goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Basketball is hard => Topic started by: Dirty Deeds on March 19, 2011, 10:53:45 PM

Title: Nick & Rod
Post by: Dirty Deeds on March 19, 2011, 10:53:45 PM
Future looks bright.....
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 10:54:38 PM
Future looks bright.....

Don't be such a rough ridin' stupid bad person
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: EMAWzified on March 19, 2011, 10:56:34 PM
Other than being sophomores and having a bad night, what do those two have in common?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 10:57:58 PM
Other than being sophomores and having a bad night, what do those two have in common?

being the subjects of a $!#* trying to be funny
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kcchiefdav on March 19, 2011, 10:59:43 PM
Rodney's Conference season was a lot like Jake's 08-09 Conference season, so I think there's a chance he can start taking over as the guy next year. What's really scary is that our starting bigs next year can't score. I don't give a eff about Nick...when you've got no skills, you've got no skills. I expect to see Sprads and Irving (Or 95 or Team Canada) start over him anyway.


*edited to put the correct year I intended to reference.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Dirty Deeds on March 19, 2011, 11:03:38 PM
Other than being sophomores and having a bad night, what do those two have in common?

being the subjects of a $!#* trying to be funny
Funny?  Seriously? Gruds 3 pt 3 reb & 2 airballs in 32 min.  He was  scared out of his mind.  
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 11:04:31 PM
Rodney's Conference season was a lot like Jake's 09-10 Conference season

No it wasn't, not even close in any way possible.  Please don't do this.  Don't ever compare 'Grudes and Pullen, not at all fair.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kougar24 on March 19, 2011, 11:05:49 PM
It will be interesting watching McG try desperately to get open looks next season.

And by interesting I mean awful.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 11:05:57 PM
Other than being sophomores and having a bad night, what do those two have in common?

being the subjects of a $!#* trying to be funny
Funny?  Seriously? Gruds 3 pt 3 reb & 2 airballs in 32 min.  He was  scared out of his mind.  

Don't ever edit my rough ridin' post again
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: j-dub on March 19, 2011, 11:06:36 PM
Rod looked like Jake did against Wiscy back in 08. It happens man.

No one feels worse than him. And he will be our best player next year. And that's not a bad thing.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: KSUTOMMY on March 19, 2011, 11:08:31 PM
Rod looked like Jake did against Wiscy back in 08. It happens man.

No one feels worse than him. And he will be our best player next year. And that's not a bad thing.

Gruds better learn to show the eff up for the biggest game of the season.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 19, 2011, 11:09:16 PM
It will be interesting watching McG try desperately to get open looks next season.

And by interesting I mean awful.

We can only hope the Pancakes turns up his control or that Angel is a PG god.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kougar24 on March 19, 2011, 11:10:54 PM
Rod looked like Jake did against Wiscy back in 08. It happens man.

No one feels worse than him. And he will be our best player next year. And that's not a bad thing.

it's bad that he'll be our best player by a freaking continent's width though.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 19, 2011, 11:12:04 PM
any time Pullen left the floor we played like complete crap.  rod can't save us. 95 can't save us.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: sys on March 19, 2011, 11:12:32 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: j-dub on March 19, 2011, 11:13:43 PM
Rod looked like Jake did against Wiscy back in 08. It happens man.

No one feels worse than him. And he will be our best player next year. And that's not a bad thing.

it's bad that he'll be our best player by a freaking continent's width though.
:pray: ing for improvement from everyone else :pray:ing
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 19, 2011, 11:14:06 PM
any time Pullen left the floor we played like complete crap.  rod can't save us. 95 can't save us.

The improvement we saw out of Will over the course of a very turbulent season in which we asked more of him than most other Frosh that aren't 4 or 5 star kids was pretty evident.

