Topic: A quality coach vs DD

[herdorbust2]

When you allow kids to shoot it 30 times a game and play 4-5 years you are going to have top scorers.

[scope58]

When you allow kids to shoot it 30 times a game and play 4-5 years you are going to have top scorers.

exactly ! And over a five year period.

[Herdalum83]

When you allow kids to shoot it 30 times a game and play 4-5 years you are going to have top scorers.

Which of our top scorers shot 30 times a game? Elmore shot the most as a senior and shot 16.1 shots per game. Elmore also missed games his freshman year. For his career he averaged 14.7 shots per game. Elmore shot 41% for his career which is a solid shooting percentage.

What about Kinsey? Kinsey shot the most in his 4th season and topped out at 16.5 shots per game. For his career, Kinsey shot 12.9 shots per game. Kinsey did get an extra year, but he entered the top 10 in scoring within the first 8 games of the year which evened out with the games he lost due to COVID his junior year. So without the extra year, Kinsey was still a top 10 scorer in school history. He also shot over 50% from the field for his career.

What about Burks, maybe he fits the bill of what you're referring to. Nope, most shots Burks took a game came his junior season at 15.7 and for his career, he averaged 11.5. Burks wasn't even a starter until his junior season. And shot 47% from the field.

None of these guys shot 30 times a game and none of them were terrible, inefficient "volume" scorers like your post suggests. As Kinsey and Burks were both very efficient and Elmore had a very solid shooting percentage.

This is why it's so hard to take you seriously Bust. You exaggerate or blatantly fabricate things when trying to string your arguments together to support whatever position you hold at the moment. Right now you hold an Anti-Dan position so to make your point you will post blatant untruths which in turn disparage GREAT players who gave EVERYTHING to the Herd. All, so you can try and crap on Dan?

It's ridiculous, and it's even more ridiculous because there are ACTUAL and FACTUAL arguments to be made against Dan, and many posters have made them eloquently and sometimes you stumble into the realm of facts too but it's almost like it's an accident because before long you're right back to posting nonsense like this.

[herdorbust2]

Which of our top scorers shot 30 times a game? Elmore shot the most as a senior and shot 16.1 shots per game. Elmore also missed games his freshman year. For his career he averaged 14.7 shots per game. Elmore shot 41% for his career which is a solid shooting percentage.

What about Kinsey? Kinsey shot the most in his 4th season and topped out at 16.5 shots per game. For his career, Kinsey shot 12.9 shots per game. Kinsey did get an extra year, but he entered the top 10 in scoring within the first 8 games of the year which evened out with the games he lost due to COVID his junior year. So without the extra year, Kinsey was still a top 10 scorer in school history. He also shot over 50% from the field for his career.

What about Burks, maybe he fits the bill of what you're referring to. Nope, most shots Burks took a game came his junior season at 15.7 and for his career, he averaged 11.5. Burks wasn't even a starter until his junior season. And shot 47% from the field.

None of these guys shot 30 times a game and none of them were terrible, inefficient "volume" scorers like your post suggests. As Kinsey and Burks were both very efficient and Elmore had a very solid shooting percentage.

This is why it's so hard to take you seriously Bust. You exaggerate or blatantly fabricate things when trying to string your arguments together to support whatever position you hold at the moment. Right now you hold an Anti-Dan position so to make your point you will post blatant untruths which in turn disparage GREAT players who gave EVERYTHING to the Herd. All, so you can try and crap on Dan?

It's ridiculous, and it's even more ridiculous because there are ACTUAL and FACTUAL arguments to be made against Dan, and many posters have made them eloquently and sometimes you stumble into the realm of facts too but it's almost like it's an accident because before long you're right back to posting nonsense like this.

Minutes played in career, shots taken etc tells the facts. Danny relies on a couple guys like Burks and Jon and then Kinsey and Andrew. That is why we never get it done. All me ball and no team ball. Fire away boys. And Kinsey played 5 full years which nobody else has done. Think that isn't huge?  Instead of finding another scorer this year and make it a complete team, it will be the Andrew and Curfman fire away show.

[Herdalum83]

Minutes played in career, shots taken etc tells the facts. Danny relies on a couple guys like Burks and Jon and then Kinsey and Andrew. That is why we never get it done. All me ball and no team ball. Fire away boys. And Kinsey played 5 full years which nobody else has done. Think that isn't huge?  Instead of finding another scorer this year and make it a complete team, it will be the Andrew and Curfman fire away show.

Yes it was huge it was the difference in him being the number 1 leading scorer and the 8th leading scorer. But in 4 normal seasons, he would have still been a top 10 scorer and one of the best we've ever seen.

