Law has good form on his jump shot and the ability to create his own shot of the dribble, which very few of our player have had. The shooting percentage of a freshmen is not always indicative of his skill level, which I am sure you know. Sobo was historically bad last year and he is shooting the ball well this year. Law has a decent handle and is a pretty good passer. He needs to relax, get stronger and take care of the ball but I will be very surprised if he is not at least a decent offensive player. And I can't think of a player that we have recruited in the past 15 years or so that combines his heighth, speed, quickness and jumping ability, so comparing him to Hearn or Capocci is probably not meaningful. He is at a different level than our recent recruits. He may not end up a great player, but I would be very surprised if he didn't end up being a valuable contributor on a good team.
Have Cats slipped this year versus last?
- Thread starter Palindrome
- Start date
Shurna averaged 5.8 points a game in conference play as a freshman and, if you take away a six game stretch that included his only games with 7+ points, he averaged 3.7 points in conference play.
He had five zero-point games, four of those without a rebound, and was scoreless in the epic win at MSU.
He hit that game-winning three against OSU - no doubt the greatest shot by an NU player in the last decade (since Michael Jenkins hit that corner three against Iowa in, say, 2003) - but he also had several games where he played less than 15 minutes and, in fact, averaged only 18 minutes a game overall as a freshman, despite starting.
This is not to denigrate Shurna - this is simply to say that it's tough to play a bunch of guys your size for the first time in your life, while adjusting to new teammates and more scrutiny and managing your life by yourself. Shurna took a leap his sophomore year - that's indisputable. (What's disputable is whether he was a star in the making or 'just a guy' in the making - and I would contend that very little of what he did showed star potential.)
I just think Law is such a huge piece - and the fact that Shurna made a leap gives me hope that Law can do the same.
(I can't get the link to paste in on my phone, because I'm old and confused. Google 'john Shurna northwestern game log', and the yahoo link is great.)
He had five zero-point games, four of those without a rebound, and was scoreless in the epic win at MSU.
He hit that game-winning three against OSU - no doubt the greatest shot by an NU player in the last decade (since Michael Jenkins hit that corner three against Iowa in, say, 2003) - but he also had several games where he played less than 15 minutes and, in fact, averaged only 18 minutes a game overall as a freshman, despite starting.
This is not to denigrate Shurna - this is simply to say that it's tough to play a bunch of guys your size for the first time in your life, while adjusting to new teammates and more scrutiny and managing your life by yourself. Shurna took a leap his sophomore year - that's indisputable. (What's disputable is whether he was a star in the making or 'just a guy' in the making - and I would contend that very little of what he did showed star potential.)
I just think Law is such a huge piece - and the fact that Shurna made a leap gives me hope that Law can do the same.
(I can't get the link to paste in on my phone, because I'm old and confused. Google 'john Shurna northwestern game log', and the yahoo link is great.)
First of all, you can't just "take away" a six game stretch. That is nuts. Yes, John didn't play as well in conference games his freshman year.
Of course there is a big adjustment to be made when transitioning to college ball. I've been saying that for a year as I try to temper expectations of those saying that Vic and Bryant and Scotty would get us anywhere near .500 in conference their first season. Those predictions were insane.
I expect Vic to improve going forward, but he has A LOT of work to do. If you take away the hype and the expectations and what he "looks like" athletically, Vic has had a very poor freshman campaign. I would argue worse than the majority of players we've had over the last several years who had meaningful playing time their first year. My guess is that he will become as good as his work ethic and weight-room ethic allows. He certainly isn't limited athletically. But that don't feed the bulldog.
Of course there is a big adjustment to be made when transitioning to college ball. I've been saying that for a year as I try to temper expectations of those saying that Vic and Bryant and Scotty would get us anywhere near .500 in conference their first season. Those predictions were insane.
I expect Vic to improve going forward, but he has A LOT of work to do. If you take away the hype and the expectations and what he "looks like" athletically, Vic has had a very poor freshman campaign. I would argue worse than the majority of players we've had over the last several years who had meaningful playing time their first year. My guess is that he will become as good as his work ethic and weight-room ethic allows. He certainly isn't limited athletically. But that don't feed the bulldog.
That's overly harsh. He had some good games in the nonconference schedule. He's a very good rebounder. He has hit some shots late in games. His defense is improving. He scored in double figures against Nebraska. Let's see how he finishes the year. It certainly a better overall season than Abrahamson. Let me put this in perspective, his PER is 11.16. A shade better than Cobb's and about the same as Sobo's. Highly touted recruit Jaren Sina, in his sophomore year, has a PER of 8.82, about half of McIntosh's. That, for those interested in those kind of things, is a very poor compaign. For those claiming that the departure of Abrahamson and the decommitment of Sina have hurt the program. I would have to beg to differ. And for those who don't believe in advance statistics, welcome to 2010. it's a crazy time.
