JaKarr ROY

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on April 01, 2013, 02:34:48 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: Poison on March 30, 2013, 01:26:05 PM

I said the same thing regarding Phil Wait and Omari Lawrence. I'm not a fan of strutting the same guys out there every game if we are getting housed. And we got housed plenty of times this year. Guys who are waiting their turn should get a chance.

Guys get there chance every day in practice. It doesn't matter that you haven't seen it. You guys have to trust that Coach is playing his best options.  Coaches want to win just a much as the fans, if he had better options, he would play them.   

Coaches have never played the wrong guys before?

Based on the information that is available to them, no. There are times, few times, where players actually play better during the game. But you can't blame a coach for not trusting to put a player in the game who doesn't know the offense, or understand their defensive rotations, make poor decisions, or make shots in practice. Coaches are trying to win a game.

When you say "play the wrong player" that is often based off of the results, hinesight. If you seen that same player completely lost in practice I doubt he would be the first person that you would put into the game. Sometimes the light just comes on. Players are not lighting it up in practice and don't see the floor. Coaches want to win.

Im not disagreeing with you that practice is important but there comes a time when in game production is what really matters and you have to shake things up to see if other players will get the job done. Some players arent practice players, I know I wasnt.

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: Poison on March 30, 2013, 01:26:05 PM

I said the same thing regarding Phil Wait and Omari Lawrence. I'm not a fan of strutting the same guys out there every game if we are getting housed. And we got housed plenty of times this year. Guys who are waiting their turn should get a chance.

Guys get there chance every day in practice. It doesn't matter that you haven't seen it. You guys have to trust that Coach is playing his best options.  Coaches want to win just a much as the fans, if he had better options, he would play them.   

Coaches have never played the wrong guys before?

I'm not sure Lavin has played the wrong guys, but we've certainly seen a coach do it. Dwight Hardy is probably one of the top 5 players this program has seen in the last 20 years. He came off the bench as a junior, and was often glued to it. Brownlee is probably in the 10-15 range as far as the last 20 years go, and Roberts couldn't see it.

Lavin actually has less talent than we've seen on paper. Garrett isn't playing like anything close to a top 100 recruit. Marco isn't playing like a D1 player. Sometimes guys don't live up to the hype.

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Correct

Yup.  I was at the game with friends, and all of us wondered what the heck happened to Balamou when Lipscomb came in the game.

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Yes he played 2 minutes in that game prior to Felix getting hurt.  Semantics maybe but still true.

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 03, 2013, 01:27:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

I don't know how long they were initially on for.  Seemed like more than 1 minute and a 12-0 or even a 14-0 run for the bad guys was the net result. 

I don't like playing walkons in the most important, post-season, games of the year that hadn't even had 1 second of meaningful non-garbage time play in the 30+ games prior to that.  You do.  Why re-invent the wheel then?

We can agree to disagree.

 

Quote from: STJFAN on April 05, 2013, 10:20:07 AM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 03, 2013, 01:27:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

I don't know how long they were initially on for.  Seemed like more than 1 minute and a 12-0 or even a 14-0 run for the bad guys was the net result. 

I don't like playing walkons in the most important, post-season, games of the year that hadn't even had 1 second of meaningful non-garbage time play in the 30+ games prior to that.  You do.  Why re-invent the wheel then?

We can agree to disagree.

Thought it was interesting to see a Louisville team dead in the water down by double digits and Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino decides to put in Tim Henderson......A player who averages 3.5 minutes a game this year. He hits back to back three's and injects life into the team. Oh yeah, he's a walk-on. In the most important game of the year, Pitino thought a walk-on gave them a better chance at winning.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 05, 2013, 01:04:01 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 05, 2013, 10:20:07 AM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 03, 2013, 01:27:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

I don't know how long they were initially on for.  Seemed like more than 1 minute and a 12-0 or even a 14-0 run for the bad guys was the net result. 

I don't like playing walkons in the most important, post-season, games of the year that hadn't even had 1 second of meaningful non-garbage time play in the 30+ games prior to that.  You do.  Why re-invent the wheel then?