[Flat Tire 2]

I just looked up Leo Byrd who averaged 29.3 ppg, but only played in 23 games in his senior season. He averaged 25.0 ppg and 16.4 ppg  in his other two varsity  seasons and played a grand total of 63 games of varsity basketball at MU. Freshmen were not allowed to play varsity basketball in his era. Elmore played in 25; 35; 36 and 37 (total of 133) games in his career at MU. TK played in 154 games and he got to play for 5 years.

MU played a fast break offense during Byrd era and you have to wonder how many points he would have scored if he played in either 133 games like Elmore or 154 like TK. By the way Byrd averaged 37.3 ppg on the MU Freshmen Team. I am not taking away from Elmore or TK, but they benefited from playing a lot more games than the other greats at MU.

[Herdalum83]

I just looked up Leo Byrd who averaged 29.3 ppg, but only played in 23 games in his senior season. He averaged 25.0 ppg and 16.4 ppg  in his other two varsity  seasons and played a grand total of 63 games of varsity basketball at MU. Freshmen were not allowed to play varsity basketball in his era. Elmore played in 25; 35; 36 and 37 (total of 133) games in his career at MU. TK played in 154 games and he got to play for 5 years.

MU played a fast break offense during Byrd era and you have to wonder how many points he would have scored if he played in either 133 games like Elmore or 154 like TK. By the way Byrd averaged 37.3 ppg on the MU Freshmen Team. I am not taking away from Elmore or TK, but they benefited from playing a lot more games than the other greats at MU.

Every player who has played after the NCAA started allowing freshmen to play "varsity" has had that same benefit and that goes for any school. Doesn't take away from their greatness and doesn't mean they shot the ball 30 times a game to get their points either.

[herdorbust2]

Yes it was huge it was the difference in him being the number 1 leading scorer and the 8th leading scorer. But in 4 normal seasons, he would have still been a top 10 scorer and one of the best we've ever seen.

Yep top 10 no doubt and a very good player. But some of you acting like Danny is a genius recruiter because of guys being at the top in points is ridiculous. Lots of variables like 3 point line, years played, shots taken etc,,, plus when you have to play 38-40 minutes because you can't recruit talent to give you any depth is another reason.

[Herdalum83]

Yep top 10 no doubt and a very good player. But some of you acting like Danny is a genius recruiter because of guys being at the top in points is ridiculous. Lots of variables like 3 point line, years played, shots taken etc,,, plus when you have to play 38-40 minutes because you can't recruit talent to give you any depth is another reason.

No one is acting like Dan is a genius recruiter. It's basically a unanimous consensus on this board that recruiting is his weakest aspect as a coach.

But, you literally tried to discredit the numbers of some of our All-Time greats with a fallacy that they had inflated numbers because they shot the ball 30 times a game. None of the 3 got anywhere close to 30 shots a game.

And since someone brought up Leo Byrd. He averaged 24 shots a game his senior season much higher than Burks, Elmore or Kinsey and for his career, in just 3 seasons he took 1358 shots (making 43% of them).

By comparison, Burks took 1493 shots Burks played 130 games Byrd played just 72 and only took 140 more shots than Byrd and also shot a much better shooting percentage. Meaning Burks, was actually more efficient scoring.

Kinsey played 154 games and took less than 2000 shots, 1986 to be exact. Yes these guys took more shots overall than Byrd because they played a lot more games, but he was taking WAY more shots a game than Elmore, Burks or Kinsey ever took at their peak.

And while 3 point line, getting to play at least 4 seasons as opposed to just 3, the pace of play, and all of that does factor into guys scoring more points. It just isn't true to say these guys were only scoring because they got a ton of shots.

I would also argue, that Kinsey and Elmore being forced to play 38 minutes a night because our depth wasn't any good is actually a detriment to their scoring and not a benefit. Especially for Elmore who relied more on the 3 balls than Kinsey, he would have greatly benefited, especially efficiency wise if he could have kept his legs fresher. All elite scorers need time to rest here and there and those two guys never got any.

[herdorbust2]

No one is acting like Dan is a genius recruiter. It's basically a unanimous consensus on this board that recruiting is his weakest aspect as a coach.

But, you literally tried to discredit the numbers of some of our All-Time greats with a fallacy that they had inflated numbers because they shot the ball 30 times a game. None of the 3 got anywhere close to 30 shots a game.

And since someone brought up Leo Byrd. He averaged 24 shots a game his senior season much higher than Burks, Elmore or Kinsey and for his career, in just 3 seasons he took 1358 shots (making 43% of them).