You're not really putting that in perspective, because you're failing to mention that 11.16 is also bad.
I don't have access to ESPN Insider so I don't have Hollinger's own numbers, but sports-reference.com has his PER at 10.7 for the season, same as Cobb and slightly better than Sobo... and also worse than everyone else except Kreisberg and Vassar. Restrict that to conference play and only Vassar has a lower PER on the entire roster.
PER certainly has its flaws, but I think it's difficult to argue that Law is not having a bad year, especially in conference play. Yes, he has obvious potential, but it's still disappointing and bothersome from the guy who's supposed to be the superstar centerpiece of the program's resurrection.
This post was edited on 2/10 2:16 AM by Styre
I don't have access to ESPN Insider so I don't have Hollinger's own numbers, but sports-reference.com has his PER at 10.7 for the season, same as Cobb and slightly better than Sobo... and also worse than everyone else except Kreisberg and Vassar. Restrict that to conference play and only Vassar has a lower PER on the entire roster.
PER certainly has its flaws, but I think it's difficult to argue that Law is not having a bad year, especially in conference play. Yes, he has obvious potential, but it's still disappointing and bothersome from the guy who's supposed to be the superstar centerpiece of the program's resurrection.
This post was edited on 2/10 2:16 AM by Styre
I didn't say it was good. I thought by comparing him with an injured Cobb and Sobo I was making that fairly clear. ESPN has Paul White at 13.48 if that is helpful. That's about the same as Lindsey. Their freshmen. I just don't think he is having a "really poor" freshmen season. Skelly, by the way, has the second hightest PER on team (17 plus) behind Olah (22 plus).
What is more bothersome to me is that there are folks who thought that he was going to be the superstar centerpiece of the program's resurrection as a freshmen. That's just silly. He was even the leading scorer on his high school team. I am sure there are a bunch of more highly rated players than him that are not getting any playing time as freshmen. It wasn't like we thought we got a one and done player here. Collins made it clear from the beginning that he was going to be a stat stuffer type player in time. He needs to be more active on the defensive end and relax on the offensive end. this year and get stronger and more confident in the offseason. Let's see how he finishes the year.
What is more bothersome to me is that there are folks who thought that he was going to be the superstar centerpiece of the program's resurrection as a freshmen. That's just silly. He was even the leading scorer on his high school team. I am sure there are a bunch of more highly rated players than him that are not getting any playing time as freshmen. It wasn't like we thought we got a one and done player here. Collins made it clear from the beginning that he was going to be a stat stuffer type player in time. He needs to be more active on the defensive end and relax on the offensive end. this year and get stronger and more confident in the offseason. Let's see how he finishes the year.
He (Shurna) averaged 5.8 ppg in the BIG as a Frosh and needed to develop. That is about the same as VV produced his Frosh year (5.1), Law is averaging 6.3 ppg and 4.8 rpg. He came in undersized for the position he is playing and I would guess that there will be a pretty good improvement between his Frosh and Soph years as there was for the other two. He needs to add about 20 lbs to really play in the BIG. I am not sure why people expected him to be a 15 ppg guy out of the gate.
This post was edited on 2/10 11:36 AM by hdhntr1
This post was edited on 2/10 11:36 AM by hdhntr1
I don't know how to get conference stats. I am sure it would be lower. He has also benefitted from now playing much in conference games. I am guessing, though, that he will always be one of our higher PER guys.
Per SR, Skelly is third-worst on the team in conference PER at 7.7.
1. Olah 21.6
2. Taphorn 21.4
3. Cobb 16.1
4. McIntosh 15.9
5. Demps 13.5
6. Sobo 11.0
7. Kreisberg 9.0
8. Lindsey 8.7
9. Lumpkin 8.1
10. Skelly 7.7
11. Law 7.2
12. Vassar -13.1
1. Olah 21.6
2. Taphorn 21.4
3. Cobb 16.1
4. McIntosh 15.9
5. Demps 13.5
6. Sobo 11.0
7. Kreisberg 9.0
8. Lindsey 8.7
9. Lumpkin 8.1
10. Skelly 7.7
11. Law 7.2
12. Vassar -13.1
With your young core, you should be excited about how...
close the games have been. The future is Bright.
close the games have been. The future is Bright.
"I am not sure why people expected him to be a 15 ppg guy out of the gate."
There are only nine players among the Big Ten's 14 teams averaging 15 pts. or more a game.
Now, OSU freshman D'Angelo Russel is second in the league in scoring at a little over 19 pts per game. But he'll be in the NBA next year.
Four freshmen are in the top 30 in scoring, and B Mac is one of those four.
There are only nine players among the Big Ten's 14 teams averaging 15 pts. or more a game.
Now, OSU freshman D'Angelo Russel is second in the league in scoring at a little over 19 pts per game. But he'll be in the NBA next year.
