Scott Christopherson Revisited

[Freeport Warrior]

egregious math error = hyperbole

hy·per·bo·le   [hahy-pur-buh-lee]
–nounRhetoric.
1.
obvious and intentional exaggeration.
2.
an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as "to wait an eternity."

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Scott also had a key turnover at the end of the game the last game ISU played.  that made sportscenter.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Nothing against Scott C. but even a casual glance at ISU's season results reveals he's had at best average performances & some absolute clunkers against teams that i'd say are Big East caliber:

@ Cal 7 pts in 22 minutes
Duke 3pts in 18 minutes
Texas 0 pts in 12 minutes
Kansas 9 pts in 33 minutes
K State 6 pts in 28 minutes
@ Mizzou 0 pts in 20 minutes
@ Kansas 5 pts in 25 minutes

He had really nice games in 4 of their last 6 games of the year against quality competition so he closed the year out strong.

Looks to me like a role player that can occasionally bust out a big game.  Not a bad thing to have but I wouldn't trade him for any of our current players.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't think any (or many) have said they would trade him out for any current players.  The slap against the kid, however, by some here because of who recruited him, was unwarranted.  He's a DI player, playing in a high major conference (#1 in the RPI right now) and has done fairly well as a sophomore.  I wish the kid well.   At some point maybe the hatred over the previous coach will go away, I know I'm looking forward to it.

[Marquette84]

Are you this obtuse and overly literal in real life, or just on the Internet?

You're right--you totally busted me, dude. As if I really thought you were trying for accuracy in your .00001% estimate. 

I should remember the rule that only you are allowed to 'exaggerate for effect' but if someone returns fire extending the effect back at you, it must mean they took it 100% literally.

Are you this smug and sanctimonious in real life, or just on the internet?

How about we just agree to leave it at this: 
There were enough people on this board who have loudly and frequently attempted to discredit Scott Christopherson as a D1-level player that wadesworld thought it was worthwhile to bring up his performance yesterday.  As with Acker and Cubillan, he has done more than enough this season to prove his critics wrong.

Does that work for you? 

What I have said - and what I stand by - is that Christopherson would not be a significant player on this year's team. Even charter members of the Scott Christopherson Fan Club (see: Chico's) admit as much.I note you have yet to argue otherwise. You have yet to explain why SC would have been a big contribuor this year,

Perhaps you missed the point about leadership, or that people said essentially the same thing about Acker and Cubillan. 

Let me extend, since you still think I didn't make the point at all: 
1. He would have provided upperclass leadership this year and next
2. We have a short roster (essentially only 6 played more than token minutes yesterday)
3. We are prone to games of poor outside shooting (4 of 23 yesterday, 5 of 19 versus Pitt, 5 of 18 vs. St. Johns).
4. Similar criticisms made regarding the inability of Acker and Cubillan to perform at Big East levels have turned out to be incorrect.

Based on those four thoughts, I think the chances are good that Christopherson may have found a role in the rotation.

Please note--since you like to use exaggeration--that I am not saying he'd start, be better than DJO, be the best shooter on the team, or any of the other exaggerations you might want to make.

What I am suggesting that he might--just might--provide enough minutes that we don't have to play our starters 35 minutes--and in games like yesterday may have given Buzz another outside shooter when everyone else came up dry.   

In terms of participation, I think he could give us at least what we currently get from Joe Fulce.  Significantly more than we get from Erik Williams.  Maybe not as much as we get from Dwight Buycks. 

why this NCAA-bound MU squad would have been significantly better with a bench player from a sub-.500 program.

Christopherson started 14 of 16 conference games.  Is your referring to him as "bench" player merely some sort of exaggeration for effect of the two games he did not start?  Or did you honestly not know he was starting?

But perhaps you're right. There's no possible way that a guy from a sub-.500 Iowa State team that didn't even make the NIT could ever help an NCAA-bound Big East program.  Just ask Syracuse what a dud Wesley Johnson turned out to be. 

[Lennys Tap]

Scott Christopherson became a starter in game 18 this year after Lucca Staiger quit the team to play in Germany. The first 17 games he came off the bench.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Charter member of the Scott Christopherson fan club.  LOL.  Wait, did I take you too literally?

Nah, I like the kid a lot, hate to see transfers, could have used him at times this year considering how depleted we were, but with the way Buzz uses players he wouldn't have played.  It's worked out well for everyone.

I'd call myself a charter member of "exposing ridiculous statements from posters based on hatred of our former coach club."  That's why Christopherson was brought up months ago, because a few posters here (more than I could have imagined) are so unhinged with our former coach that they believe that anything the former coach touched or was responsible for is inherently evil.  LOL

 
I'll never understand why grown adults rip on kids, college age kids on message boards, who are just giving their all to their school, coaches, and programs.  But hey, I'm old school.

[Blackhat]

The thing about Scott is who can he guard in the Big East? 

He's not exactly a world beater on O either.

With the guard talent coming in not sure how he would fit in....Buzz has said he likes all around players.

