Chris Mullin's seat getting hotter?

Quote from: TONYD3 on January 16, 2018, 03:11:57 PM

Most agree he picked a bad staff.
No one thinks he can coach.
Plenty of players have transferred.
Almost all agree the players who have been in the program haven’t gotten better- amar yakwe
Why should he come back?

Because it would not benefit the program to fire a guy who is the most famous person associated with the university, recruited a deep and balanced roster beginning next season, is contractually owed millions of dollars, who was brought here in large part to build a sustainable long term product, and who has only been on the job for three years.

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

Please tell me where Ponds is going?  He is not an NBA player, not now, not ever, unless he becomes a legit point guard.  As I stated in an earlier post.  More bodies, does not equal more wins.

Quote from: TONYD3 on January 16, 2018, 03:11:57 PM

Most agree he picked a bad staff.
No one thinks he can coach.
Plenty of players have transferred.
Almost all agree the players who have been in the program haven’t gotten better- amar yakwe
Why should he come back?

Because it would not benefit the program to fire a guy who is the most famous person associated with the university, recruited a deep and balanced roster beginning next season, is contractually owed millions of dollars, who was brought here in large part to build a sustainable long term product, and who has only been on the job for three years.

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

I know you're a bit of an old timer and remember basketball before the 3 point line but everybody else seems to have adjusted to it by now and you should too. Let's try some simple math:

Player A and Player B each take 100 shots. Player A only takes 2 pointers and player B only takes 3 pointers.

Player A makes 50 of his 100 shot attempts
Player B makes 35 of his 100 shot attempts

Which player scored more points? The guy that makes 50% of his shots but only takes 2s, or the guy that makes 35% of his shots and only takes 3s? Come on you can do this

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 03:38:42 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

Did you really laugh out loud or are you a 12 year old girl. Anyway I'll answer your question when you (a) define better, because you just said two posts ago that scoring more points isn't necessarily better than scoring fewer points, in fact you said that that was just about the stupidest thing anyone could think and an indication of a complete lack of understanding of the game of basketball and (b) explain how someone "will score" eight tenths of a point. Because I don't think that's possible.

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 03:38:42 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

I know you're a bit of an old timer and remember basketball before the 3 point line but everybody else seems to have adjusted to it by now and you should too. Let's try some simple math:

Player A and Player B each take 100 shots. Player A only takes 2 pointers and player B only takes 3 pointers.

Player A makes 50 of his 100 shot attempts
Player B makes 35 of his 100 shot attempts

Which player scored more points? The guy that makes 50% of his shots but only takes 2s, or the guy that makes 35% of his shots and only takes 3s? Come on you can do this

Hey stupid. I just consulted my abacus and according to my calculations if one player scores 11 points and one scores 7 the one who scored 11 scored more points. And all the hypothetical analytics in fantasy basketball land won't change that. LOL! EMOTICON! MEME! HASHTAG! APP! TWEET! SNATCHCHAT!

Quote from: TONYD3 on January 16, 2018, 03:11:57 PM

Most agree he picked a bad staff.
No one thinks he can coach.
Plenty of players have transferred.
Almost all agree the players who have been in the program haven’t gotten better- amar yakwe
Why should he come back?

Because it would not benefit the program to fire a guy who is the most famous person associated with the university, recruited a deep and balanced roster beginning next season, is contractually owed millions of dollars, who was brought here in large part to build a sustainable long term product, and who has only been on the job for three years.

Quote from: rdstr25 on January 16, 2018, 03:08:42 PM

Please tell me where Ponds is going?  He is not an NBA player, not now, not ever, unless he becomes a legit point guard.  As I stated in an earlier post.  More bodies, does not equal more wins.

Don't believe this one bit.  Kid is taking 25 shots a game, playing 40 minutes a game, to having to sit out and be the 4th best player on a team in 2 years?  Baldi, you can do better than this.

Arizona

Quote from: rdstr25 on January 16, 2018, 03:08:42 PM

Please tell me where Ponds is going?  He is not an NBA player, not now, not ever, unless he becomes a legit point guard.  As I stated in an earlier post.  More bodies, does not equal more wins.