Four freshmen are in the top 30 in scoring, and B Mac is one of those four.
C'mon hdhntr1 - you can do better than that.
Law is avg'ing 23.8 min/gm.
FG% - 35%
3P% - 24%
Shurna as a frosh avg'd 18.5 min/gm - so strictly comparing scoring avgs is a bit misleading.
But more importantly, Shurna was a lot more efficient offensively.
FG% - 47%
3P% - 35%
Yes, a year of seasoning helped Shurna but it's not like his shooting % went up during his breakout soph yr (actually dropped down a little to 46%).
Avg'ing 6.3 ppg is not that great (even for a frosh) when Law is basically playing starter minutes and considering the no. of shots he takes.
And Law really isn't undersized in terms of height for a SF.
Crawford came in at the same weight (185) and an inch shorter and yet shot 45% from the field.
In addition, Shurna was more underweight as PF at 195 lbs.
BC probably should have played Shurna a little more his frosh yr, but BC saw Shurna more as a sub for Coble rather than seeing the 2 being frontcourt mates (if Coble hadn't gotten hurt, probably wouldn't have seen Shurna avg 18.2 ppg in his soph season).
Shurna was just more polished offensively from the start (as was Crawford).
Now, that isn't to say that Law can't get there, but I wouldn't place a bet on Law turning into an 18 ppg scorer next season (more likely for his JR or SR seasons).
Right now, I'd say that there would be a greater chance of Lindsey being a bigger scorer next season.
FG%- 43%
3P% - 39%
There were those overly effusive of Law purely based on his top 100 ranking, but I (and a few others) were concerned that he didn't play as big of a role offensively on his HS team, as well as the scuttlebutt (heard more things about BMac and even Lindsey's improved play).
Also telling was when CC (after the early practice period) referred to Law more as a glue type player.
This post was edited on 2/10 4:07 PM by Katatonic
I would disagree on the argument that Shurna was viewed as a sub for Coble - after all, he started every game he played, always alongside Coble. He simply didn't earn the minutes - he was a limited contributor in two-thirds of his conference games. (The six game stretch I referred to in an earlier post was his only good stretch of the conference season, so I wasnt 'throwing it away' but rather putting the frequency of his quality games in context.)
I think the larger point I was trying to make initially is valid:
Shurna went from limited contributor to star-level contributor.
Maybe Law can do something similar - we need him to.
Those who remember projecting stardom based on an uneven frosh season are either kidding themselves, or Basketball Geniuses - Shurna scored 11 percent of his career points as a freshman. He looked like a future...sophomore.
(Edited for typos.)
This post was edited on 2/10 5:57 PM by NUCat320
I think the larger point I was trying to make initially is valid:
Shurna went from limited contributor to star-level contributor.
Maybe Law can do something similar - we need him to.
Those who remember projecting stardom based on an uneven frosh season are either kidding themselves, or Basketball Geniuses - Shurna scored 11 percent of his career points as a freshman. He looked like a future...sophomore.
(Edited for typos.)
This post was edited on 2/10 5:57 PM by NUCat320
Those who projected stardom for Shurna
Anybody with an ounce of a memory will tell you that Shurna was not THE freshman topic of discussion for improvement that year.
Sherman, can we go in the wayback machine and introduce the group to Kyle Rowley?
Let's hope the board gets it right about the excitement over Falzon because the scouting track record of this group leaves juuuuuust a little bit to be desired.
Anybody with an ounce of a memory will tell you that Shurna was not THE freshman topic of discussion for improvement that year.
Sherman, can we go in the wayback machine and introduce the group to Kyle Rowley?
Let's hope the board gets it right about the excitement over Falzon because the scouting track record of this group leaves juuuuuust a little bit to be desired.
First, you never saw me saying that I was expecting superstar performance as a FROSH. And Law was never the offensive focal point of his HS team like the others. His offensive opportunities generally came as a clean up the glass put back type player rather than one that the O ran through. Threes were probably a pretty limited part of his arsenal coming out of HS. His D and rebounding are there and I would just expect for his O to take a more time to develop as it does for most Forwards and other bigs. Crawford came in as a guard and guards often have more developed offensive games. I am just saying that his performance is similar to what other top NU forwards have done as Frosh. THe only one markedly more productive offensively was Coble.
Look I am not looking for Law to be an 18 ppg guy as a Soph. I think he will more of a 10-12ppg, 6 rpg guy with the potential for further development beyond. . But the difference is he will have plenty of backup that generally wasn't there on BC rosters. And nothing is wrong with having a glue guy or two. Doesn't mean he won't be productive
As far as his size, I mean weight. THe 185 he was listed at would look like a stretch. To hold position and not get knocked off, or having enough on his three to be well within his range rather than a stretch to get there, he needs another 15-20 lbs of muscle that hopefully time in the weight room after the season will go a long way to adding. As far as Shurna, he always played as more of a SF rather than a PF and he too needed the time in the weight room to improve his game.
