Anyone else concerned with Vander?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Kenosha Warrior, there is a lot of concern.  Vander is all about the flash, he would rather look good than be good. 

Perfect. Derp. Derp. Derp.

[ecompt]

One thing I liked about Vander's game Sunday was that he didn't try to force things too much. If he does what he does best -- play decent D, get out in transition, use his athleticism to keep his man off the boards -- he's fine.

[wadesworld]

Without having read anything in this thread (don't feel like wasting my time, so I apologize to the large majority of people here who probably answered with a resounding NO to the original question), you gotta love the fans who point out that Vander looks all-world in the non-conference season and write that off as just being because we are playing cupcakes (despite the fact that he had a very solid - not spectacular, but solid - 2nd half of the Big East season last year), so it is meaningless, but then when he "struggles" in the first game of the season against Colegate, the sky is falling for him and there is some huge cause for concern.  It's hilarious the double standard people hold just to hate on a 20 year old kid...

[brewcity77]

Without having read anything in this thread (don't feel like wasting my time, so I apologize to the large majority of people here who probably answered with a resounding NO to the original question), you gotta love the fans who point out that Vander looks all-world in the non-conference season and write that off as just being because we are playing cupcakes (despite the fact that he had a very solid - not spectacular, but solid - 2nd half of the Big East season last year), so it is meaningless, but then when he "struggles" in the first game of the season against Colegate, the sky is falling for him and there is some huge cause for concern.  It's hilarious the double standard people hold just to hate on a 20 year old kid...

You sir, just won the kewpie doll!

[esotericmindguy]

The only thing your opinion tell me, as in years past, is that you know very little about the game of basketball.  You admitted that Blue rebounds well, plays defense, and scores in transition, but say "He's just not that good...He never has been."

That is an absurd statement.  Completely absurd.  Especially since you freely admit that he does most things well.  (Except for your backtracking on his defense...which frankly shows you know even less than I thought you did prior to making that post.)

How am I back tracking on his defense, I said he was going to board and play solid defense. He played the 3 last year, with Locket assuming that position this year I expect his rebounding to go down a bit, less opportunity. It's not like 4.5 rebounds a game from the 3 is outstanding, but from watching him I'd say that's his greatest strength. Go through all my posts, I've never said he's a GREAT defender. You can interpret my posts any way you'd like but the stats don't lie. Vander's offensive rating was lower than Derrick Wilson last year, but it's ok to critique his game. Based on KenPom Vander was 87 out of 99 Big east players in Offensive rating and 85th out of 99 in TO% (40% minutes played). That's a liability on offense in my world Sultan. We've been through this several times before and the numbers come out the same each time. You say people are over critical because he was a top 50 recruit, I say you and many others on this board over react when he actually puts up decent numbers. Take the stud of the game thread, if Blue had Lockett's numbers I can GUARANTEE 20% of the people would have voted him. They did last year for the Villanova game because he hit 4 free throws for God's sake. 7 points, 7 RBs, 5 stls & 3 assists. Lockett got a few honorable mentions.

So back to the point of the thread, Anyone else concerned about Vander? I saw nothing from him that makes me think that this year will be any different. I agreed and said he's not very good and never has been....which remains true. You can take it out of context, but for a top 15-20 program in the best conference he isn't very good. He isn't very bad either, he does some things well and some things poor.

[wadesworld]

You sir, just won the kewpie doll!

...what does that even mean?! Hah.

[martyconlonontherun]

Blue kind of reminds me of DJ where he started out hot, then flat-lined. Expectations were too high his junior year, but by his senior year he realized he didn't need to be the man and just played hard and helped the team win anyway he could. I hope Vander becomes one of those 4-year guys that may not dominate a game but are extremely pesky and opponents wonder how many years of eligibility the guy has cause he seems just a constant on the team.

[ErickJD08]

Without having read anything in this thread (don't feel like wasting my time, so I apologize to the large majority of people here who probably answered with a resounding NO to the original question), you gotta love the fans who point out that Vander looks all-world in the non-conference season and write that off as just being because we are playing cupcakes (despite the fact that he had a very solid - not spectacular, but solid - 2nd half of the Big East season last year), so it is meaningless, but then when he "struggles" in the first game of the season against Colegate, the sky is falling for him and there is some huge cause for concern.  It's hilarious the double standard people hold just to hate on a 20 year old kid...