Arizona

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 03:58:47 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 03:38:42 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

I know you're a bit of an old timer and remember basketball before the 3 point line but everybody else seems to have adjusted to it by now and you should too. Let's try some simple math:

Player A and Player B each take 100 shots. Player A only takes 2 pointers and player B only takes 3 pointers.

Player A makes 50 of his 100 shot attempts
Player B makes 35 of his 100 shot attempts

Which player scored more points? The guy that makes 50% of his shots but only takes 2s, or the guy that makes 35% of his shots and only takes 3s? Come on you can do this

Hey stupid. I just consulted my abacus and according to my calculations if one player scores 11 points and one scores 7 the one who scored 11 scored more points. And all the hypothetical analytics in fantasy basketball land won't change that. LOL! EMOTICON! MEME! HASHTAG! APP! TWEET! SNATCHCHAT!

So you would rather have the guy that scores 11 points on 20 shot attempts than the guy that scores 7 points on 5 shot attempts. Ok

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 04:02:26 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 03:58:47 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 03:38:42 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

I know you're a bit of an old timer and remember basketball before the 3 point line but everybody else seems to have adjusted to it by now and you should too. Let's try some simple math:

Player A and Player B each take 100 shots. Player A only takes 2 pointers and player B only takes 3 pointers.

Player A makes 50 of his 100 shot attempts
Player B makes 35 of his 100 shot attempts

Which player scored more points? The guy that makes 50% of his shots but only takes 2s, or the guy that makes 35% of his shots and only takes 3s? Come on you can do this

Hey stupid. I just consulted my abacus and according to my calculations if one player scores 11 points and one scores 7 the one who scored 11 scored more points. And all the hypothetical analytics in fantasy basketball land won't change that. LOL! EMOTICON! MEME! HASHTAG! APP! TWEET! SNATCHCHAT!

So you would rather have the guy that scores 11 points on 20 shot attempts than the guy that scores 7 points on 5 shot attempts. Ok

No, I'd rather have Ponds and Simon than 2-star recruit Jarvis Garrett. As would anyone else - other than you evidently, being in possession of secret runes that reveal that he's secretly very good - including Danny Hurley.

Quote from: Gray Chudney on January 16, 2018, 03:41:00 PM

Quote from: TONYD3 on January 16, 2018, 03:11:57 PM

Most agree he picked a bad staff.
No one thinks he can coach.
Plenty of players have transferred.
Almost all agree the players who have been in the program haven’t gotten better- amar yakwe
Why should he come back?

Because it would not benefit the program to fire a guy who is the most famous person associated with the university, recruited a deep and balanced roster beginning next season, is contractually owed millions of dollars, who was brought here in large part to build a sustainable long term product, and who has only been on the job for three years.

That's fine but just a couple of points:

1)You have no idea what is "deep and balanced."  He has on paper a roster next year that you hope will be improved, but you have no idea if they are deep and balanced.  You have no idea if they are even any good quite frankly.

2)I love how the people who literally bashed Norm Roberts from day one are now screaming "Patience, we can't keep changing coaches for everytime we don't get immediate success." (not you but others).  And their phony excuse is "Oh I knew all along Norm was a failure..."  How convenient.

Other than that I agree it is not fair to pull the plug at this point.  My personal point is I am now a skeptic on everything, meaning he does not get the benefit of the doubt on anything.  And that is why I continually knock down the assumptions next year's roster is going to be some magic breakthrough.  I see a lot of talent that will take time to develop and also you and I know roster moves we are not anticipating are inevitable.

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 04:02:26 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 03:58:47 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 03:38:42 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 16, 2018, 02:56:43 PM

Quote from: goredmen on January 16, 2018, 02:47:03 PM

Just looking at points and rebounds per game to determine who is a better player is probably the stupidest thing one can do. Since Garrett is the 4th best player on his team he's not going to get as many chances to score as the 2nd best player on another team. Simple common sense which apparently you have none of when it comes to basketball

Justin Simon makes 46 shots for every 100 he takes. Jarvis Garret makes 45 of every 100 he takes. Advanced analytics tells us that 45 of 100 is much better than 46 of 100 by a "huge" margin. I don't need common sense to know that's bullshit. I will refrain from calling you stupid though, that would be rude.