I somewhat expect Will's Frosh-to-Soph bounce to be a decently big one.  Don't think he will ever be dynamic, but he can be a really good role player/shooter.  
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kcchiefdav on March 19, 2011, 11:15:02 PM
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=rodney-mcgruder&jacob-pullen=2008-2009&p1=jacob-pullen

For the record, I rescind my statement about Rod and Jake having similar sophomore seasons. Pretty obvious that Jake was already the focal point of the offense back then.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Skipper44 on March 19, 2011, 11:21:11 PM
my fear is the Rodney is what he is, a nice complementary dish but never a main course.  All indications are Jamar is the similar in this regard.  95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own, here is to hoping Angel or Omari or JC to be named later can too
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM
my fear is the Rodney is what he is, a nice complementary dish but never a main course.  All indications are Jamar is the similar in this regard.  95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own, here is to hoping Angel or Omari or JC to be named later can too

I think Myles has a little upside :dunno:
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: ZmoneyKSU on March 19, 2011, 11:24:33 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kougar24 on March 19, 2011, 11:25:11 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

if by "fine" you mean "in the NIT hunt," then yes, K-State will be fine.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: KSUTOMMY on March 19, 2011, 11:26:04 PM
my fear is the Rodney is what he is, a nice complementary dish but never a main course.  All indications are Jamar is the similar in this regard.  95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own, here is to hoping Angel or Omari or JC to be named later can too

I think Myles has a little upside :dunno:

Nino Williams?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: ZmoneyKSU on March 19, 2011, 11:28:36 PM
my fear is the Rodney is what he is, a nice complementary dish but never a main course.  All indications are Jamar is the similar in this regard.  95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own, here is to hoping Angel or Omari or JC to be named later can too

I think Myles has a little upside :dunno:

Nino Williams?

I've wondered about Nino several times this season. I know I have no logical reason for thinking this... but I feel like he's never going to amount to anything...like I said, no logical reason for this feeling.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Skipper44 on March 19, 2011, 11:30:07 PM
the big 12 will continue to be down as a whole.  KU is looking to replace the Morris twins with JC bigs, Anderson will leave MU (with the youngest Pressey and most likely their best recruit), ATM will be ATM and we will always own Texas.

There should be good opportunities to win road games at OU, TT, and maybe BU, anything over .500 in league may get us a play-in game
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 11:31:10 PM
95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own

by hammering the ball into the floor while staring at his shoes :dunno:
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Skipper44 on March 19, 2011, 11:33:11 PM
95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own

by hammering the ball into the floor while staring at his shoes :dunno:

If we keep running Undy's O, who do you want running the high ball screen at the end of possessions?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kcchiefdav on March 19, 2011, 11:33:43 PM
I'd forgotten about Nino. If he's worth a crap at all, he gives us some nice flexibility line-up wise.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 19, 2011, 11:35:45 PM
95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own

by hammering the ball into the floor while staring at his shoes :dunno:

If we keep running Undy's O, who do you want running the high ball screen at the end of possessions?

someone else

I don't think we will run the same offense, the personnel will be completely different, square peg round hole.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: sys on March 19, 2011, 11:38:02 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Skipper44 on March 19, 2011, 11:40:32 PM
95 looks to be the only guy on the roster next year that can regularly make a play on his own

by hammering the ball into the floor while staring at his shoes :dunno:

If we keep running Undy's O, who do you want running the high ball screen at the end of possessions?

someone else

I don't think we will run the same offense, the personnel will be completely different, square peg round hole.

I hope so too but I would love to see Diaz and JO run the hand off exchange 25 feet from the basket at least once

If Gipson and Diaz can play at all, a return to the JYC offense of getting shots up to create oboard opportunities may at least overwhelm a few teams
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: ZmoneyKSU on March 19, 2011, 11:42:55 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

overall, I think I agree. I think we could be a bubble team next year, but right now I just wanna see no light at the end of the tunnel cause I'm bitter and jaded and hate effing wisconsin.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: sys on March 19, 2011, 11:44:09 PM
If we keep running Undy's O, who do you want running the high ball screen at the end of possessions?

someone else

I don't think we will run the same offense, the personnel will be completely different, square peg round hole.

assuming kstate retains martin, the question of what offense we'll see next year will be the most interesting of the off-season.  right now, they look to only have four posts, and no matter what happens* they'll have just two experienced posts.  so you'd think a single post offense would make ever more sense than it did this year.


