| 0 |
Subject: Lg 4 w3w12 May 10th: Fess up
Posted by: blue hen, madman
- Leader [27048221] Sat, May 11, 2002, 02:13
11/11, 5/5, 3/3, and 0/0
11/11 Sherm Poole, 6'8, Columbus (17) EEFEEG
That's +9 by my count, and he's an Exc scout with amazing stats. I wouldn't be surprised if his hands were Good too, considering his stats. He's the ultimate stud, and considering TH's current underclassmen, I can afford to risk not getting him. He's be a great replacement for the graduating Baloo Henn.
3/3 Sal Sample, 7'0, Portland (29), GFPFFF
I'm going to call KM's bluff and keep maxing him anyway. He's not that good, but we need someone for our tall guys to practice on.
0/0 Amos Markham, 6'7, Des Moines (19), GFFPEF
I'm hoping he's an E shot, since he's scoring 23.8 PPG. He's an E scout, so who knows. At best, he'll be a bSG and eventually start.
5/5 Mystery Man
|
| 1 | The Beezer
Leader
ID: 191202817
Sat, May 11, 2002, 07:00
|
3/3, 1/1, and 0/0 for Paducah.
3/3:
Christopher Marcum 6-11 2.7 50 Exc C
Paducah 18 Fair - Fair + Fair - Exc - Fair +
11.3 10.8 1.2 0.8 1.5 2.9
With 7'0" Kirby House graduating, I knew I would need height to enter the season, and didn't have to look far. Third in the nation in rebounding, second in blocks, and a hometowner, plus the 11.3 PPG made this an easy choice. Ranked #190 in my last rankings, but has been a top-40 recruit because of his height.
1/1:
Caleb Geiger 6-4 3.2 67 Exc SF
Carbondale 18 Poor + Good - Good + Good - Fair +
10.3 5.1 2.2 0.9 0.8 0.3
Nice solid player. I was hoping he'd come up clear, but we don't mind the 1/1 too much. Looks like a solid ballhandler in the middle. Ranked #133 in my latest rankings.
0/0:
Les Tyler 6-2 4.0 64 Exc PG
Flint 18 Good - Fair + Good + Fair - Fair -
18.2 3.0 3.4 1.6 0.9 0.2
I'm not shocked very often in this game, but I was when I saw that LT was clear. How does a guy with those stats and a +4 Exc scout go 0/0? He can score, pass, defend, and take care of the ball. Since my PG is graduating, he'll be a perfect fit, and we'll plunk down 17 per just to make sure we don't lose him. Rated 94th in my ratings, but they skew towards big men, so I peg him at top 50 overall.
I have decent position on a couple of sleepers, so we're happy with where we are. Tyler alone will get us a long way towards being a national power again.
And before you can ask, bh, I've got your guys rated as follows:
Sherm Poole - #2
Sal Sample - #445
Amos Markham - #311
|
| 2 | Raz
ID: 3542342
Sat, May 11, 2002, 17:03
|
Recruits of the Camden Rattlers
6/6 Darrion Clayton, 6-2, Casper (25), Good Scout, EFGFG
My OOC venture of the season, my team needs a shooter, so his EXC+ in that category drew my attention (as well as his computer-coached hometown).
5/5 Sharone Hartley, 6-9, Concord (6), Exc Scout, GFFGF
Would provide some much needed height and scoring.
4/4 Jared Vowels, 6-6, Morgantown (6), Poor Scout, GFEFF
Another area of need for my team, a decent PG (and he can score - see a theme here?)
0/0 Benoit Danahy, 6-4, Bangor (6), Good Scout, GFFFF
Liked the way he performed in my scrimmages, will make a decent backup and possible starter in his later years.
I am rather disappointed in my backup recruits' situations, as so I suppose I'll be banking on winning some ties, something I've already discovered is a bad strategy. My team is horrible this season, so I can guarantee any recruits ample playing time (you hear that, guys?).