Lol. Yeah, on those 46 shots Simon makes he will score 94.8 points. On Garrett's 45 makes he will score 107.8 points. Which is better?

I know you're a bit of an old timer and remember basketball before the 3 point line but everybody else seems to have adjusted to it by now and you should too. Let's try some simple math:

Player A and Player B each take 100 shots. Player A only takes 2 pointers and player B only takes 3 pointers.

Player A makes 50 of his 100 shot attempts
Player B makes 35 of his 100 shot attempts

Which player scored more points? The guy that makes 50% of his shots but only takes 2s, or the guy that makes 35% of his shots and only takes 3s? Come on you can do this

Hey stupid. I just consulted my abacus and according to my calculations if one player scores 11 points and one scores 7 the one who scored 11 scored more points. And all the hypothetical analytics in fantasy basketball land won't change that. LOL! EMOTICON! MEME! HASHTAG! APP! TWEET! SNATCHCHAT!

So you would rather have the guy that scores 11 points on 20 shot attempts than the guy that scores 7 points on 5 shot attempts. Ok

No, I'd rather have Ponds and Simon than 2-star recruit Jarvis Garrett. As would anyone else - other than you evidently, being in possession of secret runes that reveal that he's secretly very good - including Danny Hurley.

Quote from: Marco Baldi on January 16, 2018, 03:57:06 PM

Quote from: rdstr25 on January 16, 2018, 03:08:42 PM

Please tell me where Ponds is going?  He is not an NBA player, not now, not ever, unless he becomes a legit point guard.  As I stated in an earlier post.  More bodies, does not equal more wins.

Don't believe this one bit.  Kid is taking 25 shots a game, playing 40 minutes a game, to having to sit out and be the 4th best player on a team in 2 years?  Baldi, you can do better than this.

Arizona

Quote from: Gray Chudney on January 16, 2018, 03:41:00 PM

Quote from: TONYD3 on January 16, 2018, 03:11:57 PM

Most agree he picked a bad staff.
No one thinks he can coach.
Plenty of players have transferred.
Almost all agree the players who have been in the program haven’t gotten better- amar yakwe
Why should he come back?

Because it would not benefit the program to fire a guy who is the most famous person associated with the university, recruited a deep and balanced roster beginning next season, is contractually owed millions of dollars, who was brought here in large part to build a sustainable long term product, and who has only been on the job for three years.

That pretty much summarizes things. . Mullin is the face of SJBB. Firing him is bad for optics. He has a contract we can’t afford to buyout. If we can keep our core and our recruits come, we may actually be good next year.  However, if we have an exodus of players like last year, we are going to be in trouble. Especially if Ponds leaves.

I believe almost every kid wants to play in the NCAA tourney.  I say almost, because there are those "one and done" types, that will go to a school, just to be the man or play for a relative- win or lose.  In Ponds case, I absolutely think he wants to be in the tourney, however if he even sniffed first round, I would bet he would take his chances and leave.

Being projected in second round is meaningless unless  you are a SR, and have no other choice, or in a lot of cases, players are who they are.  Ponds is neither, and if he learns to be a PG, that second round projection might mean more than Chad Ford throwing darts at a board and predicting who goes where.

please don't say I ever said Garrett is better than Ponds.

But I am certainly not the only person that would look at Garrett and Simon as players right now and say Garrett is better. I just hit you with numbers that proved that.

you have no idea how math works

Quote from: rdstr25 on January 16, 2018, 04:55:32 PM

I believe almost every kid wants to play in the NCAA tourney.  I say almost, because there are those "one and done" types, that will go to a school, just to be the man or play for a relative- win or lose.  In Ponds case, I absolutely think he wants to be in the tourney, however if he even sniffed first round, I would bet he would take his chances and leave.

Being projected in second round is meaningless unless  you are a SR, and have no other choice, or in a lot of cases, players are who they are.  Ponds is neither, and if he learns to be a PG, that second round projection might mean more than Chad Ford throwing darts at a board and predicting who goes where.

This is exactly why I posted a few weeks ago that Ponds needs to be the PG now.  Who is running the point next year? Hopefully it's Ponds