I’ve never seen a big man who is so poor finishing at the rim. Costs us no telling how many points a game.
Last edited:
Tolu Smith is soft as baby ****
- Thread starter FlotownDawg
- Start date
still-can't-hit-a-lay-up
endofgameplay = Molinar drives and misses while no one sets up for a pass to shoot
endofgameplay = Molinar drives and misses while no one sets up for a pass to shoot
At OM
At Florida
At Kentucky
At texas tech
At bama
At ark
At lsu
At Mizzou
That's a pretty tough road schedule
What was strange is the winning basketball was a luckbox shot that went in by Shak Moore. Of course he missed the and-1 FT and I thought Missouri would come down and beat us with a trey.
Haven't really had a strong big man that could finish at the rim since Charles Rhodes. Players these days are soft.
Current Howland is like Moorhead ... produces soft teams. Our teams under Howland are nothing like his Pitt teams. Howland Pitt teams played tough especially in the paint.
Tolu last year.
Reggie Perry.
Aric Holman.
Gavin Ware.
Moultrie Knee.
Jarvis Varnado.
Look up Rhodes' 2pt fg% and compare.
Reggie Perry was literally SEC player of the year and you could argue he is one of the 10 greatest (maybe higher) players in school history... Oh and he was a big man
MSU fans' lack of basketball knowledge is truly pathetic, no wonder the HUMP is empty all the time.
It is continually shocking to see. It shouldnt be shocking at this point because I know what I should expect. Apparently I continue to have hopes that more MSU sportsball fans will learn about basketball and I continually disappoint myself with those hopes.
What does fg% have to do with anything? If Rhodes got the ball under the rim, he was going to slam it down someone's throat. We need a big man with that kind of attitude. Some of those guys may have been better players, but they didn't have his level of aggression.
Right now we'll get a head fake and a weak put back off the backboard, maybe get fouled and get to the line. Rhodes didn't have time for head fakes.
'finish at the rim' doesnt just mean dunking. It really means anything within a few feet of the hoop. Dunk it, off the glass, reverse, whatever.
2pt FG% is important here because no readily available advanced stats exist to show how effective college players are on offense within the restricted area. So 2pt FG% is the next best thing since it eliminates 3pt shooting(obviously not an 'at the rim' shot) and eliminates FT shooting too.
Someone like Brooks, who is a stud at midrange shooting, will have a 2pt FG% that is lower because the further away you shoot the worse your % typically is.
Rhodes was not an outside shooter. He attempted 30 3pt shots over 4 seasons and he rarely took 17' jump shots. So his 2pt FG% was largely in close to the hoop. He made 56.9% of his 2pt FG attempts. If that is what all other bigs should be compared to, then my list is valid as they were just as effective as Rhodes in their 2pt FG%.
Whats it matter if a big aggressively makes 56.9% of their 2pt shots or casually makes 56.9% of their 2pt shots? Gavin Ware didnt take outside shots...if he was as effective as Rhodes(and he was) at 2pt FG attempts, then great- lets say so.
Curious- how would you like to determine this discussion? If not by using a mix of available stats and observed game style, how should it be determined?
Did Reggie Perry, aric Holman and Jarvis finish at the rim well? No.
They were good players for different reason but finishing at the rim wasn’t even close to a reason they were good. If Perry could finish at the rim, he’d be on ESPN a lot.
Tolu last year? No idea bc i didn’t watch much.
Gavin? Sure for the teams he was on.
Mouktrie? Absolutely.
They were good players for different reason but finishing at the rim wasn’t even close to a reason they were good. If Perry could finish at the rim, he’d be on ESPN a lot.
Tolu last year? No idea bc i didn’t watch much.
Gavin? Sure for the teams he was on.
Mouktrie? Absolutely.
Rhodes made 56.9% of his 2pt FG attempts. And it was said he is remembered for finishing well at the rim.
Jarvis took a whopping 4 3pt shots in his career, so he clearly was not an outside shooter. Him shooting 59.5% from the line confirms it. So when he has a career 2pt FG% of 59.1, you know he was taking most of those at/near the rim. He had a HIGHER 2pt FG% than Rhodes and Jarvis was not a midrange shooter so thats all close to the basket. That is mostly finishing at the rim.
In his JR season, Holman was just crazy effective. He shot 44% from deep and 63.7% from inside the arc. He had some good midrange game though and took a decent % of 2pt shots from beyond the restricted arc. Even still, you dont make 63.7% of your 2pt shots without being able to finish at the rim.
I am not getting into Reggie Perry. If you dont think he was effective in the post, I got nothing that would change your mind. Maybe rewatch some of his play?
Jarvis scored 1403 pts in 3594 minutes
Charles rhoades scored 1451 points in 2751 mins
Charles Rhodes was 100 times the “scorer at the rim” that Jarvis Varnado was.
Love varnado. Better at Rhodes in a lot of things.
Scoring in the paint? Not even close.
Charles rhoades scored 1451 points in 2751 mins
Charles Rhodes was 100 times the “scorer at the rim” that Jarvis Varnado was.
Love varnado. Better at Rhodes in a lot of things.
Scoring in the paint? Not even close.
Jarvis was not an offensive specialist. He was very good at defense.
Holman? Get real if there was defense in the paint he would try for the foul or go to the three line
Ware he was decent but he still wasn't a strong player at the rim.
Moultrie didn't play enough to make a difference. When he did play he was injured.
Perry was super talented but you give him the ball in the paint with defenders he didn't finish a lot. He would try a mid range shot before going through traffic and finishing strong.
Rhodes had a knack for getting the ball in the paint being defend and slam it in their face or getting offensive rebounds and putting it right back up.
Many of those other guys didn't understand the concept of offensive rebounds.
Jarvis was more dominant on defense. But he was still solid around the basket and numbers show that.
Moultrie was played for a whole season, of course he was here long enough. That's just an absurd dismissive attempt.
Holman was a 17 ton better than decent from deep and he absolutely scored down low too. My gosh, you can't even remember his shooting from deep?
Moultrie was played for a whole season, of course he was here long enough. That's just an absurd dismissive attempt.
Holman was a 17 ton better than decent from deep and he absolutely scored down low too. My gosh, you can't even remember his shooting from deep?
Hold up, do you really think that Jarvis had to score as much as or more points as Rhodes in order to be seen as having the ability to finish around the rim?
That is what it appears you think, based on your post. But that would be a really basic way of assessing ability, so I hope you aren't doing that.
Jarvis wasn't used on offense as heavily as Rhodes was.
Just because a player isn't used as frequently doesn't mean they aren't as effective as another player in a specific part of the game.
But furthermore, the argument isn't whether Jarvis was as good as Rhodes at finishing at the rim. The claim is that we haven't had a strong big man who could finish at the rim since Rhodes played. Based on stats and actual game play, that claim is pretty weak. Jarvis could finish at the rim very well. Same with the others.
Latest posts
-
MORAL VICTORY UNIVERSITY!!!
- Latest: Howiefeltersnstch
-
Dawgs squared game thread- Latest: El Perro Grande
-
-
-
Get unlimited access today.