And would also like to say congrats to G Dogg for grabbing the #1 power ranking!
|
| 3 | blue hen, madman
Leader
ID: 27048221
Mon, May 13, 2002, 03:42
|
Thanks Beezer. Who is #1 if Poole is #2? I went after the best guy I could find. Markham obviously loses points because of his E scout and so-so ratings, but I think he'll be better than that. If that were an E instead of a G shot, how far up would he go? And let's make him a F reb instead of P... since I wouldn't need him to rebound... Also, it looks like we agree on Sample... he sucks, but height is nice.
Raz, looks like you had some bad luck. Sorry to see that, but I guess it happens to everyone sometime.
|
| 4 | The Beezer
Leader
ID: 191202817
Mon, May 13, 2002, 04:07
|
I've got Barrett Pike at #1 mostly due to his good scout being E-E+E-G+G+ and his INT looks good, too. I wish I'd gotten on him as he appears to be only a 4/4 from some of the posts on the main site.
I'm too lazy to do the math on changes to Markham's ratings, so let's just say that his ranking would go up. :)
|
| 5 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 22947267
Mon, May 13, 2002, 11:29
|
Well I have screwed up. 0/0 on Brock, 11/11 on Poole, dropped off Garner and Fennell because of their top 75 status and moved to two players that I am now behind on, one of which I was sure I would be ahead.
Very close on some others that would be ok. Have to keep it quiet for now.
Grats to Gdogg for his number 1 ranking!!
|
| 6 | RecycledSpinalFluid
ID: 42121814
Mon, May 13, 2002, 11:31
|
The Beezer, I would love to hear how you establish your rankings. Still relatively new to this game, I am curious to what others put more weight into to rank players.
|
| 7 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Mon, May 13, 2002, 17:17
|
Thanks for the congrats, guys! I am more than a little surprised by my lofty ranking. Tonight, I get to find out just how well-deserved (or not-so-deserved) my ranking is as we take on the Tampa Wildcats, who I think is one of the top teams in all the league. Tons of talent on that team, many of whom I recruited and lost out on. Hopefully, we can continue to light it up. We're scoring about 85 PPG in slow down. The game will probably be won or lost on the glass.
My w3/w12's are a little worse off than I have been in years past. Barrett Pike is 6/6 and I am kicking myself for recruiting him. I took about an hour deciding whether or not to recruit him or his teammate Quinten Patterson, who is a 6-7 stud in his own right. Patterson is sitting at 1/1 while I am stuck in a lotto. Oh well, I'll stay and lose another tie.
My future PG, Dakota Beasley, from Twarpy's conference, 11, came in at an expected 0/0, so I can start using his max elsewhere.
The guy I think is the top center in Conference 8, Darrick Larimore, came in at 1/1. I just hope I'm not tied with Tampa (hometown) because I have lost 4 players on Tampa's current roster to them.
And Bernard Bland, who's stats have come back to earth comes in at a WAY overrated 8/8. I'll stick around only because I have a funny feeling that 3-4 teams are going to drop him. I have no reason to believe this, but I am irrational sometimes and will cling to the hope that people decide he is overrated.
After all my meticulous use of RSF's excel spreadsheet, I am in the worst shape on what I thought would be sleepers that I have ever been in. Out of the 34 players I have points on, only 8 aren't maxed and many of those have top RPE's that are pretty high. I'll be as crafty as I can with Beasley's max, but I fear that I am going to need some luck this year to pull off the type of talented class that has gotten me off to a 9-0 start.
Good luck everyone and thanks again for the congrats.
|
| 8 | kev
ID: 15357192
Mon, May 13, 2002, 17:47
|
Another question from the L5 rookie...
When you are at a 0/0 with a guy, how long do you usually keep maxing him, or if you stop, how many RP's per week do you tend to put on him?
So far, Im doing pretty good (10-2 with my team), but my recruiting is a joke.
|
| 9 | Erik B.