D and will probably always be there. O will come. While Shuna excelled offensively, D was never his strength. D is usually more about athleticism and Law has it.
This post was edited on 2/10 6:07 PM by hdhntr1
Look I am not looking for Law to be an 18 ppg guy as a Soph. I think he will more of a 10-12ppg, 6 rpg guy with the potential for further development beyond. . But the difference is he will have plenty of backup that generally wasn't there on BC rosters. And nothing is wrong with having a glue guy or two. Doesn't mean he won't be productive
As far as his size, I mean weight. THe 185 he was listed at would look like a stretch. To hold position and not get knocked off, or having enough on his three to be well within his range rather than a stretch to get there, he needs another 15-20 lbs of muscle that hopefully time in the weight room after the season will go a long way to adding. As far as Shurna, he always played as more of a SF rather than a PF and he too needed the time in the weight room to improve his game.
D and will probably always be there. O will come. While Shuna excelled offensively, D was never his strength. D is usually more about athleticism and Law has it.
This post was edited on 2/10 6:07 PM by hdhntr1
I was at the game and Law was guarding people that outweighed him by 40 plus pounds. Some posters keep bringing up that Lumpkin is out of position because he's a couple of inches shorter than his opponent. Well, 40 pounds of muscle is pretty much the equivalent of a couple of inches. Law showed a little bit of everything tonight, plenty of bad and some good. He missed a few jumpers and made at least a couple of bad passes, but was more active defensively and had several tipped passes and a couple of steals. He also grabbed rebounds that no one else on the team can grab. It is very cool to see him in a crowd of very good athletes grabbing a rebound at its apex. He also made a spin move in garbage time that was kind of a wow play in person. A very quick and fluid move. I think he is more impressive in person than on t.v. because you can appreciate the altheticism a little bit more. And the reason I am optimistic is not just because he's very athletic. It's because he shows flashes of real offensive skill. He's just not very consistent or strong with the ball yet. But I think he can become a guy that can creat his own shot pretty effortlessly. He may miss a bunch on any given day, but I am hoping there will be some days where he can carry the team for stretches.
I thought Skelly played o.k. at times today. He was very active. He got pulled for getting beat on the boards but he is really good at tipping balls out to extend plays and he had a nice power move down low.
This was not Lindsey's night. His shot never fell and I didn't notice him otherwise. A low energy game for him.
BMac created a few opportunities for his teammates but was otherwise strangely silent on the offensive end.
Demps had a really nice first half.
I thought Skelly played o.k. at times today. He was very active. He got pulled for getting beat on the boards but he is really good at tipping balls out to extend plays and he had a nice power move down low.
This was not Lindsey's night. His shot never fell and I didn't notice him otherwise. A low energy game for him.
BMac created a few opportunities for his teammates but was otherwise strangely silent on the offensive end.
Demps had a really nice first half.
While I knew Shurna started some, didn't know he started every game he played in as a frosh (interesting).
But don't think Shurna always played alongside Coble.
Anyhow, the point is Shurna didn't have to play as many mins and when he was in, he was much more efficient on O (Kobe was putting up 22 pts for the Lakers before his season ended, but at the same time, he was doing so while throwing up 20 shots a gm).
Lumpkin is undersized by both height and weight at the 4 (basically is a blown up wing playing the PF position).
Yes - added weight and strength helps, but it's not like there haven't been skinny frosh frontcourt players who have been able to shoot better.
Crawford was 185lbs and did well enough as a frosh to be named co-B1G Frosh of the Year.
Shurna was at 195lbs as a frosh and yet, the weight deficiency didn't impact his shooting %.
Lindsey at 175lbs was playing better than Law around the basket.
Kevin Durant was so weak that at the NBA combine he couldn't even do one rep on the bench press.
Did Law gain 10-15lbs over the past week?
B/c he sure is playing like it
Look, I think we have established that Law is not a pure shooter or scorer like those guys. He is already a better rebounder than any of those players. When he gains strength and weight, he will be able to get to the hoop and finish. Go play hoops with someone that has 40 pounds on you and let me know how that works out for you. I hope you are done with the silly comparisons to prior "athletic" players at NU. He's at a different level.
I don't think anyone is disputing that Law should be better w/ an added 10-15 lbs on him, but that evidently isn't the factor in the pretty drastic improvement we have seen from Law on the offensive side the past 2 games; not to mention that extra weight/strength would also help w/ regards to rebounds and despite his present scrawniness, Law has been pretty good in that dept.
Like I stated prior, Lindsey had been doing a better job around the basket than Law and he is shorter and lighter (and not like there haven't been frosh PGs who have lit it up going to basket, including BMac).