* - the obvious asterisk.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 19, 2011, 11:45:24 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: ZmoneyKSU on March 19, 2011, 11:46:49 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

No, cause remember, Beasley was totally going to stay cause he loved KSU too much...
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kougar24 on March 19, 2011, 11:47:40 PM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

so who is going to be this next generation's 3-star diamond in the rough?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: SuperG on March 20, 2011, 12:02:51 AM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.


there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

so who is going to be this next generation's 3-star diamond in the rough?

SS  :bball:
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 12:07:35 AM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

so who is going to be this next generation's 3-star diamond in the rough?

Will, but none will ever polish up as well as jake.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 20, 2011, 12:11:11 AM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

so who is going to be this next generation's 3-star diamond in the rough?

Will, but none will ever polish up as well as jake.

I don't/won't expect Will to be another Jake, but I think Will has a chance to be pretty good.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=jacob-pullen&jacob-pullen=2007-2008&p1=will-spradling
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 12:11:51 AM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

Good post.  The situation following the last time we lost to Wisconsin was much more dire.

so who is going to be this next generation's 3-star diamond in the rough?

Will, but none will ever polish up as well as jake.

I don't/won't expect Will to be another Jake, but I think Will has a chance to be pretty good.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=jacob-pullen&jacob-pullen=2007-2008&p1=will-spradling

That is what I am saying.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: pike on March 20, 2011, 12:18:14 AM
I see next year as a very 08-09 KSU Q@t rebuilding year in which we'll have an ok season and are a bubble team down the stretch
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Trim on March 20, 2011, 10:04:56 AM
Nick implies he'll be back:

Quote
Sophomore guard Nick Russell lamented the loss to the Badgers as being the last time this K-State team would all be together as a team.

"We've spent so much time together, this group, that it hurts to know that this is the last time that we'll all be together as a whole," Russell said. "You lose and you have to look those seniors in the eye and know that that's it for them. You know that your time with them is done and it's something you never wanted to feel.

"The people that are left in here, the people that are coming back have to get back to work for next year. We have to work even harder now."
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: catzacker on March 20, 2011, 10:22:56 AM
Nick implies he'll be back:

Quote
Sophomore guard Nick Russell lamented the loss to the Badgers as being the last time this K-State team would all be together as a team.

"We've spent so much time together, this group, that it hurts to know that this is the last time that we'll all be together as a whole," Russell said. "You lose and you have to look those seniors in the eye and know that that's it for them. You know that your time with them is done and it's something you never wanted to feel.

"The people that are left in here, the people that are coming back have to get back to work for next year. We have to work even harder now."

i think wally had a quote like this last year after butler.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: PowercatPat on March 20, 2011, 10:39:43 AM
I think Nino will be pretty good.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 10:48:42 AM
Just don't run anyone off, Frank.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: W.Churchill on March 20, 2011, 11:01:56 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 11:10:33 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Agreed, but I think Will, Jamar, or even Nick could step up. Will and Jamar obviously won't be as good as CK and Pullen, but they can be "fine".
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Pett on March 20, 2011, 11:10:54 AM
I think Nino will be pretty good.

I'm thinking this as well. Lots of room to grow, redshirt year was probably the best for him (concussion or not). Then add in the three recruits coming in and Omari. Biggest ? is on Omari.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 20, 2011, 11:13:43 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Agreed, but I think Will, Jamar, or even Nick could step up. Will and Jamar obviously won't be as good as CK and Pullen, but they can be "fine".

McGruds?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 20, 2011, 11:17:55 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CHONGS on March 20, 2011, 11:36:04 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).
J H R

Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2011, 11:36:59 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).

At a minimum, he will make an impact in minutes.  He's going to get them because he's physically ready to compete right now.

If we could get 6/4 out of him in 15-20 minutes a game, I'll do cartwheels.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2011, 11:40:13 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).
J H R



If he continues to improve, we're going to be a much, much better basketball team for it.

His offensive prowess at the end of the season on some of his moves was next level quality.

Regardless, he's going to get his minutes.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 11:41:08 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).

