What's new
By:

2013 Chicago Combine May 15-19

PKM said:
No, I was referring to your jabs about anything UK. Was just playing.

And I can't say anything about Rivers because I pimped him harder than you did, I think... and I still believe.

You had Lillard in higher regard than I did. I admit that.

We have both been buying McCollum for a long time now.
Click to expand...

You know I just give UK crap because of you.

And because Kentucky has to have some of the dumbest fans I've ever seen. You're not one of them, but dammit man...y'all got a stupid fanbase.
 
While we're on the subject, can someone explain the McCollum love. I'm being serious. To me he looks like a 6' 3", 22 yr. old shooting guard who can play some point. If you look at his first 3 years, he is an average shooter with a 43% FGA and 36% 3PA against the likes of Monmouth, Stony Brook, Army, Navy, and Lafayette. In games against better competition, he shot .33 against Kansas, .35 against St. John's, .33 against Michigan St., .38 against Duke, and .23 against Xavier. He averaged 2.7 APG and 2.4 TO's. He seems to be an above average, but not elite athlete, has a shoot first mentality, and is just an average defender. Even if you factor in the 12 games from last year his numbers only improve slightly. Maybe someone who's seen him more than I have can help me understand why some people are salivating.
 
NAOS said:
I'm liking Larkin more and more, but I still have him behind the perimeter-defending-rain-making prospects like Franklin and Bullock.
Click to expand...

.... speaking of saying **** and nobody listening... I just read three pages where you all were agreeing with this in one way or another.

;)
 
GVC said:
I think length is least important at the 1. Motor, physicality, foot speed, smart rotations, explosiveness are far more important defensively, as I see it (I have little/no data to support this). Larkin is better than pretty much every other point guard in this draft by those measures. Is length the only knock against the guy, or is there some other reason people don't like him? I haven't seen him play that much, admittedly, but have the detractors?

Qman mentioned turnovers and Miami's talent (a team ranked 4th in the ACC in the preseason by ACC coaches...), which is a start, I guess. Again, does anyone who's actually seen him play have reasons not to like him other than length?
Click to expand...

Agreed, but when you are giving up 6' on average of vertical reach to most every opponent you face, you are going to have problems.

It's why you see so very few starting PG's of his size. The only players that succeed in his physical size are the ones that take the role of scorers. Is Larkin that good of a scorer?
 
And also with Nate, you see his explosiveness in his game. He is dunking a lot and he is even occasionally blocking shots at the rim. How often do you see the explosion in Larkin's game put to use?
 
My2Cents said:
While we're on the subject, can someone explain the McCollum love.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be able to explain it. All the McCollum lovers are crazy, loco, cuckoo, nuts, insane, ape****, bonkers.

tumblr_ljt0dyKNX81qb7645o1_400.gif
 
Hantlers said:
You know I just give UK crap because of you.

And because Kentucky has to have some of the dumbest fans I've ever seen. You're not one of them, but dammit man...y'all got a stupid fanbase.
Click to expand...

All fanbases have their idiots. UK fans are very knowledgeable about the game, but I have to admit I HATE it when Cal comes on a local radio show and takes callers... I cringe. It's like only the most backwards marble-mouth talking hicks get through.. and ask the dumbest questions imaginable...

Caller - So coach? (awkward silence)
Cal - Yes, go ahead.....
Caller - Uhh, yeah... so, anyways, I was just thinkin bout basketball and all and the upcoming season and what have you.. and I was just wonderin if your thinkin we're gonna have a good team. I'll go ahead and hang up and listen. Go CAYUTS!
Cal - Yes, I think we'll be good. Next called *sigh*
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Agreed, but when you are giving up 6' on average of vertical reach to most every opponent you face, you are going to have problems.

It's why you see so very few starting PG's of his size. The only players that succeed in his physical size are the ones that take the role of scorers. Is Larkin that good of a scorer?
Click to expand...

That's a helluva difference there, mathomatico.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top