Like I stated prior, Lindsey had been doing a better job around the basket than Law and he is shorter and lighter (and not like there haven't been frosh PGs who have lit it up going to basket, including BMac).
Everyone's game is different. And Lindsey and McIntosh are not being asked to bang with 230 pound power forwards.
And he will be better with additional weight and strength. Not should. And he's a very good rebounder already. Let's stop underselling his skills and athleticism. Like I said, the comparisons to Capocci and Hearn have always been laughable.
And he will be better with additional weight and strength. Not should. And he's a very good rebounder already. Let's stop underselling his skills and athleticism. Like I said, the comparisons to Capocci and Hearn have always been laughable.
It's not like Lindsey and BMac at times aren't facing bigs defending the paint when they drive to the basket.
And if we are just comparing positions - Law is more likely to be facing 210 lb SFs.
And actually doing quite the opposite w/ regard to his athleticism. W/ his athleticism (which is far superior to BMac's), Law should be able to take it to the basket more frequently than he does.
And nothing has changed w/ regard to Law's weight, so why the recent marked improvement in scoring in B1G play?
Could it be that he is just shooting it better since, as he stated himself, he started to take things like practicing his shots prior to the game more seriously?
And if we are just comparing positions - Law is more likely to be facing 210 lb SFs.
And actually doing quite the opposite w/ regard to his athleticism. W/ his athleticism (which is far superior to BMac's), Law should be able to take it to the basket more frequently than he does.
And nothing has changed w/ regard to Law's weight, so why the recent marked improvement in scoring in B1G play?
Could it be that he is just shooting it better since, as he stated himself, he started to take things like practicing his shots prior to the game more seriously?
The marked improvement is that Vic Law has met with coaches and reviewed his shot on tape (he was interviewed and said this) and he was not going up strong on his jump strong meaning he was shooting fall away jumpers or jumper where his shoulders were not squared up to the basket. He still has had issues on dribble penetration getting stripped on the way to the rim even on his career day on Saturday v. PSU. These are correctable errors in fundamentals, but his jumping ability and rebounding ability are excellent and unlike what we have seen at NU at the forward position. I still view Crawford as a SG even though he was an excellent rebounder. Credit Law's hard work, ability to adapt and good coaching. Now it will be interesting to see his progress versus a 6'7" pogo stick in Troy Williams (Top 50-60 prospect out of h.s.) who is Indiana's chief frontcourt threat. Troy Williams dunked at least 4-5 times in a blowout at Welsh Ryan last year. That will be a major item on the scouting report along with trying to containing two former McDonald's All-American's in Yogi Ferrell and James Blackmon. The 2-3 zone better extend to out to the three point line or else those two players and Johnson and IU will have a field day with 10-20 three pointers.
Those guys are guards and used to having the ball in there hands. Law is a forward and as such much of his success is on the ability of others to put the ball in his hands in appropriate position. He was never a primary offensive weapon in HS and he has potential but definitely needed work in that area. Mechanics and just taking a lot of shots in practice will improve his % Also having additional threats on the floor will give him more open shots and spacing for drives. Why do feel that he should have come as a finished product in order to be deemed as a success?
One of the other things that could have made a difference in the last couple games is that we went to a zone D. That would likely take less energy on D leaving more for the O side of his game.
One of the other things that could have made a difference in the last couple games is that we went to a zone D. That would likely take less energy on D leaving more for the O side of his game.
Whenever a coaching change takes place in college year 3 is the critical year. The coaching staff has 2 years of recruits on campus and the third class signed in the fall. You cannot use the excuses anymore of the last staff's recruits, the last staffs system of play habits, etc. We have seen some progress in CC's first two years in the infrastructure of the program but next year they need to start showing results on the court. whatever happens in the first two years is purely coaching most of the other staffs guys. The third year is really the time that it is fair to judge how the program is progressing.
What's your deal? I don't even understand what your point is. Was there something in my initial post that was not correct? I was posting after the Michigan State game, when Law was playing against some huge guys. I never said that being skinny was the reason he shot poorly from the outside. I do think it's a big reason that he has had trouble getting to the basket and I think it affects his confidence. He was used to being one of the tallest guys on the court. He's just another 6'7" player in college. BMac is an outstanding ballhandler, is very confident, and has tremendous touch around the basket. If Law had those skills and mindset already, he would probably be on his way to the NBA.
For anyone who has any ability to evaluate basketball players, it is very clear that Law has elite athleticism and a skill set that can be developed. He appears to work hard and have a good attitude. The sky is the limit. So why are people on this board taking shots at a kid because he isn't fully developed his freshmen year? You twist and turn and twist again to defend Carmody, who had 13 years to prove himself. It's comical. It really is. How about giving an 18-year old kid some time to develop? Oh, and is Lumpkin not taking his shooting seriously lately? Was Sobo screwing around in warmups last year? Was Taphorn texting his girlfriend instead of working on his shot last year? I can promise you that Law is going to have some more 1 for 7 games, even with this more "serious" approach. By the way, I wish Carmody had taken recruiting more seriously. I am thankful he eventually hired some assistant coaches that did.