[MUBurrow]

yeah, its great to see Scott get big minutes in Ames as well as get his name on the big sites.  always seemed like a good kid caught in an unfortunate regime change.  (thats ignoring that he seemed a little over his head here in the beginning too - but who knows what he would have become). seems like a guy who is a nice niche player on a below average team. 

+1 with all those before me who still say that it doesnt seem like he would fit in.  this whole idea of just inserting individual statlines into our statistics is ill-conceived.  similar debates have come up surrounding guys like Harangody before, and what they would do if on a different team.  too bad there isnt an easier way to study comparisons like that - is that what PER ratings and efficiency ratings attempt to do? i was never smart or dedicated enough to totally understand Hollinger.

[DomJamesToTheBasket]

I find it interesting that Christopherson  is brought up as a what if.  Damian Saunders is the real "what if".  We took Trevor Mbakwe and Pat Hazel over him.......

[MUBurrow]

to be fair - Patrick Hazel gave us a huge contribution as the subject of Lazar's Buzz impressions.

[77ncaachamps]

I find it interesting that Christopherson  is brought up as a what if.  Damian Saunders is the real "what if".  We took Trevor Mbakwe and Pat Hazel over him.......

YES!

Count Odartey into the real "What If" discussion as well.

[GOMU1104]

I find it interesting that Christopherson  is brought up as a what if.  Damian Saunders is the real "what if".  We took Trevor Mbakwe and Pat Hazel over him.......

From what I remember, it wasnt necessary that simple.  If it was just a matter of taking the better player, Hazel probably would have been the one to go elsewhere.

[DomJamesToTheBasket]

Hazel was a lot better than he got credit for.  The rare occurrences that he played,  there was an impact.  He really crashed the boards and got some good blocks in limited minutes.  Ultimately,  I'm glad he left because there are more minutes elsewhere.  6'7" posts typically have a rough time at the highest college levels,  but that dude played taller than his height........HUGE wingspan.......his hands were freakshow LARGE.  Hopefully,  things are going well for him.  You can't blame him for leaving.

[GOMU1104]

Hazel was a lot better than he got credit for.  The rare occurrences that he played,  there was an impact.  He really crashed the boards and got some good blocks in limited minutes.  Ultimately,  I'm glad he left because there are more minutes elsewhere.  6'7" posts typically have a rough time at the highest college levels,  but that dude played taller than his height........HUGE wingspan.......his hands were freakshow LARGE.  Hopefully,  things are going well for him.  You can't blame him for leaving.

Is there another Pat Hazel that I forgot about?

[Lennys Tap]

Hazel was a lot better than he got credit for.  The rare occurrences that he played,  there was an impact.  He really crashed the boards and got some good blocks in limited minutes.  Ultimately,  I'm glad he left because there are more minutes elsewhere.  6'7" posts typically have a rough time at the highest college levels,  but that dude played taller than his height........HUGE wingspan.......his hands were freakshow LARGE.  Hopefully,  things are going well for him.  You can't blame him for leaving.

Pat Hazel was TOLD to leave and it had nothing to do with basketball. So while we certainly can't blame him for leaving, he can and should be blamed for the actions that caused his departure.

[DomJamesToTheBasket]

Pat Hazel was TOLD to leave and it had nothing to do with basketball. So while we certainly can't blame him for leaving, he can and should be blamed for the actions that caused his departure.

Hmmm,  didn't know.  I'm sorry to hear that.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The thing about Scott is who can he guard in the Big East? 

Funny, if I had a nickel for every time someone said that about
Acker as well.

I wonder how he guards those terrible Big 12 players from Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma State, etc


You guys make it sound sometimes like the Big 12 doesn't have quality players or teams

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

Remember, when Christopherson left, at the time, we had James, McNeal, Matthews, Acker, and Cubillan on the depth chart ahead of him, and also had (tentatively) Tyshawn Taylor coming as well (although the Taylor situation was resolved about a week after Scott left).  So in theory, when Scott made the transfer decision, he was realistically the 6th or 7th guard in the rotation had Taylor come to Marquette at least as a sophomore.

That being said, Scott was not necessarily overrated (I remember he was about #125 or so in the Rivals 150), but overhyped (#25 player in the country as a sophomore in high school).  While he could shoot, he definitely lacked lateral quickness and was not a very good on ball defender.

Overall, he was probably a better fit for Crean's system than Buzz's. The numbers he put up this year are about the same as to what Buycks did this year, but Buycks is a better on-ball defender and rebounder as well.

All in all, it's good to see Scott doing well at Iowa State.  He did what was best for his career, and both himself and Marquette are doing just fine.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Pat Hazel was TOLD to leave and it had nothing to do with basketball. So while we certainly can't blame him for leaving, he can and should be blamed for the actions that caused his departure.

Yes, but other players were also told to leave and allowed back.  It's one of those things that the more needed you are as a player, the bigger the forgiveness scale can be (obviously there are other factors like the reason one was asked to leave).  That's just the reality of life and occurs pretty much everywhere....corporate America, athletic teams, politics, etc.

[GGGG]

Is there another Pat Hazel that I forgot about?

I think he's mixing him up with Jeremy Hazell.