At a minimum, he will make an impact in minutes.  He's going to get them because he's physically ready to compete right now.

If we could get 6/4 out of him in 15-20 minutes a game, I'll do cartwheels.

How are Gip's handles?  Anyone know?  I assume we keep the same offense to at least start next year since it seems our line up will favor us playing somewhat small more often than not.  does he have any game from free throw line?  Any dribble/drive or jumper from ft line?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: catzacker on March 20, 2011, 11:42:29 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Agreed, but I think Will, Jamar, or even Nick could step up. Will and Jamar obviously won't be as good as CK and Pullen, but they can be "fine".

McGruds?

i'm interested to see how McGruds gets used and defended next year.  is he like a shorter cartier martin?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 11:43:03 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Agreed, but I think Will, Jamar, or even Nick could step up. Will and Jamar obviously won't be as good as CK and Pullen, but they can be "fine".

McGruds?
[/quote

i'm interested to see how McGruds gets used and defended next year.  is he like a shorter cartier martin?


No
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 20, 2011, 11:44:02 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).
J H R



 :dubious:

DOB is JHR.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CHONGS on March 20, 2011, 11:46:41 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).
J H R



 :dubious:

DOB is JHR.
Right you are!  Sorry I read that as DOC.  carry on!
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2011, 11:48:29 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).

At a minimum, he will make an impact in minutes.  He's going to get them because he's physically ready to compete right now.

If we could get 6/4 out of him in 15-20 minutes a game, I'll do cartwheels.

How are Gip's handles?  Anyone know?  I assume we keep the same offense to at least start next year since it seems our line up will favor us playing somewhat small more often than not.  does he have any game from free throw line?  Any dribble/drive from ft line?

From what I've seen, he's pretty much a banger.  In all of his highlights, he's pretty much posted up on the blocks.  He dominated because he's a lot stronger than a lot of guys at his level.  But he does seem to have a nice back to the basket game.  But he's not going to do some really sweet looking spin move into the lane or hit a twelve foot fade away like CK.

Love Gipson though because he's a big, physical banger that's big enough that he can be effective and get boards and score down low, but you don't have to worry about him going pro because he's a tweener in height.  He'll end up being like Marshall Moses in that regard*.

* Not saying he'll end up as good as Moses, but I think he will be pretty damn good in the latter part of his career.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 20, 2011, 11:50:54 AM
i'm interested to see how McGruds gets used and defended next year.  is he like a shorter cartier martin?

It appears more and more like this is a pretty accurate comparison. I thought McGruds would develop into a better penetrator, but I'm not sure that's the case.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 11:52:51 AM
I think the biggest question for me is if Gipson can make a decent impact or not. We obviously need a decent option outside of Samuels and DOB, and I'm fairly positive it won't be Diaz (or Judge if he comes back).

At a minimum, he will make an impact in minutes.  He's going to get them because he's physically ready to compete right now.

If we could get 6/4 out of him in 15-20 minutes a game, I'll do cartwheels.

How are Gip's handles?  Anyone know?  I assume we keep the same offense to at least start next year since it seems our line up will favor us playing somewhat small more often than not.  does he have any game from free throw line?  Any dribble/drive from ft line?

From what I've seen, he's pretty much a banger.  In all of his highlights, he's pretty much posted up on the blocks.  He dominated because he's a lot stronger than a lot of guys at his level.  But he does seem to have a nice back to the basket game.  But he's not going to do some really sweet looking spin move into the lane or hit a twelve foot fade away like CK.

Love Gipson though because he's a big, physical banger that's big enough that he can be effective and get boards and score down low, but you don't have to worry about him going pro because he's a tweener in height.  He'll end up being like Marshall Moses in that regard*.

* Not saying he'll end up as good as Moses, but I think he will be pretty damn good in the latter part of his career.

Will be interesting to see how Frank integrates this into our O.  A banger who is going to be several inches shorter than those he is banging against with guards that struggle to feed the post.  

Still think that our best option would be to stick to the current O, but that won't work well with a kid that isn't a threat from 15' out.  Curt and JHR's abilities from that distance is one thing that made that O work.  