ID: 239592612
Mon, May 13, 2002, 17:55
|
What is this game?
|
| 10 | The Beezer
Leader
ID: 191202817
Mon, May 13, 2002, 18:23
|
RSF, while I won't go into specifics, what I generally do is rank players by their attributes from highest to lowest, and then do the same thing with their stats. I then use the scout for each player to weight their attribute rank versus their stat rank. I then sort by this combined ranking to get the rankings that I use. I also have a separate guard ranking that only takes into account attributes and stats that I want from the guard position.
Kev, that usually depends on how much I want the player. If it's a player that is more of a "safety" recruit, that is not likely to be heavily pursued, I'll usually just put down 9 RPE per week to save a visit and 8 points. This also ensures that you aren't overtaken by someone who is off the radar (say, 13 behind) who spends 17. Of course if someone shows up w/12 at any time, you'd probably want to start maxing him again.
For a guy like Les Tyler that I listed in my lg4 recruits, though, I'm going to max him all the way to guarantee that I get him, because there is a chance (very small, but I have seen it happen before) that you could lose a recruit to someone that is a few points back.
Erik B., the game is SimulatedSports.com Basketball, at the website just listed. It's a college basketball game that uses computer-created players as opposed to real-life players like Strat-O-Matic. They also have horse racing which is played by several Gurupies as well.
|
| 11 | kev
ID: 15357192
Mon, May 13, 2002, 18:33
|
Thanks a ton Beezer. I can probably use a visit or 2 on a another recruit.
|
| 12 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Mon, May 13, 2002, 19:12
|
Kev, I agree with The Beezer. For me, 0/0 = 6 RP's minimum, which is what I will spend on my one 0/0 until/if I see someone get within 12 RPE.
Sometimes, desperate coaches will attempt to overtake you and max the player you have over a 3 RPE lead on for the rest of the season, which is annoying. And other times, you may be so far ahead (we only know we are AT LEAST 12 RPE ahead) that other teams won't put any points on your guy because they feel they have no chance of catching you.
So, 6 RPE is the minimum you should spend to ensure that you keep your lead on the recruit for that week.
|
| 13 | blue hen, almighty
ID: 473133021
Mon, May 13, 2002, 21:06
|
I agree. I shift from 17 to 6 when I get to 0/0 and back if I go 0/1. In my experience, most of the spreadsheets vastly undervalue height. But at least you can sort your players out a little better. I usually don't stray from my own conference, except in league 4.
|
| 14 | Raz
ID: 3542342
Mon, May 13, 2002, 21:42
|
I echo the sentiments above regarding switching from 17 RPE's to 6 RPE's for a 0/0 guy. Of course, there's always the other side of the coin. Late last season (I think it was the second or third to last week), I was happily putting 6 RPE's on an OOC guy who I had started out maxing and been 0/0 on all season. Suddenly, after one Friday's games, I was 1/1 on this guy. Someone had either gotten lucky or timed it extremely well to sneak up within 3 RPE (or less) of my guy. Of course, I maxed him the rest of the season, but I ended up losing him, and it turns out the team who caught me was his hometown, which I'm sure contributed to my loss. Such has been the recruiting woes of Camden.
Oddly enough, I've felt like I've had an easier time recruiting in L5 than in L4. Go figure.
|
| 15 | Raz
ID: 3542342
Mon, May 13, 2002, 21:44
|
Oh, and regarding my recruits, I expected Clayton about where he was (I like to gamble as I haven't learned better yet). But I was a bit disappointed when I saw my other two Conf. 6 recruits so high on the Top 75 list the first week. But I have a hard time talking myself out of dropping an in-conference max, so I'm holding on for the long haul.
|
| 16 | RecycledSpinalFluid
ID: 42121814
Tue, May 14, 2002, 11:24
|
Thanks to everyone. I appreciate getting the "veteran" angle to recruiting so I can formulate my own ideas. Seeing the players (and their stats/attribs) that you are recruiting helps put some more pieces of the puzzle together.