For anyone who has any ability to evaluate basketball players, it is very clear that Law has elite athleticism and a skill set that can be developed. He appears to work hard and have a good attitude. The sky is the limit. So why are people on this board taking shots at a kid because he isn't fully developed his freshmen year? You twist and turn and twist again to defend Carmody, who had 13 years to prove himself. It's comical. It really is. How about giving an 18-year old kid some time to develop? Oh, and is Lumpkin not taking his shooting seriously lately? Was Sobo screwing around in warmups last year? Was Taphorn texting his girlfriend instead of working on his shot last year? I can promise you that Law is going to have some more 1 for 7 games, even with this more "serious" approach. By the way, I wish Carmody had taken recruiting more seriously. I am thankful he eventually hired some assistant coaches that did.
And I believe the the critical years is the 4th year. In the third year, new coaches first year recruits are only Sophs and second year recruits are Frosh. That is asking a lot out of young guys, especially if there was not much talent left for the transition. The third years, I would like to see the start of progress, sure but I really expect to see something in the 4th year when coach has the first of his recruits as upperclassmen and enough depth with experience to really make a push.
Geeze - has Law only played against MSU?
And MSU always seems to have wide bodies - another skinny F (190 lbs) by the name of Kevin Coble went 5-9 for 15 pts and 6 rbds against MSU in his frosh yr.
And what are you talking about?
Who here has disputed Law;'s athleticism or potential?
And esp, this - what does BC have anything to do w/ this? (Now you are really grasping at straws and show your true colors).
How about giving an 18-year old kid some time to develop?
Who isn't?
Same goes for Lindsey, Skelly and Vassar. (At the same time, there were those who proclaimed Law the best player on the team purely based on his ESPN/star ranking and nothing more.)
And the whole discussion was about Law's inefficient scoring - in stark contrast to the past couple of games and not all the extraneous points that you have brought up.
Some have pegged it his thin build, but as I have stated, that doesn't explain the past couple of games (since it isn't he all of a sudden gained 15 lbs of muscle) and it's not like Law has played MSU in every game.
Yes - I'm well aware of and agree on all of that.
I was one of those who tried to put some reign on some of the unreasonable expectations on Law due to the scuttlebutt about his game and even CC making certain remarks after the early practice session, and that BMac seemed to be the most polished player of the bunch, even if he isn't as athletically talented.
Yes, Law should improve as he works on his game and adding weight should help as well, but simply chalking up his struggles to this point on his weight was too simple/lazy of an argument (Coble's best FG% was during his 1st season when he had the least help offensively and was a gangly 190 lb frosh).
This post was edited on 2/24 3:07 AM by Katatonic
While I agree with you on year 4 my point is the 3rd year is critical to show progress because thats how these guys are judged. do they have better recruits coming in, is the team showing progress on the floor, etc. It is also the year coaches go in to try to negotiate that extension (most get 4 or 5 year deals). I have heard many a coach say you better be showing progress in year 3 or you may not get that second contract
First, I was never one to say that he would be great out of the gate but I do feel his upside is high. But even in evaluation for this year, you hve to take in not just the O but also the D. While he has potential to be very solid offensively, his O game needs development. He came from a situation where he was at best a 3rd or 4th option offensively (more likely an afterthought). The 3 pt shot is a relatively recent part of his game. It was his D and rebounding that showed his athleticism and made him a 4 star. By contrast, Coble came in with a developed offensive game as he was option #1 on his HS team but his D never got to where Law's is as a Frosh.
I would expect BMac to come in more polished offensively (not on D) . He was used to handling the ball and coordinating an offense. In addition, isn't he a couple years older? So for a Frosh, he is more developed physically.
I would expect BMac to come in more polished offensively (not on D) . He was used to handling the ball and coordinating an offense. In addition, isn't he a couple years older? So for a Frosh, he is more developed physically.
Who isn't giving him time to develop? Those folks criticizing his inefficient scoring and failure to live up to his ESPN star rating. Those folks comparing him to other players that developed more quickly. Folks like you, who felt compelled to respond to this post 10 days later:
"I was at the game and Law was guarding people that outweighed him by 40 plus
pounds. Some posters keep bringing up that Lumpkin is out of position because
he's a couple of inches shorter than his opponent. Well, 40 pounds of muscle is
pretty much the equivalent of a couple of inches. Law showed a little bit of
everything tonight, plenty of bad and some good. He missed a few jumpers and
made at least a couple of bad passes, but was more active defensively and had
several tipped passes and a couple of steals. He also grabbed rebounds that no
one else on the team can grab. It is very cool to see him in a crowd of very
good athletes grabbing a rebound at its apex. He also made a spin move in
garbage time that was kind of a wow play in person. A very quick and fluid
move. I think he is more impressive in person than on t.v. because you can
appreciate the athleticism a little bit more. And the reason I am optimistic is
not just because he's very athletic. It's because he shows flashes of real
offensive skill. He's just not very consistent or strong with the ball yet.
