Tmoney12
Well-Known Member
Why are you responding for herby?
Shimonek leads team to state title game.
- Thread starter thejumper5
- Start date
Why are you responding for herby?
Well Hawkeye11en1 accused us of being cousins. I told him I didn't know because our family tree was messed up so bad we couldn't tell.
Section136
Well-Known Member
Y can't u?
tm3308
Well-Known Member
franstheman
Well-Known Member
Good for you! It's the 21st century, you don't have to be ashamed anymore!
Great post, that was a hilarious joke. not.
On another note, not that I wish to derail this ******* match, how is his named pronounced?
GhostofBTT
Banned
Well, this just pokes more holes in your prognostications. You predicted Gesell would put up numbers similar to Burke. Not only has he not done that, but he actually got beat out of his own position. Now if I remember correctly, you spent all summer saying White would be playing three as well. It was White's inability to play the 3 which forced Clemmons on the court in the first place.
Burke was "15th" in his position and Gesell was "13th" therefore Clemmons should have been "1st", scouting failed and everyone should be ashamed of themselves. Those scouts owe everyone their money back if they work for a pay site.
Hawkeye11en1
Well-Known Member
You followed right along in doing so.
Red, doesn't every coach recruit top level talent to be a starter? It isn't sad that people don't follow ever word that Fran says like you. That doesn't mean they don't follow recruiting, I mean are you serious?
So you are saying that Fran's word during recruiting is what told you that Gesell was the starter, therefore you felt it was ok to compare Trey Burke a proven PG in the B1G to a kid who hadn't played division 1 basketball yet?
Ok, keep back peddling. The fact is either you only listen to the coaches and you don't understand "coach speak" or you can't form an opinion on your own because when it is proved wrong you blame someone one else.
to date Fran has been pretty honest in what he said, Fran very rarely goes with this "coach speak" as you call it,
and I used burke mere ly as a EXAMPLE OF HOW GESELL "COULD DO", very big difference between "DOING" and "COULD" do.
so who better to compare, and its not like Burke was the #1 pg and 5* coming out of HS
and I used burke mere ly as a EXAMPLE OF HOW GESELL "COULD DO", very big difference between "DOING" and "COULD" do.
so who better to compare, and its not like Burke was the #1 pg and 5* coming out of HS
Red, you took an extreme case and applied to to Gesell in the hopes that he would play that well. It is understandable why YOU would do that because of your optimism but I don't think you understand the odds were stacked up against Gesell could do that. You have to understand that simpling comparing numbers doesn't show anything but potential but you have to look at the odds against that potential of actually happening.
Section136
Well-Known Member
I am done with this thread, going into this season Gesell was to be the starting PG end of arguement..
to show a "POSSIBLE" LEVEL of success, I chose a player of similar rankings in Burke as the 15th best PG vs Gesell the 13th best PG just "ONE" year apart, and also chose Burke as he played against the same level of competition, the BT,
coming out of HS Burke was not a 5* McDonald AA.
now that Gesell is no longer the starting PG and is the starting SG, the comparisions stop.
who better to use to show the
"POTENTIAL" SUCCESS. other than Burke
to show a "POSSIBLE" LEVEL of success, I chose a player of similar rankings in Burke as the 15th best PG vs Gesell the 13th best PG just "ONE" year apart, and also chose Burke as he played against the same level of competition, the BT,
coming out of HS Burke was not a 5* McDonald AA.
now that Gesell is no longer the starting PG and is the starting SG, the comparisions stop.
who better to use to show the
"POTENTIAL" SUCCESS. other than Burke
Red, I think if you would have just picked a player who didn't have as such a high level of success as a TR FR it might have made more sense to people.
I know you wanted to show the possible level of success but like I said the odds of that happening are extreme. It starts to appear to people that you think he WILL have that kind of success.
I know isn't what you expected him to do but that is how it came off.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Here is the frustrating thing with you Herby. You used Burke as an example of what Gesell WOULD DO. You didn't say he "could produce as Burke". Instead you said there is no reason Gesell can't produce as Burke did, because he is rated roughly the same as Burke was. That is why posters jumped all over you. Of course we all understand that there was a possibility that Gesell was the second coming, and could potentially be even better than Burke......yet we all understood that isn't the norm, and that producing as Burke did in his FR year isn't the norm either (even for kids ranked as they were). All we ever tried to explain to you is that the norm for FR coming in is much, much less than the level Burke produced, and to not put soooooo much expectations on these kids as FR. You did the same to Gabe as a FR saying there is no reason he can't get 8 pts. and 8 Rbs a game.
People try to talk you off the cliff with the idiotic things you say, but instead of re-evaluating, you just freaking double down on your position. Just as you are now doing with Gabe, because of your idiotic prediction last year. You will do the same thing with Gesell through his career now.....crowing how you were right if he steps up and is a 15 pt. scoring next year, like you knew something the rest of us didn't.......
