@gE strikes again!

[Panjandrum]

If Kamau is on track to break the assist record after next year then I will buy everyone on this board a drink, if not, then y'all need to get Angel's name out of your mouth when talking about Stokes. Angel was on track to be the most productive point guard ever in K-State history. Kamau has shown basically no ability to get into the lane and he rarely makes anything happen on the rare occasion that he finds himself there. Stokes is just like this team, low ceiling, high floor.

I don't think you have to say that about Stokes.  I think he can be good/very good.  Angel was just a special player, and it's probably not fair to try and compare Stokes to Angel.

We also have the benefit of seeing how Angel's full career has progressed, and we got, what?  16-18 games of Stokes?

I thought Stokes' game against UNC showed what his ceiling can look like.  That's not fair to measure him against and assume that level of consistency, but it was nice to see him go off against a team that good.  For two reasons: One, he has the confidence to go into a game like that with aggressiveness, and two, he actually executed.

Stokes is a positive part of this program right now.  I don't think it's fair to say he has a low ceiling, but it's not fair to say he'll be better than Angel, either.

[Trim]

Well now there's the obvious question - Nigel or Stokes?

[420seriouscat69]

Well said, Panj!

[ksupamplemousse]

If Kamau is on track to break the assist record after next year then I will buy everyone on this board a drink, if not, then y'all need to get Angel's name out of your mouth when talking about Stokes. Angel was on track to be the most productive point guard ever in K-State history. Kamau has shown basically no ability to get into the lane and he rarely makes anything happen on the rare occasion that he finds himself there. Stokes is just like this team, low ceiling, high floor.

I don't think you have to say that about Stokes.  I think he can be good/very good.  Angel was just a special player, and it's probably not fair to try and compare Stokes to Angel.

We also have the benefit of seeing how Angel's full career has progressed, and we got, what?  16-18 games of Stokes?

I thought Stokes' game against UNC showed what his ceiling can look like.  That's not fair to measure him against and assume that level of consistency, but it was nice to see him go off against a team that good.  For two reasons: One, he has the confidence to go into a game like that with aggressiveness, and two, he actually executed.

Stokes is a positive part of this program right now.  I don't think it's fair to say he has a low ceiling, but it's not fair to say he'll be better than Angel, either.

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

[kso_FAN]

Well now there's the obvious question - Nigel or Stokes?

[Rage Against the McKee]

I had forgotten how much worse Angel was as a freshman than he was as a sophomore.

[kso_FAN]

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

Meh. Frank won with combos, it can be done.

[ksupamplemousse]

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

Meh. Frank won with combos, it can be done.

I think Frank could do it, but oscar sure can't, not with his current offense. Nigel had significantly better A & TO numbers (would have been even better had Stokes' stats been subjected to Big XII play). We're going to war with a worse Nigel Johnson at point, and that is somehow comforting?

[Panjandrum]

If Kamau is on track to break the assist record after next year then I will buy everyone on this board a drink, if not, then y'all need to get Angel's name out of your mouth when talking about Stokes. Angel was on track to be the most productive point guard ever in K-State history. Kamau has shown basically no ability to get into the lane and he rarely makes anything happen on the rare occasion that he finds himself there. Stokes is just like this team, low ceiling, high floor.

I don't think you have to say that about Stokes.  I think he can be good/very good.  Angel was just a special player, and it's probably not fair to try and compare Stokes to Angel.

We also have the benefit of seeing how Angel's full career has progressed, and we got, what?  16-18 games of Stokes?

I thought Stokes' game against UNC showed what his ceiling can look like.  That's not fair to measure him against and assume that level of consistency, but it was nice to see him go off against a team that good.  For two reasons: One, he has the confidence to go into a game like that with aggressiveness, and two, he actually executed.

Stokes is a positive part of this program right now.  I don't think it's fair to say he has a low ceiling, but it's not fair to say he'll be better than Angel, either.

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

But do you really need a true point guard in this offense?  I mean, really?

It seems like we want to throw 2-3 combo guards on the floor at the same time to handle getting it up the floor.  If you have some subset of them that can penetrate, do you need a traditional PG?

[Trim]

Well now there's the obvious question - Nigel or Stokes?

I'd forgotten Nigel played 2 years here and I've forgotten who the other pg was during that time.

[Panjandrum]

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

Meh. Frank won with combos, it can be done.

I think Frank could do it, but oscar sure can't, not with his current offense. Nigel had significantly better A & TO numbers (would have been even better had Stokes' stats been subjected to Big XII play). We're going to war with a worse Nigel Johnson at point, and that is somehow comforting?

My layman's observation, backed up by BBB's stats and consistent talking about about 3pt%, is that we're going to live and die by the three.  If we have combos that can shoot, we're probably fine.  If we have combos that can't shoot, we'll struggle.

What we have right now is a streaky combo (Brown), a slashing combo (Edwards), and a guy that should be playing the 4 (Westicles) as our perimeter players.

[ksupamplemousse]

If he's forced to play point guard, then his ceiling will be low...he's not a point guard. He's barely a combo guard. If he could play shooting guard, which would be his natural position, then no telling what his ceiling would be, because we haven't seen him there.

Meh. Frank won with combos, it can be done.

I think Frank could do it, but oscar sure can't, not with his current offense. Nigel had significantly better A & TO numbers (would have been even better had Stokes' stats been subjected to Big XII play). We're going to war with a worse Nigel Johnson at point, and that is somehow comforting?