But I think he can become a guy that can create his own shot pretty
effortlessly. He may miss a bunch on any given day, but I am hoping there will
be some days where he can carry the team for stretches."
I don't have "true colors" on Carmody. I thought he should have gotten another year at the time, although I now couldn't be more pleased with the decision. I think Demps and Taphorn will probably get the majority of the playing time over Ash and Falzon next year. Everything you post is through a Carmody filter. You apparently were offended that I brought up Lumpkin (a Carmody recruit). Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't you defended Lumpkin's lack of production because he's a couple inches shorter than other 4's? Do you want me to go through a list of 6'6" power forwards who have been more effective scorers? Do you want to discuss if Lumpkin would really be more effective as a 3? I don't see the point in bashing Lumpkin to try to prove you are wrong.
Reading my post again, it look pretty fricken' on point given the way Law has played the past few games. So why the hell are you arguing with me about it?
"I was at the game and Law was guarding people that outweighed him by 40 plus
pounds. Some posters keep bringing up that Lumpkin is out of position because
he's a couple of inches shorter than his opponent. Well, 40 pounds of muscle is
pretty much the equivalent of a couple of inches. Law showed a little bit of
everything tonight, plenty of bad and some good. He missed a few jumpers and
made at least a couple of bad passes, but was more active defensively and had
several tipped passes and a couple of steals. He also grabbed rebounds that no
one else on the team can grab. It is very cool to see him in a crowd of very
good athletes grabbing a rebound at its apex. He also made a spin move in
garbage time that was kind of a wow play in person. A very quick and fluid
move. I think he is more impressive in person than on t.v. because you can
appreciate the athleticism a little bit more. And the reason I am optimistic is
not just because he's very athletic. It's because he shows flashes of real
offensive skill. He's just not very consistent or strong with the ball yet.
But I think he can become a guy that can create his own shot pretty
effortlessly. He may miss a bunch on any given day, but I am hoping there will
be some days where he can carry the team for stretches."
I don't have "true colors" on Carmody. I thought he should have gotten another year at the time, although I now couldn't be more pleased with the decision. I think Demps and Taphorn will probably get the majority of the playing time over Ash and Falzon next year. Everything you post is through a Carmody filter. You apparently were offended that I brought up Lumpkin (a Carmody recruit). Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't you defended Lumpkin's lack of production because he's a couple inches shorter than other 4's? Do you want me to go through a list of 6'6" power forwards who have been more effective scorers? Do you want to discuss if Lumpkin would really be more effective as a 3? I don't see the point in bashing Lumpkin to try to prove you are wrong.
Reading my post again, it look pretty fricken' on point given the way Law has played the past few games. So why the hell are you arguing with me about it?
Um, I have never once stated that Law wasn't going to develop (and heck, I had him slated as the starter at the 3-spot, ahead of upperclassmen like Lumpkin and Tap - so your insinuations about how I regard Law is so off-base, it's laughable).
And the issue here was whether it was his slight build that was responsible for his low shooting % (don't see how pointing out his shooting inefficiency is taking shots at the kid - since both CC and even Law acknowledge it).
Well, evidently, based on his past few games, it's not his build (unless Law managed to gain 15 lbs w/o us knowing it); and yes, Law should be better next season as he gains strength/mass, but the point is that his build wasn't what was preventing him from being more efficient in his shooting.
As stated by Law himself, he fixed a flaw in his form and began to take things like the pre-game warm-ups more seriously (Law has stated that he didn't always take those things seriously - thinking that his talent would prevail, but now realizes that he was to work his butt off on everything at this level).
So - could that possibly be the diff. for what we are seeing in Law's shooting %? Along w/ the switch to the 2-3 zone which seems to have made both Law and Demps more comfortable and not b/c he is so underweight compared to the competition.
And the issue here was whether it was his slight build that was responsible for his low shooting % (don't see how pointing out his shooting inefficiency is taking shots at the kid - since both CC and even Law acknowledge it).
Well, evidently, based on his past few games, it's not his build (unless Law managed to gain 15 lbs w/o us knowing it); and yes, Law should be better next season as he gains strength/mass, but the point is that his build wasn't what was preventing him from being more efficient in his shooting.
As stated by Law himself, he fixed a flaw in his form and began to take things like the pre-game warm-ups more seriously (Law has stated that he didn't always take those things seriously - thinking that his talent would prevail, but now realizes that he was to work his butt off on everything at this level).
So - could that possibly be the diff. for what we are seeing in Law's shooting %? Along w/ the switch to the 2-3 zone which seems to have made both Law and Demps more comfortable and not b/c he is so underweight compared to the competition.