Seems like we have a bunch of pieces that don't fully fit together next year.  Hope I am wrong.  

I guess an overachieving Angel can make all this irrelevant.  

Would love some other HBBIQ thoughts.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 12:04:37 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 12:09:25 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

Is my memory bad, or was Cartier MUCH more of a pure shooter than Rodney?  Maybe I am completely misinterpreting Rodney's game, but other than the lack of self creation and occasional 3's, I just don't see it.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: jtksu on March 20, 2011, 12:12:59 PM
I thought Rod had a pretty damn good season, especially considering this was the first year he saw much playing time.  Doubt he will ever be the #1 option on offense but I am excited to see him play the next 2 seasons.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: j-dub on March 20, 2011, 12:13:57 PM
Cartier was a better pure shooter. No doubt. Better from 3, from the line, but nowhere near the rebounder that Rod is. And up until Huggy got a hold of him, nowhere near the defender that Rod is.. He was a much more complete player his senior year than he was under Wooly.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: EMAWzified on March 20, 2011, 12:14:21 PM
Diaz might fit in well with the offense. Appears he's a face up guy, but he's also appears to be a gamer with a game-winning 3 in the state playoffs. Kelly was running off a JHO screen at times last night. Can't really say anything about him or Gipson without film, much less seeing them. Obviously, both will have to master Frank's defensive requirements and rebound to log minutes.

Also, really curious how Nino and Omari fit in at 2 and 3.

It'll be an interesting year.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: catzacker on March 20, 2011, 12:16:44 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

seems like we have some good/decent pieces just, ya know, no point guard.  i'm hopeful that rodney can develop something off the bounce.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CNS on March 20, 2011, 12:20:21 PM
Diaz might fit in well with the offense. Appears he's a face up guy, but he's also appears to be a gamer with a game-winning 3 in the state playoffs. Kelly was running off a JHO screen at times last night. Can't really say anything about him or Gipson without film, much less seeing them. Obviously, both will have to master Frank's defensive requirements and rebound to log minutes.

Also, really curious how Nino and Omari fit in at 2 and 3.

It'll be an interesting year.

With Nino and Rodney, you gotta think that we will lean Omari toward the 2?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 12:26:50 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

seems like we have some good/decent pieces just, ya know, no point guard.  i'm hopeful that rodney can develop something off the bounce.

Doc should be fine.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Fuktard on March 20, 2011, 01:18:24 PM
Surprised no one is mentioning Nick at the point.  With his passing prowess and decision making he would seem to be a perfect fit.  Sorry, still stinging from last night, and nearly every game he played in and made some stupid, half assed pass/play.  Forgive me. :chainsaw:
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: j-dub on March 20, 2011, 01:32:32 PM
Surprised no one is mentioning Nick at the point.  With his passing prowess and decision making he would seem to be a perfect fit.  Sorry, still stinging from last night, and nearly every game he played in and made some stupid, half assed pass/play.  Forgive me. :chainsaw:

No need. If I wasn't so apathetic about Nick I would be damning him to the 7th layer of hell.
He just sucks man. It's not his fault. He just doesn't have it in him. Obviously, the all the scouts just whiffed this time.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Dirty Deeds on March 20, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Surprised no one is mentioning Nick at the point.  With his passing prowess and decision making he would seem to be a perfect fit.  Sorry, still stinging from last night, and nearly every game he played in and made some stupid, half assed pass/play.  Forgive me. :chainsaw:
Actually wanted him back until last night. 

No need. If I wasn't so apathetic about Nick I would be damning him to the 7th layer of hell.
He just sucks man. It's not his fault. He just doesn't have it in him. Obviously, the all the scouts just whiffed this time.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 20, 2011, 01:47:33 PM
Cartier was a better pure shooter. No doubt. Better from 3, from the line, but nowhere near the rebounder that Rod is. And up until Huggy got a hold of him, nowhere near the defender that Rod is.. He was a much more complete player his senior year than he was under Wooly.

