be better without him is just flat out stupid. I want to like other MU fans, but this level of ignorance is just too much.
Anim's defense was great, but he also got his shot with fresher legs and some new strategy from the coaches. And as good as his defense was, to only contribute a single rebound, no assists, and then to foul out in 24 minutes is not ideal. Again, if that's your bar for excellent play, I'll be happy to disagree with you all year long.
The guy had 5 turnovers in the first half and another non-turnover-turnover on an attempt to draw a foul that (rightfully) didn't get called and he just threw the ball to the other team (which counted for a shot attempt). I do think we would've been up by double digits had we not had Rowsey in the first half, yes. 5 (6) turnovers in a half is not helping your team one bit.
I have no problem whatsoever with you not liking me.