You won't go away. Last post on this topic. Please read carefully.
1. I didn't say you said he wouldn't develop. I said you weren't giving him time to develop by being critical of his play 20 games into his career, which I think is ridiculous unless the player is not giving a good effort. You have previously posted that you thought he should develop, although you cautioned that other good athletes at NU did not develop into good players. Either you were being disingenuous or you really thought that his athleticism is comparable to Mike Cappoci. If you are unable to recognize that he is the type of athlete we have once every 15 or 20 years, please go to a game in person.
2. For the last time, I never said his slight build was the reason for his poor outside shooting. Read my post again, carefully. I do think that banging with much bigger, stronger players will affect your confidence, tires you out, and discourages drives to the basket. He consistently gets stripped going to the hoop because he needs to get stronger.
3. Collins expressed my view in one of the interviews after the Indiana game. He was just shaking his head at those folks who were critical of Law and questioning his future, and I include you in those folks. He stated that Law will be an outstanding player. He couldn't believe that people were questioning it. And yet many of the posts on this thread (not just yours) are either critical of Law or questioning his skills. You confused shooting percentage with offensive skills. He has plenty of skill. He may never be a great shooter but he will be able to score in bunches. Here is your earlier post: "Well, Law has certain skills, but I wouldn't say that he has skills when it comes to the offensive side of the ball when his shooting % is just plain awful for a F w/ his long range % even worse."
This post was edited on 2/28 3:19 PM by clarificationcat
1. I didn't say you said he wouldn't develop. I said you weren't giving him time to develop by being critical of his play 20 games into his career, which I think is ridiculous unless the player is not giving a good effort. You have previously posted that you thought he should develop, although you cautioned that other good athletes at NU did not develop into good players. Either you were being disingenuous or you really thought that his athleticism is comparable to Mike Cappoci. If you are unable to recognize that he is the type of athlete we have once every 15 or 20 years, please go to a game in person.
2. For the last time, I never said his slight build was the reason for his poor outside shooting. Read my post again, carefully. I do think that banging with much bigger, stronger players will affect your confidence, tires you out, and discourages drives to the basket. He consistently gets stripped going to the hoop because he needs to get stronger.
3. Collins expressed my view in one of the interviews after the Indiana game. He was just shaking his head at those folks who were critical of Law and questioning his future, and I include you in those folks. He stated that Law will be an outstanding player. He couldn't believe that people were questioning it. And yet many of the posts on this thread (not just yours) are either critical of Law or questioning his skills. You confused shooting percentage with offensive skills. He has plenty of skill. He may never be a great shooter but he will be able to score in bunches. Here is your earlier post: "Well, Law has certain skills, but I wouldn't say that he has skills when it comes to the offensive side of the ball when his shooting % is just plain awful for a F w/ his long range % even worse."
This post was edited on 2/28 3:19 PM by clarificationcat
Re: To answer my own question.....
Yeah, it's a young team, so we kinda needed the whole season to play out to see if we had gone forward or backward this year.
I'm thinking we've done just fine.
Next year I think it's reasonable to make an NIT appearance. And if you're an NIT at-large then you're on the NCAA bubble.
Yeah, it's a young team, so we kinda needed the whole season to play out to see if we had gone forward or backward this year.
I'm thinking we've done just fine.
Next year I think it's reasonable to make an NIT appearance. And if you're an NIT at-large then you're on the NCAA bubble.
You need to follow your own advice.
I merely pointed out that Law's shooting % was pretty low (even for a frosh - was at the time, a good bit lower than that for BMac, Lindsey, etc.), esp. from 3 pt range.
You then brought up the size factor due to game against MSU as to explain his shooting inefficiency - which I then pointed out that it's not like Law played against MSU every game and that there have been skinny frosh who had shot well against physical MSU teams.
Furthermore, rbdng and D hasn't been the issue for Law and if his poor shooting earlier was such a by-product of his lack of bulk, one would think that Law would have struggled when it came to fighting for rebounds and playing D against bigger forwards as well.
But the things is - what I was pointing out was that Law was struggling w/ his shooting - and most of that was comprised of open look jump shots (so his lack of physical bulk had nothing to do w/ it).
As I had stated earlier, Law's FG% was 35% and from 3P range 24%.
Since then, he has managed to raise both to 39% and 34%, respectively, w/ the greatest improvement being seen in his 3pt efficiency.
Do you think that has something to do w/ his lack of bulk or even developing (players generally don't see a drastic improvement on their shooting in such a short time frame and usually need an offseason of work) - or him correcting a kink in his shooting form and taking his pre-game warm-ups/shooting practice more seriously?
Hence, Law's earlier shooting struggles not having to do w/ his weight (lack thereof) and having to do w/ something else.
Similar threads