McGruds shot 41.9% from 3 as a FR, 40.8% this year. This year on 169 attempts. 71% and 72% from the FT line. Martin was 34.7% and 42.3% from 3 his first two years, 62% and 68.6% FTs. Really hard to say Martin is a better "pure shooter" at this point. JMHO.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: j-dub on March 20, 2011, 01:55:06 PM
Cartier was a better pure shooter. No doubt. Better from 3, from the line, but nowhere near the rebounder that Rod is. And up until Huggy got a hold of him, nowhere near the defender that Rod is.. He was a much more complete player his senior year than he was under Wooly.

McGruds shot 41.9% from 3 as a FR, 40.8% this year. This year on 169 attempts. 71% and 72% from the FT line. Martin was 34.7% and 42.3% from 3 his first two years, 62% and 68.6% FTs. Really hard to say Martin is a better "pure shooter" at this point. JMHO.

I should add that I'm biased toward guys who shoot with a generous amount of arc.. Cartier had really good arc on his shot, whereas Rod has some line drive. But Rod does have a quicker release. That was always the weakspot in Cartier's shooting stroke.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: CatsFan_58 on March 20, 2011, 02:18:58 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)
you are right on the Mcgruder and Martin comparo. Cartier never really drove, he was more spot up. Mcgruder, while not as good of a shooter, has a little more athleticism and defensive ability.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: wetwillie on March 20, 2011, 02:54:15 PM
Cartier was a better pure shooter. No doubt. Better from 3, from the line, but nowhere near the rebounder that Rod is. And up until Huggy got a hold of him, nowhere near the defender that Rod is.. He was a much more complete player his senior year than he was under Wooly.



McGruds shot 41.9% from 3 as a FR, 40.8% this year. This year on 169 attempts. 71% and 72% from the FT line. Martin was 34.7% and 42.3% from 3 his first two years, 62% and 68.6% FTs. Really hard to say Martin is a better "pure shooter" at this point. JMHO.

Which is why his two airballs were really crushing for me.  The way our underclassmen played should be more than enough evidence for frank to keep him from running anyone off the team in the off season.  I've gone full on tard on the Nick issue but I'm certain in a few days I will want him to be on next years squad.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: jtksu on March 20, 2011, 04:09:25 PM
Kinda thinking that Frank's attempted murder of anyone who misses a shot also played a role last night.  After Rod missed his first 2, he really needed to just keep shooting.  And Doc didn't look like he had any thoughts of shooting from behind the arc.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: MakeItRain on March 20, 2011, 04:25:15 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

We already have a Diaz or two or three.  We need a true back to the basket post, I'd like to see another attempt at a high-low offense like we attempted in the non-con.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 20, 2011, 04:41:15 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

We already have a Diaz or two or three.  We need a true back to the basket post, I'd like to see another attempt at a high-low offense like we attempted in the non-con.

Isn't that what Diaz does?  How can we have 2 seven footers and neither has a BTTB game?
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: sys on March 20, 2011, 05:32:10 PM
soph mcguder & soph cmart had extremely similar games.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: jtksu on March 20, 2011, 07:40:10 PM
Do you really want a BTTB center in the new offense?  Seems like a face up guy would be better.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2011, 07:49:46 PM
soph mcguder & soph cmart had extremely similar games.

I could be completely high, but I thought Martin's mechanics improved dramatically over the course of his career.  I thought Rodney's changed over the course of last year to this year as well (someone already mentioned a quicker release).

Cartier had more mass, so he could bang a little more, IMO, but Rodney is a little more wiry and can insert himself into post situations because of his ability to move and rebound in traffic.

I think their production and what we're asking them to do is similar.  I think people may be looking at them visually and dismissing the comparison.

I absolutely think he'll be averaging something like 15-16 points a game by his senior year.  I fully expect him to average 13-14 next season.  He works too hard on his game not to improve at least marginally.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 20, 2011, 07:51:31 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

We already have a Diaz or two or three.  We need a true back to the basket post, I'd like to see another attempt at a high-low offense like we attempted in the non-con.

Isn't that what Diaz does?  How can we have 2 seven footers and neither has a BTTB game?