Interesting...  During the second half of the BE schedule and tourney, Blue had increased minutes and increased his average by a point and change BUT saw a decrease in steals, shooting percentage, blocks, and an increase in turnovers.  

I think most people that are critical of Blue play would not say he had a solid second half of the BE schedule.  He was really inconsistent and that's that.  So there is no double standard.

Look.  We will all wait and see what Blue continues to do.  Bottom line, yesterday was more of the same and we hope he improves.

[Pakuni]

Kenosha Warrior, there is a lot of concern.  Vander is all about the flash, he would rather look good than be good. 

Says the guy Vander punched.

[wadesworld]

Interesting...  During the second half of the BE schedule and tourney, Blue had increased minutes and increased his average by a point and change BUT saw a decrease in steals, shooting percentage, blocks, and an increase in turnovers.  

I think most people that are critical of Blue play would not say he had a solid second half of the BE schedule.  He was really inconsistent and that's that.  So there is no double standard.

Look.  We will all wait and see what Blue continues to do.  Bottom line, yesterday was more of the same and we hope he improves.

Huh?  Try almost 7 ppg in more in the 2nd half of the Big East season from the first half.  Try more steals in the 2nd half of the Big East season.  Try more blocks in the 2nd half of the season.  But hey, man, whatever.  You know how the saying goes..."Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story."


First 9: 17-36 FG, 47.2% shooting, 1-4 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 13-25 FT, 52% FT %, 36 rebounds, 30 assists, 1 block, 6 steals, 18 turnovers, 46 points, 5.1 ppg in 24.2 mpg

Last 9: 36-82 FG, 44% shooting, 3-12 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 33-42 FT, 79% FT %, 59 rebounds, 16 assists, 2 blocks, 10 steals, 17 turnovers, 108 points, 12 ppg in 27.8 mpg

12 points, 1.8 assists, 1 steal, 1.9 turnovers, 6.6 rebounds per game in the second half of the season.  That's not solid?  I will absolutely take that from one of our starters, but not stars.  Really inconsistent?  Go look at his numbers.  He was pretty consistently getting 10-15 ppg and 5-7 rpg every night during the 2nd half of the Big East season.  But again, that's not convenient for you so pretend it didn't happen.

Beyond that, my original point was that last year when Vander had great games in the non-conference part of our season it was because we were playing cupcake teams who couldn't keep up with his athleticism so those good games meant absolutely nothing.  But now when he doesn't have a great game against Colgate in the first game of the year we should all be concerned.  If that doesn't define a double standard then I don't know what does.

[reinko]

Huh?  Try almost 7 ppg in more in the 2nd half of the Big East season from the first half.  Try more steals in the 2nd half of the Big East season.  Try more blocks in the 2nd half of the season.  But hey, man, whatever.  You know how the saying goes..."Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story."


First 9: 17-36 FG, 47.2% shooting, 1-4 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 13-25 FT, 52% FT %, 36 rebounds, 30 assists, 1 block, 6 steals, 18 turnovers, 46 points, 5.1 ppg in 24.2 mpg

Last 9: 36-82 FG, 44% shooting, 3-12 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 33-42 FT, 79% FT %, 59 rebounds, 16 assists, 2 blocks, 10 steals, 17 turnovers, 108 points, 12 ppg in 27.8 mpg

12 points, 1.8 assists, 1 steal, 1.9 turnovers, 6.6 rebounds per game in the second half of the season.  That's not solid?  I will absolutely take that from one of our starters, but not stars.  Really inconsistent?  Go look at his numbers.  He was pretty consistently getting 10-15 ppg and 5-7 rpg every night during the 2nd half of the Big East season.  But again, that's not convenient for you so pretend it didn't happen.

Beyond that, my original point was that last year when Vander had great games in the non-conference part of our season it was because we were playing cupcake teams who couldn't keep up with his athleticism so those good games meant absolutely nothing.  But now when he doesn't have a great game against Colgate in the first game of the year we should all be concerned.  If that doesn't define a double standard then I don't know what does.

Get the frack outta here with your fancy facts, don't you know message boards are for nonsense, jackassery, and places to peddle your CD's that teach people how to swear in different languages??

