Author Topic: we may be a bit more talented than we thought (Read 1250 times)

fatty fat fat · February 07, 2009, 06:27:38 PM

den-clem is pretty special. always nice to have a guard that can handle the ball like him, and can create shots. he's very augustin-lite, and he limits the major limitations this team has.

thoughts? thanks. facebook.

nicname · February 07, 2009, 06:29:16 PM

He was a top 10 PG out of HS.

wildcat79 · February 07, 2009, 06:34:52 PM

Limits the major limitations this team has! A national championship team has limitations. They become national champions because they learn to cover them up.

K-States players are starting to mature. I really like what Frank has done here. I like the players as well. We have several players that can score when they have to. That imho is a limitation most team have. They look to me to be becoming a handful for all. I haven't seen this since the Hartman, Kruger days

MOKSUAZ · February 07, 2009, 06:35:46 PM

Quote from: nicname on February 07, 2009, 06:29:16 PM

He was a top 25 PG out of HS.

fyp, per rivals

chum1 · February 07, 2009, 06:43:19 PM

Yeah, quite a few were claiming that this team isn't talented not long ago. I'm not saying they are talented (or that they aren't), but, based on the reasoning, those people are now either changing their view or contradicting themselves.

Bullfn33 · February 07, 2009, 06:47:36 PM

I said last week that this team has some talent but it is very raw. More and more experience will continue to bring it out but a lot of what I think you see these last couple weeks is a wave of confidence.

sys · February 07, 2009, 06:55:28 PM

2 top 150s. neither a top 50. no, the team is not talented, don't be ridiculous.

fatty fat fat · February 07, 2009, 06:56:00 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 06:55:28 PM

2 top 150s. neither a top 50. no, the team is not talented, don't be ridiculous.

i'm saying we are talented at a position that means a lot.

nicname · February 07, 2009, 06:57:06 PM

Quote from: MOKSUAZ on February 07, 2009, 06:35:46 PM

Quote from: nicname on February 07, 2009, 06:29:16 PM
He was a top 25 PG out of HS.

fyp, per rivals

I was using scout.com

doesn't really matter.

chum1 · February 07, 2009, 06:59:33 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 06:55:28 PM

2 top 150s. neither a top 50. no, the team is not talented, don't be ridiculous.

That won't help. FFF retroactively evaluates recruits.

fatty fat fat · February 07, 2009, 07:06:30 PM

Quote from: chum1 on February 07, 2009, 06:59:33 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 06:55:28 PM
2 top 150s. neither a top 50. no, the team is not talented, don't be ridiculous.

That won't help. FFF retroactively evaluates recruits.

yup. what's wrong w/that? noone knows exactly how good a kid is out of high school, we learn years later.

catdude33 · February 07, 2009, 07:11:15 PM

Quote from: chum1 on February 07, 2009, 06:59:33 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 06:55:28 PM
2 top 150s. neither a top 50. no, the team is not talented, don't be ridiculous.

That won't help. FFF retroactively evaluates recruits.

Our guards have some talent. A good deal of talent imo.

michigancat · February 07, 2009, 08:52:06 PM

team still has crap talent. It's just been playing a lot better lately. We'll lose at home to Tech and/or a Nortard. Watch.

cireksu · February 07, 2009, 08:54:42 PM

at least we're knocking down open 3's fairly regularly this year.

steve dave · February 07, 2009, 08:55:16 PM

I think the Frank coached'em up discussion can now move forward.

Skycat · February 07, 2009, 09:07:11 PM

Quote from: michigancat on February 07, 2009, 08:52:06 PM

team still has crap talent. It's just been playing a lot better lately. We'll lose at home to Tech and/or a Nortard. Watch.

Guaranteed?

CatsNChiefs · February 07, 2009, 09:18:41 PM

Quote from: michigancat on February 07, 2009, 08:52:06 PM

team still has crap talent. It's just been playing a lot better lately. We'll lose at home to Tech and/or a Nortard. Watch.

Or else what?

feralchat · February 07, 2009, 09:39:29 PM

What's talent? Athleticism? Basketball skills?
We have two wonderfully athletes -- Samuels and Sutton -- who aren't particularly offensively gifted. Does that mean they're not talented?
Overall, we're not an especially offensively talented team, but we have three good guards who can shoot (if streaky).
We are a talented defensive and rebounding team. Effort, or effort and athleticism? I think it's the latter.

ksu_FAN · February 07, 2009, 10:18:57 PM

Its hard to say. What we have on paper is still limited. But Den-ee may be working himself into a 2nd team all-league selection. When you have that, especially at pg, you have a chance. Then role players like Brown and Kent (yeah I said it) are playing up to expectations. To me the exciting thing is JamSam has kind of leveled;if he breaks thru the FR wall and truly compliments DC it could get even better.

sys · February 07, 2009, 10:23:36 PM

weird samuels tidbit - i always feel like he'll make his fts, even though he's like a 60% shooter or something.

kst@te1 · February 07, 2009, 10:24:31 PM

Talent or not the team has a chance to win 20+ games again this year making that 3 years in a row for them. When was the last time they accomplished that? I guess with where my expectations were leading into this season I've been impressed thus far.

cireksu · February 07, 2009, 10:25:07 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 10:23:36 PM

weird samuels tidbit - i always feel like he'll make his fts, even though he's like a 60% shooter or something.

you know what? I think the exact same thing. dude is money in crunch time.

chum1 · February 07, 2009, 10:27:53 PM

Please, no one else chime in with their impressions of Samuels shooting FTs. I've got enough to deal with when watching the games already.

TAFNA Dude · February 07, 2009, 10:32:21 PM

i agree with rusty on this one. we'll definitely lose two more that we 'should' win. this is one of the most inconsistent teams i've ever seen.

fun to watch though.

ksu_FAN · February 07, 2009, 10:57:17 PM

The real surprise for me is this team figuring out how to win games on the road at this pace. Didn't expect this team to do that.

Panjandrum · February 07, 2009, 11:07:14 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 10:23:36 PM

weird samuels tidbit - i always feel like he'll make his fts, even though he's like a 60% shooter or something.

Totally glad I'm not the only one that feels that way.

Panjandrum · February 07, 2009, 11:08:20 PM

Quote from: chum1 on February 07, 2009, 10:27:53 PM

Please, no one else chime in with their impressions of Samuels shooting FTs. I've got enough to deal with when watching the games already.

Didn't catch this before responding.

Crap.

cireksu · February 07, 2009, 11:11:00 PM

Quote from: ksu_FAN on February 07, 2009, 10:57:17 PM

The real surprise for me is this team figuring out how to win games on the road at this pace. Didn't expect this team to do that.

yeah, wait til we lose @ ISU by 7

Skycat · February 07, 2009, 11:13:16 PM

Quote from: sys on February 07, 2009, 10:23:36 PM

weird samuels tidbit - i always feel like he'll make his fts, even though he's like a 60% shooter or something.

Because he shares pt with Anderson?

McLovin · February 07, 2009, 11:18:56 PM

Quote from: cireksu on February 07, 2009, 11:11:00 PM

yeah, wait til we lose @ ISU by 7

Totally possible. This year's team is just so streaky. We're winning right now because the team is playing with confidence. Jake, DC and (dare I say) DK are playing with confidence on the offensive end. The rotation of bigs is able to match up on defense because Lou+DK+Ron+Jamar= 20 fouls to give. Hell, might as well throw 'Nique in there and make it 25.

As long as the players come out aggressive and don't get rattled, the Qatz are in good shape. If we come out and get steamrolled by someone, it could start another losing streak.