I am curious as to the what your expected production levels would be based on various attributes. If you think this is too much spoonfeeding, feel free to say "shuddup!"
|
| 17 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Tue, May 14, 2002, 14:02
|
RSF, there are many schools of thought on attributes/production. Most "vets" agree that there is a range for each attribute rather than one absolute for each attribute. Not all E ratings are the same, which can also be said for G's, F's, etc. So, you may have a G shooter that is closer to an F shooter, which will cause you to be frustrated because, to you, he just doesn't shoot "good."
Also, position greatly influences some players. In my first season, I had a player who was a G shot 6-5 guy who was forced to play SF because that team was tiny. Well, he had a great season and shot 56% from the field. I pulled in a great recruiting class that season (including the best Lg 4 player ever, Lonnie Buckner) and was forced to move my 6-5 to SG to make room for Buckner at SF. The 6-5 guy never shot over 50% again.
One other thing to consider, there are supposedly "hidden" attributes that may cause a player to play at a level above or below what you think his visible attributes say he should be playing at.
One of these is selfishness. If you have an E shooter (or high G shooter) who lights it up, it's great to have a selfish guy who loves to jack it up as much as possible. Chris has had a couple of players who I think would fit this description, namely Denny Cole and Greg Detherage. They were both outstanding shooters and thanks in large part to the fact that they weren't afraid to take tons of shots (and a little bit of Chris' coaching), they both won Lg Player of the Year awards.
This works the other way, too. On my current Gainesville team, Mohammed Gabriel is an absolute ball hog. His settings are sub normal, shoot less, 3's less. You wouldn't be able to tell that from looking at his stats because the dumbass has taken the 4th most shots on my team and the most of any of my bench players, two of which are on shoot more.
So, it really comes down playing them and figuring out what each player's level of production is. I'll give you a breakdown on what I expect, if you'd like to see it.
|
| 18 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Tue, May 14, 2002, 14:14
|
Damn that was long. Sorry.
|
| 19 | Matt G
ID: 37722615
Tue, May 14, 2002, 14:36
|
I almost went completely out of conference this year, only 1 guy within my conf was solid enough to max so I'm doing that.
Lorenzo Holman 3/3 6'10" GFGFF Good Scout I need height and he's in conf so what the heck.
Reese Goodwin 3/3 6'8" EGGEG Poor Scout but Shows great stats, would be a role player, I have my superstars that I recruited last year, I just need some spots to be filled.
Jackson Nix 7/8 6'10" GGGEF Exe Scout Again I need height, here's hoping he can take over the C spot so Cole Goff can play PF where he belongs, only if i get him.
Barrett Pike 6/6 6'8" EEEGG Good Scout You all know him, I figured I'd give him a change and see if I get lucky, who knows, I did last year.
Ira Koehler 5/5 6'6" EGFFF Good Scout He's a shooter, and I could use another, I'm actually behind on him but whoever was maxing him just left off only putting 9 on him last week. I think I'm gonna see what happens with Pike and Nix, if people don't drop off of them, I will and start maxing Ira to see if I can catch whoever was maxing him off guard...
Considering I don't graduate any starters and only one person I use as a reserve, anything I get here helps. MY starters are strong and I'm starting 3 Frosh, at 5-5 I couldn't be happier considering. I'm a strong class away from some great success.
|
| 20 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 22947267
Tue, May 14, 2002, 15:25
|
Great analysis Gdogg. I would only add (not a vet of this game mind you) that there appears to be a big difference between a freshman rating and what the player eventually turns out to be.
I have seen Good hands freshman play terribly, yet play with Good hands as sophomores. I have seen Good shooters step it up in accuracy as juniors.
Not sure it's a trend but there definitely is something for the maturity factor or whatever else it may be.
|
| 21 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Tue, May 14, 2002, 15:30
|
MattG, I'm on Ira Koehler(RPE 66, soon to be 83) and last week W3 1 W12 2.
|
| 22 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Tue, May 14, 2002, 15:31
|
I'll breakdown my W3's tonight when I have more time.
OT, no summer school for me, just learned I got a 4.0 and I get to keep my scholarsip, woohoo.
|
| 23 | Twarpy
Leader
ID: 464451510
Wed, May 15, 2002, 11:02
|
BR is maxing Xavier Pullen, Harrison Fry, Wesley Pape, Damian Patterson.