They both weighed about 200 pounds soaking wet after high school.  They were pretty easy to push around.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 08:21:40 PM
I think mcgruder = a shorter cartier martin is a good comparison. Cartier was never much of a creator. I also think Diaz can make at least as much of an impact as gipson. (although their styles will not be.)

We already have a Diaz or two or three.  We need a true back to the basket post, I'd like to see another attempt at a high-low offense like we attempted in the non-con.

I don't think anyone on the team is similar to Diaz at all. And you don't really need any certain type of player to be successful. Sure, it would be nice to have a "true back to the basket post", but it definitely isn't necessary.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: SlamSam on March 20, 2011, 08:58:27 PM
JMHO, but I think our future relies on our posts' development. We have some pretty solid guards that could easily lead us to being a bubble team if our posts can remain average. I know none of them are outstanding, but Canada, Doc, and 95 have shown some great upside. I understand Canada isn't the popular pick, but he has a dribble drive, and not the worst handles and has shown he can make the three every once and a while. We have three point shooters in Doc, Nick (maybe), and Grudes. JamSam is the biggest ? right now imo. We know he can step up, but he really has never done it on a consistent basis. If JHR has a significant improvement in his BTTB game, he will be very valuable. As has been said, no one knows how Diaz and Gipson will turn out. If one of them steps up to be an 8-10 point contributor, it could be huge. The biggest difference will be our point spread. We know that everyone can contribute (none of them on a real consistent basis besides McGruder and Doc). Everyone has had their shining moments, even Russel. All we need is for at least two of them to step up every game.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: nicname on March 20, 2011, 10:04:45 PM
Surprised no one has brought up Shane yet.  The kid obviously has a pretty good overall game if Frank is willing to start him in nearly half the team's game this year.  His outside game needs a ton of improvement, but it is really the only thing holding him back from being a really nice player.  Hopefully he shoots like 1000 jump shots a day and comes back a confident shooter.  There is no reason to think we won't see a vast improvement in his game next season.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Barry McCockner on March 20, 2011, 10:13:21 PM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 20, 2011, 10:14:06 PM
Surprised no one has brought up Shane yet.  The kid obviously has a pretty good overall game if Frank is willing to start him in nearly half the team's game this year.  His outside game needs a ton of improvement, but it is really the only thing holding him back from being a really nice player.  Hopefully he shoots like 1000 jump shots a day and comes back a confident shooter.  There is no reason to think we won't see a vast improvement in his game next season.

No way to know.  Look at Dom, he got suckier on offense ending with a sucktastic game against Butler.  On the other hand, jake, Rod, Jamar and others improved greatly year 1 to 2.  Hope you're right.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: nicname on March 20, 2011, 10:22:25 PM
Surprised no one has brought up Shane yet.  The kid obviously has a pretty good overall game if Frank is willing to start him in nearly half the team's game this year.  His outside game needs a ton of improvement, but it is really the only thing holding him back from being a really nice player.  Hopefully he shoots like 1000 jump shots a day and comes back a confident shooter.  There is no reason to think we won't see a vast improvement in his game next season.

No way to know.  Look at Dom, he got suckier on offense ending with a sucktastic game against Butler.  On the other hand, jake, Rod, Jamar and others improved greatly year 1 to 2.  Hope you're right.

Dom was an uber-athletic headcase.  Though SS is not the pure athlete Dom was he seems to have a much higher.  I don't know whether that will translate into a better jump shot, but I have high hopes for him. 
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Barry McCockner on March 20, 2011, 10:28:24 PM
To Dom's credit, he eventually realized he wasn't a shooter and bacame a contributor on offense by using his athleticism to score off of orebs and in transition.  Shane has the athleticism to do the same.  We could use that, particularly in terms of getting some transition buckets.

JHR has the opportunity to make an impact next year.  He clearly gained some confidence this year, and made a huge improvement in the course of the season.  Continued improvement in the offseason and he could be a 10/8 kind of guy.