[martyconlonontherun]

Beyond that, my original point was that last year when Vander had great games in the non-conference part of our season it was because we were playing cupcake teams who couldn't keep up with his athleticism so those good games meant absolutely nothing.  But now when he doesn't have a great game against Colgate in the first game of the year we should all be concerned.  If that doesn't define a double standard then I don't know what does.

I don't think that is a double-standard, actually. A double-standard would be 1-player be commended for his big game while dismissing another player in a similar situation. This judgement of Blue is pretty clear and on the same standards: Blue should dominate bad opponents, anything less is unacceptable. The standard may be be waaaaaay too high, but it isn't a double-standard. If the argument was non-conference games are meaningless in judging a player, than it could be a double-standard.

I look at non-conference games like NBA summer leagues. You shouldn't get too excited about a huge game by your rookie because there are so many bad players on the court. If your rookie looks lost against street FA's you need to look into it because talent level alone should set him apart. Not working? How about this? If you score with the fatty at the end of the night do you brag? No. If the fatty turns you down, you might be a little worried about your game.

[wadesworld]

I don't think that is a double-standard, actually. A double-standard would be 1-player be commended for his big game while dismissing another player in a similar situation. This judgement of Blue is pretty clear and on the same standards: Blue should dominate bad opponents, anything less is unacceptable. The standard may be be waaaaaay too high, but it isn't a double-standard. If the argument was non-conference games are meaningless in judging a player, than it could be a double-standard.

I look at non-conference games like NBA summer leagues. You shouldn't get too excited about a huge game by your rookie because there are so many bad players on the court. If your rookie looks lost against street FA's you need to look into it because talent level alone should set him apart. Not working? How about this? If you score with the fatty at the end of the night do you brag? No. If the fatty turns you down, you might be a little worried about your game.

I agree with you on tempering the expectations of newcomers in non-conference. That's my point. If you can't take anything away from non-conference when a player has a good game, then why take anything away when a player plays bad? How can you come to conclusions when it's bad but not when it's good? It just doesn't make sense to me. Either non-conference means something or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.

[martyconlonontherun]

I agree with you on tempering the expectations of newcomers in non-conference. That's my point. If you can't take anything away from non-conference when a player has a good game, then why take anything away when a player plays bad? How can you come to conclusions when it's bad but not when it's good? It just doesn't make sense to me. Either non-conference means something or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.

You can't see why it may be bad if someone struggles with an easy task, but not a big deal if someone dominates that same simple task?

I'm not arguing that playing any D-1 team is an easy task and I'm not worried about Blue's play. I just find it funny people are saying its a double-standard when its not. There's a very logic reason to think a game can mean nothing if good, but mean something if bad. It's a negative response test.

[ErickJD08]

Huh?  Try almost 7 ppg in more in the 2nd half of the Big East season from the first half.  Try more steals in the 2nd half of the Big East season.  Try more blocks in the 2nd half of the season.  But hey, man, whatever.  You know how the saying goes..."Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story."


First 9: 17-36 FG, 47.2% shooting, 1-4 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 13-25 FT, 52% FT %, 36 rebounds, 30 assists, 1 block, 6 steals, 18 turnovers, 46 points, 5.1 ppg in 24.2 mpg

Last 9: 36-82 FG, 44% shooting, 3-12 3 point FG, 25% 3 point %, 33-42 FT, 79% FT %, 59 rebounds, 16 assists, 2 blocks, 10 steals, 17 turnovers, 108 points, 12 ppg in 27.8 mpg

12 points, 1.8 assists, 1 steal, 1.9 turnovers, 6.6 rebounds per game in the second half of the season.  That's not solid?  I will absolutely take that from one of our starters, but not stars.  Really inconsistent?  Go look at his numbers.  He was pretty consistently getting 10-15 ppg and 5-7 rpg every night during the 2nd half of the Big East season.  But again, that's not convenient for you so pretend it didn't happen.

Beyond that, my original point was that last year when Vander had great games in the non-conference part of our season it was because we were playing cupcake teams who couldn't keep up with his athleticism so those good games meant absolutely nothing.  But now when he doesn't have a great game against Colgate in the first game of the year we should all be concerned.  If that doesn't define a double standard then I don't know what does.

My calculation came from the last 10 games of the season. That includes the tourney. Your right though. The tourney doesn't count.

