Chemistry Warning Signs?

  • 46 replies
  • 7383 views

cjfish

  • *****
  • 1388
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #20 on: November 21, 2016, 09:35:41 PM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

Agree posts telling people not to post what they think is wrong & I never issued an "edict" WASJU & I were going back and forth and he cited this thread. I simply responded;

"Why react to one guy starting an inane thread like that one on JJ? Btw, when I last looked most guys thought it was silly. Thus, most guys support, value & appreciate LoVett, no?"

If this is an edict, some sensitive little soul needs to reread it. "Why react" meant why get upset, not why respond. Don't want to waste time of those I respect on JJ. Moving on.


 I did not see your post elsewhere but you often tell people that what they are posting about is less than interesting. I could easily cite 50 posts where someone says something they find interesting and you say 'time to move on' or the like, as if you're the arbiter of what's worthy of discussion. The saying of which is your prerogative. But otoh personally I'm not interested in recruiting - I cannot think of anything less interesting than the workings of teenage minds - and so find many of your posts about recruiting pointless and boring. But I wouldn't say that because others find those posts fascinating, as evidently do you, and I don't begrudge you your interests or your readers theirs. As silly as I find this thread of hnk's if he and others want to discuss chemistry I don't see how or why someone who's authored THIRTY THOUSAND #SJUBB   posts should begrudge others bandwidth especially when if no one finds it interesting it'll die its own death  without your help. But that's just me, so carry on.




Agreed Foad.  It is a legit topic, though to think there are any chemistry problems this early, considering the 2 frosh guards, is absurd.  Anything that leads to meaningful discussion of the squad  is OK by me.  I agree re the recruiting posts, do not to hear about every longshot underclassman recruit but I do appreciate the effort since a small percentage may work out.   
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 09:44:13 PM by cjfish »

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #21 on: November 21, 2016, 09:40:48 PM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

Agree posts telling people not to post what they think is wrong & I never issued an "edict" WASJU & I were going back and forth and he cited this thread. I simply responded;

"Why react to one guy starting an inane thread like that one on JJ? Btw, when I last looked most guys thought it was silly. Thus, most guys support, value & appreciate LoVett, no?"

If this is an edict, some sensitive little soul needs to reread it. "Why react" meant why get upset, not why respond. Don't want to waste time of those I respect on JJ. Moving on.


 I did not see your post elsewhere but you often tell people that what they are posting about is less than interesting. I could easily cite 50 posts where someone says something they find interesting and you say 'time to move on' or the like, as if you're the arbiter of what's worthy of discussion. The saying of which is your prerogative. But otoh personally I'm not interested in recruiting - I cannot think of anything less interesting than the workings of teenage minds - and so find many of your posts about recruiting pointless and boring. But I wouldn't say that because others find those posts fascinating, as evidently do you, and I don't begrudge you your interests or your readers theirs. As silly as I find this thread of hnk's if he and others want to discuss chemistry I don't see how or why someone who's authored THIRTY THOUSAND #SJUBB   posts should begrudge others bandwidth especially when if no one finds it interesting it'll die its own death  without your help. But that's just me, so carry on.
Yes, far be it for Foad or even Fun for that matter to ever offend anyone. We need to take care as we all are such sensitive souls.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2016, 02:11:22 PM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

What he said

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2016, 03:41:41 PM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

Agree posts telling people not to post what they think is wrong & I never issued an "edict" WASJU & I were going back and forth and he cited this thread. I simply responded;

"Why react to one guy starting an inane thread like that one on JJ? Btw, when I last looked most guys thought it was silly. Thus, most guys support, value & appreciate LoVett, no?"

If this is an edict, some sensitive little soul needs to reread it. "Why react" meant why get upset, not why respond. Don't want to waste time of those I respect on JJ. Moving on.


 I did not see your post elsewhere but you often tell people that what they are posting about is less than interesting. I could easily cite 50 posts where someone says something they find interesting and you say 'time to move on' or the like, as if you're the arbiter of what's worthy of discussion. The saying of which is your prerogative. But otoh personally I'm not interested in recruiting - I cannot think of anything less interesting than the workings of teenage minds - and so find many of your posts about recruiting pointless and boring. But I wouldn't say that because others find those posts fascinating, as evidently do you, and I don't begrudge you your interests or your readers theirs. As silly as I find this thread of hnk's if he and others want to discuss chemistry I don't see how or why someone who's authored THIRTY THOUSAND #SJUBB   posts should begrudge others bandwidth especially when if no one finds it interesting it'll die its own death  without your help. But that's just me, so carry on.