We can agree to disagree.

Thought it was interesting to see a Louisville team dead in the water down by double digits and Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino decides to put in Tim Henderson......A player who averages 3.5 minutes a game this year. He hits back to back three's and injects life into the team. Oh yeah, he's a walk-on. In the most important game of the year, Pitino thought a walk-on gave them a better chance at winning.

Kevin Ware plays and Henderson doesn't leave the bench.

I kid u not Lipscomb can be that guy for us!
#STJBB!!!!!!!
 
next year that is.

Quote from: STJFAN on April 06, 2013, 10:04:43 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 05, 2013, 01:04:01 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 05, 2013, 10:20:07 AM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 03, 2013, 01:27:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

I don't know how long they were initially on for.  Seemed like more than 1 minute and a 12-0 or even a 14-0 run for the bad guys was the net result. 

I don't like playing walkons in the most important, post-season, games of the year that hadn't even had 1 second of meaningful non-garbage time play in the 30+ games prior to that.  You do.  Why re-invent the wheel then?

We can agree to disagree.

Thought it was interesting to see a Louisville team dead in the water down by double digits and Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino decides to put in Tim Henderson......A player who averages 3.5 minutes a game this year. He hits back to back three's and injects life into the team. Oh yeah, he's a walk-on. In the most important game of the year, Pitino thought a walk-on gave them a better chance at winning.

Kevin Ware plays and Henderson doesn't leave the bench.

Perhaps....However Ware didn't play, and instead of choosing a "scholarship" player to replace those minutes, Pitino chose a walk-on. In their biggest game of the year. It's not about labels, its about getting results, and the Coach will play the player he sees getting it done in practice.   

Quote from: Moose on April 06, 2013, 11:03:56 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 06, 2013, 10:04:43 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 05, 2013, 01:04:01 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 05, 2013, 10:20:07 AM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on April 03, 2013, 01:27:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on April 01, 2013, 04:50:46 PM

Why is that inexplicable?

Because on a team that is fully funded scholarship wise, walkons should only play when you are up or down by a lot late in the second half; or when 1/2 your team is suspended for indescretions with prostitutes in Pittsburgh.

Quote

Their playing time had no impact on us winning or losing the game.

Wouldn't say that. 7-0 and 5-0 runs for the opponent in tight ballgames were the initial results of walkongate.

Quote

It was a classy move by coach,

I would call it more of a stupid or inexplicable move.

Quote

imo, to get them at least 1 minute of action in what maybe their final game in an STJ uniform. We don't know if they will be on the team next year. These kids work their tails off all year, just as hard as the scholarship players. Why is that so terrible?

It was postseason play.  Everybody involved at least deserves our best shot at winning the games.  And that doesn't involve playing walkons. The good of the team and going for the win has got to take on more importance than a "nice gesture" towards walkons.

I find it hard to believe that 1 minute of playing time equated to a combined 12-0 run for the opposing team. It appears you believe that playing the walkons 1 minute cost us the game, I don't believe that. They played better than Marco so I could care less about their label. In that context, I don't have an issue with it. We can agree to disagree.

I don't know how long they were initially on for.  Seemed like more than 1 minute and a 12-0 or even a 14-0 run for the bad guys was the net result. 

I don't like playing walkons in the most important, post-season, games of the year that hadn't even had 1 second of meaningful non-garbage time play in the 30+ games prior to that.  You do.  Why re-invent the wheel then?

We can agree to disagree.

Thought it was interesting to see a Louisville team dead in the water down by double digits and Hall of Fame coach Rick Pitino decides to put in Tim Henderson......A player who averages 3.5 minutes a game this year. He hits back to back three's and injects life into the team. Oh yeah, he's a walk-on. In the most important game of the year, Pitino thought a walk-on gave them a better chance at winning.

Kevin Ware plays and Henderson doesn't leave the bench.