Xavier is from the Dan/Mach (4) conference and as expected wasn't maxed so I'm alone on him. He will be hopefully a solid bench backup that I'm in need of.
Harrison is from conf 5, another role player that I hope eventually can become a starter in due time, hes scoring enough to be one. Only tied with 1 person on him.
Pape has fallen off his torrid scoring pace at the beginning, but the main reason for recruiting him still remains his defense. Tied with 2 on him.
Damian is Baton Rouge's pride, He looks to be a +6 with all the attributes that I want in a PG. Unfortunately I have the disadvantage of being the hometowner maxing him (I've never won a hometown battle, lost 4 of them). Tied with 3 on him.
My team actually looks to be getting back to former times, with Carlos Lawhorn looking like he could win ROY this year, and will definately give me the scoring touch for the next 3 seasons following this one. Right now I just need to find some key role players, and a PG and I could start making some glory runs again.
|
| 24 | Matt G
ID: 37722615
Wed, May 15, 2002, 11:11
|
Ahh Crap BMD, I'll have to move off of him then spend my points elsewhere as im not gonna catch you now that you know, not a prob, i got some others in mind...
|
| 25 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Wed, May 15, 2002, 13:14
|
MattG, I was maxing him all the way no matter what. I never planned to only give him 9 RPE.
|
| 26 | blue hen, almighty
ID: 473133021
Thu, May 16, 2002, 19:28
|
What is it about guys named Xavier from Conf 4 and us being all alone on them.
|
| 27 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 22947267
Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:00
|
Thought I would BUTT this.
Well I guess seeing is believing! My center, Lorenzo Billings, went from a plus two to a plus four (one poor is in there) between Monday and Wednesday. I had heard of this happening but had never seen it. Very interesting!
Started out with a 6 power ranking and went from 51 to 52 now after beating a team 90-68. With Minn still to play in the conference tourney looks like I will miss the NTT again!
Hope all is well with everyone else's teams.
|
| 28 | RecycledSpinalFluid
ID: 42121814
Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:07
|
Recruiting question:
When a player is scouted Poor, how much fluctuation have you guys seen in the listed Attributes and the Real Attributes? I wonder because I have a guy in my Hometown that is 6-5 scoring 22+ points a game, but has attribs of Fair+ for shooting and basicly Poor+ for the rest. Do I even touch this guy?
|
| 29 | kev
ID: 15357192
Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:17
|
Im having the same question. In Lg5, Im recruiting a guy avging 10 RPG, and his Rebounding attribute is "poor+", but their is poor scouting on him
|
| 30 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 22947267
Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:51
|
RFS and kev-I am not a vet of this game so I'm pretty clueless also. But a guy who averages 10 RPG's per game, to me, is clearly not a poor rebounder.
Shooting is more guesswork to me, since you don't know if the guy is taking a ton of shots. I am leading on some guys like that so I would like to hear some other thoughts.
|
| 32 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Thu, May 23, 2002, 18:47
|
I am trying to avoid my usually long-winded posts, but I will simply say this. In my experience, a recruit can fluctuate seemingly without any limits (-1 turning into +6, for example) REGARDLESS of scout. I have had E scouts improve by as much as 5 attributes. My current bC in L4 was a G scout +0 and is actually +4.
Here's the key: Poor scouts and Fair scouts are inaccurate much more than Good or Exc scouts (obviously). I am in the minority on this, but for me stats tell almost all. The only exception to this for me is PPG, which VID touched on. This is why I recruit (whenever possible) the players with the best stats (that I like, high PPG, high RPG, high SPG, etc.) and DO NOT give out PP's.
This is cliche, but "the proof is in the puddin'."
Let me know if I failed to address your question, which I am sure I did.
|
| 33 | balls
Donor
ID: 193311316
Thu, May 23, 2002, 22:28
|
Hey, G Dogg, why not any PP's?
|
| 34 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Fri, May 24, 2002, 14:03
|
No PP's because, despite all the info we have about the recruits, we have absolutely no way of knowing for sure what the attributes of the recruits actually are. The CPU knows for sure, and also knows exactly how high each attribute is for each player.