I like Paultzman but find those move along posts both arbitrary and infuriating.
We're grown men talking about kids playing sports...every post is inane.

cjfish

  • *****
  • 1388
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2016, 04:42:18 PM »
good point

hnk

  • *****
  • 1681
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2016, 04:44:16 PM »
I wish you guys would stop picking on Pautzman.  He has his issues, but he is an asset to these blogs.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2016, 04:46:24 PM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

Agree posts telling people not to post what they think is wrong & I never issued an "edict" WASJU & I were going back and forth and he cited this thread. I simply responded;

"Why react to one guy starting an inane thread like that one on JJ? Btw, when I last looked most guys thought it was silly. Thus, most guys support, value & appreciate LoVett, no?"

If this is an edict, some sensitive little soul needs to reread it. "Why react" meant why get upset, not why respond. Don't want to waste time of those I respect on JJ. Moving on.


 I did not see your post elsewhere but you often tell people that what they are posting about is less than interesting. I could easily cite 50 posts where someone says something they find interesting and you say 'time to move on' or the like, as if you're the arbiter of what's worthy of discussion. The saying of which is your prerogative. But otoh personally I'm not interested in recruiting - I cannot think of anything less interesting than the workings of teenage minds - and so find many of your posts about recruiting pointless and boring. But I wouldn't say that because others find those posts fascinating, as evidently do you, and I don't begrudge you your interests or your readers theirs. As silly as I find this thread of hnk's if he and others want to discuss chemistry I don't see how or why someone who's authored THIRTY THOUSAND #SJUBB   posts should begrudge others bandwidth especially when if no one finds it interesting it'll die its own death  without your help. But that's just me, so carry on.

I like Paultzman but find those move along posts both arbitrary and infuriating.
We're grown men talking about kids playing sports...every post is inane.

While I agree in theory.... You posted on the original BEB and someone telling you to move along is infuriating ;)
You have gone soft!

paultzman

  • *****
  • 16981
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #27 on: November 23, 2016, 09:16:21 AM »
Paultzman has issued his edict on the other blog.  Apparently, this is an inane topic so please stop responding to it.  Thank you.

I think this is a stupid topic but I think that posts telling people not to post about what they think is interesting are even more stupid. So I will respond: I don't see a chemistry problem, I see a talent problem. When Mussini starts shooting > than 25 percent from three they should maybe set him up. Should Ellison shoot better than oh for six they should feed him. Until then Lovett should take 30 shots and Ponds should take 25, at least that's interesting basketball.

Agree posts telling people not to post what they think is wrong & I never issued an "edict" WASJU & I were going back and forth and he cited this thread. I simply responded;

"Why react to one guy starting an inane thread like that one on JJ? Btw, when I last looked most guys thought it was silly. Thus, most guys support, value & appreciate LoVett, no?"

If this is an edict, some sensitive little soul needs to reread it. "Why react" meant why get upset, not why respond. Don't want to waste time of those I respect on JJ. Moving on.


 I did not see your post elsewhere but you often tell people that what they are posting about is less than interesting. I could easily cite 50 posts where someone says something they find interesting and you say 'time to move on' or the like, as if you're the arbiter of what's worthy of discussion. The saying of which is your prerogative. But otoh personally I'm not interested in recruiting - I cannot think of anything less interesting than the workings of teenage minds - and so find many of your posts about recruiting pointless and boring. But I wouldn't say that because others find those posts fascinating, as evidently do you, and I don't begrudge you your interests or your readers theirs. As silly as I find this thread of hnk's if he and others want to discuss chemistry I don't see how or why someone who's authored THIRTY THOUSAND #SJUBB   posts should begrudge others bandwidth especially when if no one finds it interesting it'll die its own death  without your help. But that's just me, so carry on.

Fair points

hnk

  • *****
  • 1681
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #28 on: November 25, 2016, 05:22:04 AM »
Last two games,  for long stretches Ponds didn't get any shots.  Mussini needs to get more than 4 shots a game. Marcus, Bashir and the bigs need to kick it out once in a while.  Seems like we have no inside out game.  The ball sometimes goes in and never comes out. 

Against VCU a few times Sima tried dribbling to the basket from the elbow or even further out.  Not a good look right now.