Perhaps....However Ware didn't play, and instead of choosing a "scholarship" player to replace those minutes, Pitino chose a walk-on. In their biggest game of the year. It's not about labels, its about getting results, and the Coach will play the player he sees getting it done in practice.   

I don't know who is or isn't on scholarship but after the Top 9 games in games played Henderson is next at 10th and has played in 25 games this year.

Lavin didn't get any results from Lipscomb.  He didn't move all year.  It was a baffling move at the time but there were reasons behind it.  Nothing major but its par for the course with Lavin in why he did it.

Doesnt Pitino get scholi calibre players to come as walkons?

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on April 01, 2013, 08:37:17 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Yes he played 2 minutes in that game prior to Felix getting hurt.  Semantics maybe but still true.

No, it is not semantics, actually, it's everything. Once we lost Felix, I get it, we're down a guard and now we've lost another. The walk on has got to play. Before Felix gets hurt, there is absolutely no reason to play a walk on over him. It's a bush league move. We've experienced seasons where there was no choice. Now, we have a choice, and coach chooses to make some kind of example out of Lipscomb.

What did the players learn from this?

Balamou was playing sparingly because guys like Pointer, Greene, Garrett and Harrison took his minutes. But I think he has potential. He can go to the basket strong. He has a nice 10 foot j, and he's quietly the best free throw shooter on the team. AND w two guys out, it should be his turn, because after all, we're all about 13-14, and Felix should be a big part of our bench.

Quote from: yankcranker on April 02, 2013, 05:30:05 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on April 01, 2013, 08:37:17 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Yes he played 2 minutes in that game prior to Felix getting hurt.  Semantics maybe but still true.

No, it is not semantics, actually, it's everything. Once we lost Felix, I get it, we're down a guard and now we've lost another. The walk on has got to play. Before Felix gets hurt, there is absolutely no reason to play a walk on over him. It's a bush league move. We've experienced seasons where there was no choice. Now, we have a choice, and coach chooses to make some kind of example out of Lipscomb.

What did the players learn from this?

Balamou was playing sparingly because guys like Pointer, Greene, Garrett and Harrison took his minutes. But I think he has potential. He can go to the basket strong. He has a nice 10 foot j, and he's quietly the best free throw shooter on the team. AND w two guys out, it should be his turn, because after all, we're all about 13-14, and Felix should be a big part of our bench.

Did you see how many teams played walkons in the NCAA tourney? People are blowing this way out of proportion

Quote from: Poison on April 07, 2013, 11:03:23 AM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 02, 2013, 05:30:05 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on April 01, 2013, 08:37:17 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Poison on April 01, 2013, 07:52:15 PM

Quote from: yankcranker on April 01, 2013, 06:02:19 PM

And Lipscomb was only in there because unless you wanted Pointer (which could have been an option) playing guard there was no other option at third guard with Dlo suspended and Balamou injured.

The walk on played before Balamou got hurt.

Umm, no he didn't.  Balamou got hurt vs. Nova.  Lipscomb never played more than 2 minutes in a game before the Nova game nor did he play in any game decided by less than 11 points before the Nova game.  But thanks for playing.

Lipscomb was the first guard off the bench in the nova game. Prior to Felix getting hurt.

Yes he played 2 minutes in that game prior to Felix getting hurt.  Semantics maybe but still true.

No, it is not semantics, actually, it's everything. Once we lost Felix, I get it, we're down a guard and now we've lost another. The walk on has got to play. Before Felix gets hurt, there is absolutely no reason to play a walk on over him. It's a bush league move. We've experienced seasons where there was no choice. Now, we have a choice, and coach chooses to make some kind of example out of Lipscomb.

What did the players learn from this?

Balamou was playing sparingly because guys like Pointer, Greene, Garrett and Harrison took his minutes. But I think he has potential. He can go to the basket strong. He has a nice 10 foot j, and he's quietly the best free throw shooter on the team. AND w two guys out, it should be his turn, because after all, we're all about 13-14, and Felix should be a big part of our bench.

Did you see how many teams played walkons in the NCAA tourney? People are blowing this way out of proportion

It's not the same thing.