Gruds isn't going to be a slasher in terms of getting to the basket effectively, but he does have the ability to get to 15 and pull up or take it a step deeper and hit the floater.  Same with Doc.  With the percentage they shoot from 3, teams are going to close out hard on them, and they should have that available.

The wild card as I see it (aside from the newcomers) is Samuels.  Improvement from him, back to at least end of 09-10 season level, would be a big help.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 20, 2011, 10:54:56 PM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on March 20, 2011, 11:09:11 PM
Shane can become a better shooter, got a decent mid range jumper, Dom never had a chance, his release was way to slow took him a whole hour to get a shot off.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 20, 2011, 11:16:55 PM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Johnny Thunderbone on March 21, 2011, 03:42:02 AM
We're going to be much worse than Iowa State next year. Begin psychological preparations now.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2011, 07:49:50 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.

Yep. JUST DON'T RUN ANYONE OFF.  Wisconsin has been in the top 100 in kenpom's experience ranking every year since 2008. KSU's highest since then was 159 last year.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2011, 08:47:16 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.

Yep. JUST DON'T RUN ANYONE OFF.  Wisconsin has been in the top 100 in kenpom's experience ranking every year since 2008. KSU's highest since then was 159 last year.

I agree completely, even if this is a fairly SLTH-y thought.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: michigancat on March 21, 2011, 08:50:05 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.

Yep. JUST DON'T RUN ANYONE OFF.  Wisconsin has been in the top 100 in kenpom's experience ranking every year since 2008. KSU's highest since then was 159 last year.

I agree completely, even if this is a fairly SLTH-y thought.

SLTH's are generally terrible at managing rosters. see: Wooly, McDermott, and even Doc to an extent.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Panjandrum on March 21, 2011, 09:08:40 AM
We're going to be much worse than Iowa State next year. Begin psychological preparations now.

My dad said the same thing yesterday.

I'm going to wait until I see how Hoiberg manages all of those transfers before I make a judgment.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kso_FAN on March 21, 2011, 09:25:39 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.

Yep. JUST DON'T RUN ANYONE OFF.  Wisconsin has been in the top 100 in kenpom's experience ranking every year since 2008. KSU's highest since then was 159 last year.

I agree completely, even if this is a fairly SLTH-y thought.

SLTH's are generally terrible at managing rosters. see: Wooly, McDermott, and even Doc to an extent.

Good point. I'd say Ryan was SLTH type for Wiscy though, although he was a really good D3 coach.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: Ghost of Stan Parrish on March 21, 2011, 09:59:42 AM
I'm just glad posters have moved on from discussing McGruder playing as a #2, like last off-season.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: mcmwcat on March 21, 2011, 10:13:00 AM
kstate'll be fine next year.  i'll save my pointless meltdowns for coaching searches.  maybe apportion a little to recruiting as well.

Please define 'fine.' While I don't think we'll be garbage, I don't see us being an NCAA tourney team.  I think we'll be okay, but its gonna be some time until we can make a run of any significance.

there are too many unknowns to predict well, but i'd guess 50/50ish on the tourney.  teams don't have to have a guy that takes 30% of its shots in order to be good.  pullen & kelly were incredibly important to the team, but their combined season long efficiency was pretty pedestrian.  and i have confidence (perhaps unreasonable confidence) that the staff can get just about any group of moderately talented players to defend pretty damn well.

and there were enough garbage teams in the tourney this year to give me hope that we'll at least be a bubble team next year.
Title: Re: Nick & Rod
Post by: kougar24 on March 21, 2011, 11:12:44 AM
Looks like a team full of complementary players.

Which is what we just lost to.

Um, no.

But they do show what you can do with a bunch of 3 stars, a couple of borderline top 100 kid.

Yep. JUST DON'T RUN ANYONE OFF.  Wisconsin has been in the top 100 in kenpom's experience ranking every year since 2008. KSU's highest since then was 159 last year.

I agree completely, even if this is a fairly SLTH-y thought.

SLTH's are generally terrible at managing rosters. see: Wooly, McDermott, and even Doc to an extent.

Damn, mich. Owning this. Well done.

Er, I mean: Look at you, owning this thread.