In short, the CPU has an overall ranking of all 700+ recruits, from #1 to #768. If you don't give out any PP's, the CPU will give you the 3 highest ranked players (according to the CPU) that are willing to sign with you.
I'd rather someone that knows how good or bad the recruits are for sure give me my recruits than attempt to assess how good the recruits are myself, blindly.
OK, now for bmd's rebuttal... ;)
|
| 35 | Twarpy
Leader
ID: 23359202
Sat, May 25, 2002, 00:07
|
BR actually has a bright spot this season, Carlos Lawhorn my freshman scored my first 28 points for me tonight in a blowout loss. He know leads the league in points/game and is only a freshie!
|
| 36 | balls
Donor
ID: 193311316
Sat, May 25, 2002, 01:39
|
G Dogg, I take it you have had good, or decent results not giving any PP's. Is that right?
Has anyone givin much thought to the time stamp? Say you're maxing a recruit and you're tied with some other coaches for him. Each week you try to put your RP's in as early as possible, so that you can get the earliest time stamp before the other coaches do. So basically you're the first coach to recruit that player for the week. Does that help with your recruiting efforts? Did I make any sense?
|
| 37 | G Dogg
ID: 13631420
Sat, May 25, 2002, 13:46
|
balls, I'd say I've had good to very good results not putting any PP's down. But, bmd can say the same thing and he uses PP's.
As for the time stamp thing, I doubt it matters at all. The best player (and largest tie) I ever landed, Lonnie Buckner, is a prime example. I would put my points down early (Saturdays) for my other 3 maxes because I knew I was recruiting them. Chris actually had to talk me into maxing Buckner every Friday morning because I always had this bad feeling that I was wasting my RP's on a guy I wasn't going to get. Well, I landed him and I'm pretty sure I was very close to being the last person to put points on him each week.
|
| 38 | balls
Donor
ID: 193311316
Sun, May 26, 2002, 17:08
|
I've used PP's before with mixed results. I'm thinking about not using any this time around since my recruiting efforts look terrible already. I'm in league 14 and we are half way through the season and I've offered 19 scholarships with all 19 being maxed by someone else. I don't have any "safety nets" and any that I can find, I don't feel I can catch up. I just hope I can get at least one of my maxes and then let the computer decide the rest. Thanks for your input, G dogg.
|
| 39 | VIDevilRays
ID: 5856611
Thu, Jun 06, 2002, 11:06
|
I play this team called "Gainesville DoggyDoggs" next in the NTT-anyone have any clues on how to play them?:) Lol!
Branson has been on a mission since we were dissed by the selection committee-forcing us to play the winner of play-in teams Roswell and Decatur-for the last slot in the NTT. Not sure how these power rankings work.
Anyway, Branson enjoyed the run. Can't see getting by gdogg's powerhouse!! At least this will prevent me from getting twenty wins which means I have a shot at Sherm Poole right gdogg?:)
Good luck!
|
| 40 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Thu, Jun 06, 2002, 12:43
|
Vid, my "powerhouse" is playing like crap. We jumped out to a 23 point lead in the first half of our first round game against Dallas only to let them cut it to 6 in the second half and we were down most of the game against St. Cloud before finally pulling it out in OT. Ever since I had two guys drop to 9's (guys on sub more, I should add), we haven't really played all that well, save a few halves. I wouldn't count the Posse out quite yet.
I see you read my posts. Part of it was frustration in having all that crap happen in recruiting over the last few seasons. After posting all of that stuff, I looked over my two best teams, Reading (Lg 1) and Gainesville, to add up the combined w3/w12's of the entire teams:
Gainesville: 4/4 total for 12 players. Two 1/1 HT'ers and one 1/1 IC player included. The other tie won is sitting NA at the moment.