We'll get there.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2016, 12:42:48 AM »
We just need one of the bigs to step up and develop some kind of offense game and the team needs to work on transition defense. Once that happens, we will be just fine.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #30 on: November 26, 2016, 12:53:19 AM »
None of our current bigs will ever be consistently good.  Not even fair to classify Owens a big @ 200 lbs preseason and likely 190 by mid season. 

Sima lacks intensity and has reflexes of a piece of sheet rock.

These two are not the guys that can carry the load down low.


Yakwe is being asked to play big at 6'7 cause he can jump high but his offense is just as questionsble.  Watching the ball come out of his hands is like spinning a globe.  Awkward rotation.  Like a curveball.


Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #31 on: November 26, 2016, 01:04:21 AM »
None of our current bigs will ever be consistently good.  Not even fair to classify Owens a big @ 200 lbs preseason and likely 190 by mid season. 

Sima lacks intensity and has reflexes of a piece of sheet rock.

These two are not the guys that can carry the load down low.


Yakwe is being asked to play big at 6'7 cause he can jump high but his offense is just as questionsble.  Watching the ball come out of his hands is like spinning a globe.  Awkward rotation.  Like a curveball.



Sima seems like a solid Ruben Garces type. He is getting good back-to-the-basket shots off, they just keep barely missing. Owens looks like a very, very solid first
big off the bench player. His slight frame will limit what he can do this year, but his hustle and hands are very positive signs for the future. Ahmed will get the hang of it and his future is inside. Yakwe is just as mess. Horrible hands. Never boxed out. Poor on-ball defender.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #32 on: November 26, 2016, 01:10:45 AM »

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #33 on: November 26, 2016, 08:58:50 AM »
I'm sorry, but Yakwe has absolutely no basketball skills or IQ.


None of our current bigs will ever be consistently good.  Not even fair to classify Owens a big @ 200 lbs preseason and likely 190 by mid season. 

Sima lacks intensity and has reflexes of a piece of sheet rock.

These two are not the guys that can carry the load down low.


Yakwe is being asked to play big at 6'7 cause he can jump high but his offense is just as questionsble.  Watching the ball come out of his hands is like spinning a globe.  Awkward rotation.  Like a curveball.



Sima seems like a solid Ruben Garces type. He is getting good back-to-the-basket shots off, they just keep barely missing. Owens looks like a very, very solid first
big off the bench player. His slight frame will limit what he can do this year, but his hustle and hands are very positive signs for the future. Ahmed will get the hang of it and his future is inside. Yakwe is just as mess. Horrible hands. Never boxed out. Poor on-ball defender.

hnk

  • *****
  • 1681
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #34 on: November 27, 2016, 11:58:41 AM »
Guys tried to censor this thread.  Too bad we can't censor some of what we've seen on the court.....wild shots, quick shots, defensive rebounding., defensive lapses.

hnk

  • *****
  • 1681
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #35 on: December 10, 2016, 09:10:30 AM »
Guys hurt Paultzman's feelings.  Now he's on strike from JJ.  Wonder how long it will last.   BTW, chemistry has been great last few games....showing signs of a little inside outside game....and real glimpses of ball movement.   Ponds is really something.

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2016, 09:31:10 AM »
Guys hurt Paultzman's feelings.  Now he's on strike from JJ.  Wonder how long it will last.   BTW, chemistry has been great last few games....showing signs of a little inside outside game....and real glimpses of ball movement.   Ponds is really something.

???
Follow Johnny Jungle on Twitter at @Johnny_Jungle

cjfish

  • *****
  • 1388
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #37 on: December 10, 2016, 09:48:11 AM »
I agree Paultz IS an important asset.   However, he shouldn't be so sensitive.  Considering the back and forth dialogue between certain posters, the occasional comments regarding Paultz are mild by comparison and certainly not offensive.  HE IS APPRECIATED. 

Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #38 on: December 10, 2016, 10:41:28 AM »
I agree Paultz IS an important asset.   However, he shouldn't be so sensitive.  Considering the back and forth dialogue between certain posters, the occasional comments regarding Paultz are mild by comparison and certainly not offensive.  HE IS APPRECIATED. 

A few posters have gone missing

SJU79

  • ***
  • 283
Re: Chemistry Warning Signs?
« Reply #39 on: December 10, 2016, 10:54:35 AM »
I've made my last post as well( not that anybody cares)... after discussing this with certain other members who know me we agree that a few have made a nice life distraction personal and no longer enjoyable.  Best of luck to all, prayers for  you and your families  to stay safe and healthy...peace, love and go SJU
« Last Edit: December 10, 2016, 01:27:47 PM by SJU79 »