And your accusing me of using selective stats. Funny

[real chili 83]

My calculation came from the last 10 games of the season. That includes the tourney. Your right though. The tourney doesn't count.

And your accusing me of using selective stats. Funny

Erick, you picked up where you left off last year......bagging on Blue....to no end.

Is he a complete player yet? No. You are welcome to your opinion (obviously), but it's a bit of a broken record.

Buzz has publicly said that he tries to run off guys who he thinks cant play. He plays (starts) Blue a lot. A ton. 

Thats good enough for me. 

Buzz put Lazar, JB, DJO, and Jae in the NBA.  That's good enough for me.

[wadesworld]

My calculation came from the last 10 games of the season. That includes the tourney. Your right though. The tourney doesn't count.

And your accusing me of using selective stats. Funny

No, I didn't use selective stats.  I stated from my first post in here that he had a solid second half of the Big East season.  You responded that he averaged just 1 point per game higher in the 2nd half of the Big East season than he did in the first, less rebounds, etc. etc.  Which is plain out wrong.  His 2nd half of the Big East season was much better than the first half of the Big East season.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

EDIT: Delete.

[🏀]

Great. Professor crass is back with Vander hate.

[ErickJD08]

Great. Professor crass is back with Vander hate.

Statistics = hate... Right

[🏀]

Statistics = hate... Right

Cherry picking statistics = hate... Correct.

[GGGG]

How am I back tracking on his defense, I said he was going to board and play solid defense. He played the 3 last year, with Locket assuming that position this year I expect his rebounding to go down a bit, less opportunity. It's not like 4.5 rebounds a game from the 3 is outstanding, but from watching him I'd say that's his greatest strength. Go through all my posts, I've never said he's a GREAT defender. You can interpret my posts any way you'd like but the stats don't lie. Vander's offensive rating was lower than Derrick Wilson last year, but it's ok to critique his game. Based on KenPom Vander was 87 out of 99 Big east players in Offensive rating and 85th out of 99 in TO% (40% minutes played). That's a liability on offense in my world Sultan. We've been through this several times before and the numbers come out the same each time. You say people are over critical because he was a top 50 recruit, I say you and many others on this board over react when he actually puts up decent numbers. Take the stud of the game thread, if Blue had Lockett's numbers I can GUARANTEE 20% of the people would have voted him. They did last year for the Villanova game because he hit 4 free throws for God's sake. 7 points, 7 RBs, 5 stls & 3 assists. Lockett got a few honorable mentions.

This is my last time saying this because you still seem to struggle with basic basketball analysis....

There is more to the game of basketball than offense, so your statement "He's just not that good, it's pretty plain and simple. He never has been," is ABSURD when you base it only on offensive statistics.

Understand???  I'm no John Wooden, but it's pretty f*cking obvious that he's a "good" basketball player.  Buzz seems to think so.

[real chili 83]

This is my last time saying this because you still seem to struggle with basic basketball analysis....

There is more to the game of basketball than offense, so your statement "He's just not that good, it's pretty plain and simple. He never has been," is ABSURD when you base it only on offensive statistics.

Understand???  I'm no John Wooden, but it's pretty f*cking obvious that he's a "good" basketball player.  Buzz seems to think so.

See Dennis Rodman......

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Compare Gardner vs Blue.

- 1 comes in highly ranked, one doesn't.
- 1 has an NBA type body and athelticism, one doesn't.
- 1 is a guard, the other is a center.
- 1 is a very good defender, rebounder and passer, the other is a poor defender, average rebounder and average passer
- 1 is a poor shooter and finisher around the rim the other is a decent shooter and fantastic finisher around the rim
- 1 exceeds fan expectations and the other doesn't mean fan expectations
- 1 is really only effective offensively, the other is only effective defensively.

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

[Hards Alumni]

Compare Gardner vs Blue.

- 1 comes in highly ranked, one doesn't.
- 1 has an NBA type body and athelticism, one doesn't.
- 1 is a guard, the other is a center.
- 1 is a very good defender, rebounder and passer, the other is a poor defender, average rebounder and average passer
- 1 is a poor shooter and finisher around the rim the other is a decent shooter and fantastic finisher around the rim
- 1 exceeds fan expectations and the other doesn't mean fan expectations
- 1 is really only effective offensively, the other is only effective defensively.

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

Great comparison.