Kansas Crimson

Yay?

Yay is implied with a few posters though they won't admit it.
The reason it is implied is linked to a history ( here and on dotnet ) of rooting against the kid/minimizing his good games/overexaggerating his on court play ( lazy, bad defense, doesn't try as hard ).

So by quoting that post about our conference record with/without, are you implying that you wish we didn’t have a better record without him?

Are you sure you aren’t just as prone to maximizing his good games and underexaggerating his laziness and bad d?

(And I wish we could go back to dot net so I could quote my posts there in fall 2017 when I was gushing about how I expected Vick to be the best pro prospect on the team...)

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:40 pm(And I wish we could go back to dot net so I could quote my posts there in fall 2017 when I was gushing about how I expected Vick to be the best pro prospect on the team...)

I don't think there's anyone on here that didn't think Vick was going to be drafted this past summer at that time.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:40 pm So by quoting that post about our conference record with/without, are you implying that you wish we didn’t have a better record without him?

wut?
All of the straw in all of the men.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:25 pm Yay is implied with a few posters though they won't admit it.
The reason it is implied is linked to a history ( here and on dotnet ) of rooting against the kid/minimizing his good games/overexaggerating his on court play ( lazy, bad defense, doesn't try as hard ).

I am neither happy nor unhappy. I am just going off the e idence which seems to show that KU has been closing out ganes better without Vick than we did when he was playing.

Why? I dont know. Maybe the freshmen got screamed at for not forcing the ball to him late and now they can just run the plays right. Maybe we are playing better, more attentive and aggressive team defense to close than when Vick played. Maybe the freshmen have simply improved and would have anyways. No idea.

In the end, it doesn't matter. He isnt on the team. Would him being on the team mean we'd have more or less losses? No way to know. Would him never returning this year mean we'd have more or less losses? No way to know.

I takw no satisfaction from any of this; you're just allowing yourself to get bent over a simple disagreement of opinion.

Or because Lindy Waters missed



And let's be honest...pdub is no more bent out of shape about it than the people who insist on arguing with him.

I have to think Vick will have a career overseas, but his chance at NBA seems slim.

sdoyel wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:24 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:19 pm

sdoyel wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:28 pm Will his speech be recorded and played on the video board? It’s a fair question.

Wut?

So no speech at all?

No.

Are these even serious questions?

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:59 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:40 pm So by quoting that post about our conference record with/without, are you implying that you wish we didn’t have a better record without him?

wut?
All of the straw in all of the men.

Are you saying that there's nothing meaningful about the league-play record differential without Vick as compared to with him?

Talked about that league-play record in another thread, if you want to go flip back to the NCAA 2018-19, but I'm guessing that won't do anything for you, so I might not bother.

Sorry - it's pretty weird to quote things from one thread in another without a link.

And the shitty stretch came against the 9th, 25th and 26th kenpom teams in the country, all on the road, so the argument that we would have won those games with this team isn't a strong one. Lumped in there was a very strong win v the 8th ranked kenpom team.

My point is, I don't think you'll be convinced, so I don't know why you should even bother reading it.

I guess I just pick up on the irony of you (a) supporting your pot-committed position with stats that do not tell the whole story (which stats are favorable to your position), while (b) defending against people critical of your pot-committed position by saying their stats do not tell the whole story (which stats are not favorable to your position).

Start here:
viewtopic.php?p=39164#p39164
And read on down.
You won't be convinced even though there's good argument in there, so like I said before, I might not bother.

The anomaly in there of course is the WVU turd.
You certainly can't put the blame solely on Vick for that when your point guard turns the ball over 7 times and your bench scores 4 points.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:59 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:40 pm So by quoting that post about our conference record with/without, are you implying that you wish we didn’t have a better record without him?

wut?
All of the straw in all of the men.

wut?

So it’s a straw man argument to make arguments and put words in people’s mouths based on some implied logical extreme?

Agreed.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:18 pm Start here:
viewtopic.php?p=39164#p39164
And read on down.
You won't be convinced even though there's good argument in there, so like I said before, I might not bother.

I think there are - and you have raised! - good arguments that the evaluation of Vick's impact should not start and end with comparative W/L records.

Which...just replace "comparative W/L records" with "season shooting percentages" and see where that takes you.

PPG, FG%, 3PTFG%, 1,000 point scorer, above average rebounder for a guard.
Also games started, minutes played.