Author Topic: Anyone else notice the correlation of JO playing and losing the lead? (Read 15921 times)

KITNfury · « **on:** February 05, 2011, 07:55:47 PM »

It seemed to me that he goes in, we lose a 7 point lead and turn it into a 6 point deficit. Then he goes to the bench and we barely climb back and sneak out a win. I really don't like him but hate that we HAVE to play him.

steve dave · « **Reply #1 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:03:34 PM »

+/- used to be what pro-JO's hung their hats on

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #2 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:05:55 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on February 05, 2011, 08:03:34 PM

+/- used to be what pro-JO's hung their hats on

Pro Sprads too.

Immaculate1 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:08:07 PM »

I think it's more a product of the other players production requiring his presence on the court, as opposed to him specifically being on the court.

Wally just left. The sample size seems small so far. Going forward, your point may be validated though.

I don't think you can fault JO for CK and Jam sucking it up requiring him to enter the game and attempt to be a meaningful post. (I'm not sure how much of a meaningful post this is the more that I type.

)

JO is who he is. Someone we shouldn't have to count on.

michigancat · « **Reply #4 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:22:30 PM »

No, but I noticed when JHR dunked in your face. Losers.

kougar24 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:27:32 PM »

JO with an RR of -5 today (+/- of -2).

With him, we scored 2 ppm and gave up 2.2 ppm
Without him, we scored 2.2 ppm and gave up 2.1 ppm.

Does that mean anything at all? Don't know. Ask _FAN. The whole JO story isn't truly told, though, until we get a stat for # of rebounds that bounce off his hands/head and end up with the opponent.

kougar24 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:30:44 PM »

Speaking of correlation, 'Tay with an RR of +23 today. Big night for my 'Tay Crusade!

Pullen with an RR of -15.

steve dave · « **Reply #7 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:45:15 PM »

iirc someone posted a HBBIQ piece the other day that showed +/- wasn't really valid

kougar24 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:47:37 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on February 05, 2011, 08:45:15 PM

iirc someone posted a HBBIQ piece the other day that showed +/- wasn't really valid

Yep, just throwing that out there since +/- was brought up earlier.

steve dave · « **Reply #9 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:48:12 PM »

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:47:37 PM

Quote from: steve dave on February 05, 2011, 08:45:15 PM
iirc someone posted a HBBIQ piece the other day that showed +/- wasn't really valid

Yep, just throwing that out there since +/- was brought up earlier.

yeah, I brought it up, dummy

sys · « **Reply #10 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:48:50 PM »

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:27:32 PM

The whole JO story isn't truly told, though, until we get a stat for # of rebounds that bounce off his hands.

he has really bad hands.

steve dave · « **Reply #11 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:50:29 PM »

Quote from: sys on February 05, 2011, 08:48:50 PM

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:27:32 PM
The whole JO story isn't truly told, though, until we get a stat for # of rebounds that bounce off his hands.

he has really bad hands.

awful

kso_FAN · « **Reply #12 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:50:41 PM »

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:30:44 PM

Speaking of correlation, 'Tay with an RR of +23 today. Big night for my 'Tay Crusade!

Pullen with an RR of -15.

Yeah, and Russell's was -11. 95's was -13.

Quote from: steve dave on February 05, 2011, 08:45:15 PM

iirc someone posted a HBBIQ piece the other day that showed +/- wasn't really valid

Obviously. Pullen -15, Russell -11, 95 -13, JHR -5. We needed to get all those guys off the court.

But I do know JHR had 4 blocks and 3 Oboards in 12 whole minutes. Its obvious he stunk today.

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #13 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM »

I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

steve dave · « **Reply #14 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:52:17 PM »

Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM

I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

We would be in a world of crap if we didn't have him. I'm not going to stop mentioning his shitty hands just because of that fact though.

CNS · « **Reply #15 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:53:45 PM »

He does have shitty hands, but that same time period in the game saw two guards in at the same time who usually never see the court.

If we are going to talk about correlations, we should probably start there.

kso_FAN · « **Reply #16 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:54:07 PM »

Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM

I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

Yeah, who is going to play when (not if) Kelly and Samuels get in foul trouble.

Again, he played 12 minutes. Most of those b/c Frank had to put him in b/c he had no other options.

He's doing fine for what he's asked to do. Yes, the balls that go off his hands can be maddening and his missed bunnies (6 shots was too many for JHR) were frustrating, but overall he did some nice things on both the offensive and defensive ends of the floor.

steve dave · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:54:29 PM »

Quote from: CNS Casey on February 05, 2011, 08:53:45 PM

He does have shitty hands, but that same time period in the game saw two guards in at the same time who usually never see the court.

If we are going to talk about correlations, we should probably start there.

yeah, as has been mentioned, the stat really isn't very relevant.

steve dave · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:55:40 PM »

You know who would make this team ridiculously better? Darren Kent. Speaking of, got a pic of one of our posters basically slow dancing with him in the concourse

kougar24 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:55:59 PM »

Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM

I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

I agree, but that's an indictment on our recruiting, not an endorsement of JO. Just because we need him doesn't mean he's good.

kso_FAN · « **Reply #20 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:56:46 PM »

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:55:59 PM

Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM
I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

I agree, but that's an indictment on our recruiting, not an endorsement of JO. Just because we need him doesn't mean he's good.

Do you expect us to have 4 posts that each score 15 points a game?

kougar24 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 05, 2011, 08:58:38 PM »

Quote from: ksu_FAN on February 05, 2011, 08:56:46 PM

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:55:59 PM
Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM
I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

I agree, but that's an indictment on our recruiting, not an endorsement of JO. Just because we need him doesn't mean he's good.

Do you expect us to have 4 posts that each score 15 points a game?

Of course not. Don't act like he's even in that ballpark.

sys · « **Reply #22 on:** February 05, 2011, 09:03:27 PM »

Quote from: ksu_FAN on February 05, 2011, 08:56:46 PM

Do you expect us to have 4 posts that each score 15 points a game?

best frontcourt in america. how will the coaches find enough minutes for samuels?

kso_FAN · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2011, 09:04:21 PM »

Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:58:38 PM

Quote from: ksu_FAN on February 05, 2011, 08:56:46 PM
Quote from: kougar24 on February 05, 2011, 08:55:59 PM
Quote from: gatoveintisiete on February 05, 2011, 08:50:49 PM
I would rather have JO than not have him, if you dissagree you should be tested and watched closely.

I agree, but that's an indictment on our recruiting, not an endorsement of JO. Just because we need him doesn't mean he's good.

Do you expect us to have 4 posts that each score 15 points a game?

Of course not. Don't act like he's even in that ballpark.

I'm not, but I don't expect him to be. But I do expect him to block shots and get rebounds. Even with the frustrating balls off his poor hands, he does this very well. I just want JHR to do what he needs to to be effective for us, and he does that.

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #24 on:** February 05, 2011, 09:04:42 PM »

wichita state had a project center during the turgeon years that would absolutely make you vomit his first two years, and then grew into his body and became the center piece of their sweet 16 run, paul miller. My dream is that jo can improve every year he is here as much as he has this year.