Reading: 3/4 for 12 players. One HT 1/1, and one 1/1 IC tie included.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Back to the topic at hand, I think you have an excellent chance at knocking us off. We are solid, but very beatable. I am really looking forward to it. I don't think any gurupies have squared off in the championship bracket of the NTT before in any league. I know we've done battle in consolation NTT games, but not in the championship bracket that I can recall. Good luck vid, but not too much!
|
| 41 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 21516613
Thu, Jun 06, 2002, 16:49
|
Thanks gdogg-good luck to you too. My team though is wildly inconsistent-hence the weird-imho-power ranking. Lost four times all year-twice to Minn and twice to teams ranked in the 100's. Once I saw my seed and who I had to play before you I knew I had a chance to get to this game.
As far as recruiting I have not been around long enough to know how it works. I do know that I have not won a hometown tie in any of the leagues I am in. And my worst team in-League 6-has never won a tie period! Five walk-ons out of six recruits! So there!!!!:)
I do know that if I get Sherm Poole I will be a legitimate NTT contender. But I also realize that, given my record, there is little, if any, chance of that.
Watch Minneapolis. Tough, tough team!
|
| 42 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Thu, Jun 06, 2002, 17:30
|
Yeah, I played Minneapolis last season in the Elite Eight. I lost by 1 in the last minute. I had the lead going into the final minute, turned the ball over a couple of times and they beat me. I was furious, but couldn't really complain much since my team was on the verge of the PTT prior to the conference tourney last season.
I hope we're out of our funk or the Posse will be dancing on Friday night.
|
| 43 | VIDevilRays
Leader
ID: 21516613
Mon, Jun 10, 2002, 09:23
|
Good game gdogg-although the game was not as close as the score would indicate. I'm already regretting not staying with my usual man-to-man-did not figure that Edens would light it up for that many close baskets.
Good luck the rest of the way.
|
| 44 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Mon, Jun 10, 2002, 14:45
|
Thanks, VID. Great game, indeed. This game was very similar to the other games this tournament. We jumped out to a nice, sizable lead and your guys just chipped away until you closed the gap (to within 6?).
Edens is simply a freak. He's only a +3, but is looking like he will go down as one of my best players ever. He is currently shooting 60.6%...as a Sophomore and over 58% in his short career. It's scary to think what he might do the next two years. I mean, he is leading me in scoring, rebounding and second on the team in blocks, all from the SF position, which is incredible. So, don't sweat what Edens did, he pretty much does it to everyone, unless Marsh or Revell go off, which they did not thanks to a nice defensive effort on those two.
I'm a little worried about my game with Panama City. This is the first team I have played that pretty much match my height 1-10. I am hoping that it was your defense that forced us to shoot, uncharacteristically, below 50% from the field. If it was just that my team is starting to cool off from our blistering 54% from the field pace on the season, we could be in some serious trouble tonight.
Anyway, great game and you have done a great job with Branson. The future looks bright for the Posse.
|
| 45 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Mon, Jun 17, 2002, 22:44
|
I hope tonight's game is a precursor of things to come.
Also, Rayshard Edens is God.
|
| 46 | balls
Donor
ID: 193311316
Mon, Jul 08, 2002, 16:07
|
Well, G Dogg, I didn't use any PP's and didn't get any of my maxes and ended up with a -1 recruiting class. All 3 guys are fairs across the board with one poor rating. I guess I'll have to be a lot more smarter this recruiting season. Oh well, live and learn.
|
| 47 | G Dogg
ID: 539522315
Wed, Jul 10, 2002, 17:25
|
balls, either you A) lost all your ties; or, b) recruited crappy ties and the three players you got were just better. I assure you that you did as well as you possibly could have with the players you recruited. I hate to put it this way, but you were just unlucky in that you recruited players that weren't very good (at least on paper).
|
| 48 | balls
Donor
ID: 193311316
Wed, Jul 10, 2002, 19:12
|
Yes, I lost all my ties and my recruiting effort was awful last season.
I wasn't unlucky, I just sucked. Thanks for putting it such a kind way though. :)
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|