My layman's observation, backed up by BBB's stats and consistent talking about about 3pt%, is that we're going to live and die by the three.  If we have combos that can shoot, we're probably fine.  If we have combos that can't shoot, we'll struggle.

What we have right now is a streaky combo (Brown), a slashing combo (Edwards), and a guy that should be playing the 4 (Westicles) as our perimeter players.

If you look at those stats, and Stokes is right there with Nigel, and you're going to tell me that's enough to get it done at pg? A guy that Jevon Thomas started over for the majority of his career. And we're talking about someone that is even less adept at playing pg, that's who we're betting on? Count me out, homies.

[Trim]

Holy crap, I forgot about my guy Jevon.

[ksupamplemousse]

If someone wants to make an argument that Stokes deserves as much playing time as Brown at SG, then I'd listen. Especially with Stokes' superior ball handling. Get him into the game early, and see what side of streaky he's on that night and make your decision from there. This team needs a point guard though, or at least a combo guard that can penetrate and kick. We don't have that right now, nothing actually close to that really. That's the difference between Frank's combo guards and our guys. His dudes could get into the lane basically at will. There is nobody on our team that can get into the lane at will, guess a argument could be made for Edwards, but he's not here going forward.

[kso_FAN]

My layman's observation, backed up by BBB's stats and consistent talking about about 3pt%, is that we're going to live and die by the three.  If we have combos that can shoot, we're probably fine.  If we have combos that can't shoot, we'll struggle.

What we have right now is a streaky combo (Brown), a slashing combo (Edwards), and a guy that should be playing the 4 (Westicles) as our perimeter players.

Its absolutely correct. I made the point earlier in the year that the single stat that correlates most to the success/failure of oscar's teams is 3PT%. If he has a team that shoots 35% or better from 3, they go dancing. If his team shoots worse than that, they don't, with one exception (14 K-State).

No other stat (advanced, shooting, etc.) correlates more to success/failure than this one for oscar.

We're going to war with a worse Nigel Johnson at point, and that is somehow comforting?

To be fair with the comparison it should be noted that Nigel didn't really play point much, he was off the ball most of the time with Jevon at the point.

[michigancat]

Need to add usage, BBB. It's important context, but Stokes definitely appears better than I realized he was.

[kso_FAN]

We don't have that right now, nothing actually close to that really. That's the difference between Frank's combo guards and our guys. His dudes could get into the lane basically at will. There is nobody on our team that can get into the lane at will, guess a argument could be made for Edwards, but he's not here going forward.

This is true, especially now. Its pretty much Westicles playing a swing-point with a little bit of Ervin mixed in.

We were much better with Stokes at PG though, as our increased TO% since he went out would indicate.

[ksupamplemousse]

My layman's observation, backed up by BBB's stats and consistent talking about about 3pt%, is that we're going to live and die by the three.  If we have combos that can shoot, we're probably fine.  If we have combos that can't shoot, we'll struggle.

What we have right now is a streaky combo (Brown), a slashing combo (Edwards), and a guy that should be playing the 4 (Westicles) as our perimeter players.

Its absolutely correct. I made the point earlier in the year that the single stat that correlates most to the success/failure of oscar's teams is 3PT%. If he has a team that shoots 35% or better from 3, they go dancing. If his team shoots worse than that, they don't, with one exception (14 K-State).

No other stat (advanced, shooting, etc.) correlates more to success/failure than this one for oscar.

We're going to war with a worse Nigel Johnson at point, and that is somehow comforting?

To be fair with the comparison it should be noted that Nigel didn't really play point much, he was off the ball most of the time with Jevon at the point.

Okay, so 3 point percentage is the litmus test. Wouldn't create better opportunities for Stokes to play off the ball then, and to have a lead guard that could make the defense collapse so our shooters were actually, ya know, open? Big part of our problems this year is no open shooters, and I think it's obvious at this point that oscar would rather take responsibility for a loss than screen for a shooter.

[kso_FAN]

Need to add usage, BBB. It's important context, but Stokes definitely appears better than I realized he was.

True. I would just have to steal that from kenpom, my charts are easy to compile with copy/paste of the season individual stats, but I don't have the formulas in place for usage based stuff, so its not easy to add.

[kso_FAN]

Okay, so 3 point percentage is the litmus test. Wouldn't create better opportunities for Stokes to play off the ball then, and to have a lead guard that could make the defense collapse so our shooters were actually, ya know, open? Big part of our problems this year is no open shooters, and I think it's obvious at this point that oscar would rather take responsibility for a loss than screen for a shooter.

Agree completely.

[michigancat]

The Flush gets into the lane and gets called for charging more than any player I've ever seen.

[420seriouscat69]

The Flush gets into the lane and gets called for charging more than any player I've ever seen.

Edwards is pretty good at that too.

[ksupamplemousse]

The Flush gets into the lane and gets called for charging more than any player I've ever seen.

Which I feel like makes him gunshy about going into the lane. Sad, because if anybody on this team has the ability to be a good penetrator, it's definitely him.

[ChiComCat]

Brown doesn't lay off or try to stop when someone gets in front of him.  He just heads in full steam and lets the chips fall where they may.  I think sometimes it's the right choice if he has any chance of drawing the foul or no chance of holding up enough.  Other times its just stupid.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Brown should consider dishing the ball to Dean when he penetrates.