By comparison, Burks took 1493 shots Burks played 130 games Byrd played just 72 and only took 140 more shots than Byrd and also shot a much better shooting percentage. Meaning Burks, was actually more efficient scoring.

Kinsey played 154 games and took less than 2000 shots, 1986 to be exact. Yes these guys took more shots overall than Byrd because they played a lot more games, but he was taking WAY more shots a game than Elmore, Burks or Kinsey ever took at their peak.

And while 3 point line, getting to play at least 4 seasons as opposed to just 3, the pace of play, and all of that does factor into guys scoring more points. It just isn't true to say these guys were only scoring because they got a ton of shots.

I would also argue, that Kinsey and Elmore being forced to play 38 minutes a night because our depth wasn't any good is actually a detriment to their scoring and not a benefit. Especially for Elmore who relied more on the 3 balls than Kinsey, he would have greatly benefited, especially efficiency wise if he could have kept his legs fresher. All elite scorers need time to rest here and there and those two guys never got any.

Well hopefully Andrew doesn't put up 27 shots a game like he did against ODU the last game of the season. Let's play a little team ball for a change instead of blacktop ball.

[goherd24]

No one is acting like Dan is a genius recruiter. It's basically a unanimous consensus on this board that recruiting is his weakest aspect as a coach.

But, you literally tried to discredit the numbers of some of our All-Time greats with a fallacy that they had inflated numbers because they shot the ball 30 times a game. None of the 3 got anywhere close to 30 shots a game.

And since someone brought up Leo Byrd. He averaged 24 shots a game his senior season much higher than Burks, Elmore or Kinsey and for his career, in just 3 seasons he took 1358 shots (making 43% of them).

By comparison, Burks took 1493 shots Burks played 130 games Byrd played just 72 and only took 140 more shots than Byrd and also shot a much better shooting percentage. Meaning Burks, was actually more efficient scoring.

Kinsey played 154 games and took less than 2000 shots, 1986 to be exact. Yes these guys took more shots overall than Byrd because they played a lot more games, but he was taking WAY more shots a game than Elmore, Burks or Kinsey ever took at their peak.

And while 3 point line, getting to play at least 4 seasons as opposed to just 3, the pace of play, and all of that does factor into guys scoring more points. It just isn't true to say these guys were only scoring because they got a ton of shots.

I would also argue, that Kinsey and Elmore being forced to play 38 minutes a night because our depth wasn't any good is actually a detriment to their scoring and not a benefit. Especially for Elmore who relied more on the 3 balls than Kinsey, he would have greatly benefited, especially efficiency wise if he could have kept his legs fresher. All elite scorers need time to rest here and there and those two guys never got any.

Wasting your time with bust. You know that.

[herdorbust2]

Wasting your time with bust. You know that.

You still looking the other way concerning basketball while you give football no room for error?

[bighat]

Bust will make up his own set of facts.

[herdorbust2]

Bust will make up his own set of facts.

Lol!!! We see how you evade facts on the other board.

[goherd73]

Minutes played in career, shots taken etc tells the facts. Danny relies on a couple guys like Burks and Jon and then Kinsey and Andrew. That is why we never get it done. All me ball and no team ball. Fire away boys. And Kinsey played 5 full years which nobody else has done. Think that isn't huge?  Instead of finding another scorer this year and make it a complete team, it will be the Andrew and Curfman fire away show.

You said Dan allows multiple players to shoot 30 shots per game.
I've been trying to figure out which ones were shooting 30 shots per game, can you help me out?
Or perhaps you were mistaken?

[herdorbust2]

You said Dan allows multiple players to shoot 30 shots per game.
I've been trying to figure out which ones were shooting 30 shots per game, can you help me out?
Or perhaps you were mistaken?

And 30 footers!!!

[Herdalum83]

You said Dan allows multiple players to shoot 30 shots per game.
I've been trying to figure out which ones were shooting 30 shots per game, can you help me out?
Or perhaps you were mistaken?

There are none. Taylor has the highest shot-per-game average for a season of anyone under DD at 19, and that was last year. Which, to be fair I think is too many, Taylor should never be taking more than 15 in any given game. But, still, 19 is a far cry from 30.

[herdorbust2]

There are none. Taylor has the highest shot-per-game average for a season of anyone under DD at 19, and that was last year. Which, to be fair I think is too many, Taylor should never be taking more than 15 in any given game. But, still, 19 is a far cry from 30.

I think people get my drift. Bombs away as much and as far as you like. 25 against ODU was a main reason we lost the regular season championship. Total me ball in that game and Danny stood with arms crossed the whole game watching it.

[Herdalum83]

I think people get my drift. Bombs away as much and as far as you like. 25 against ODU was a main reason we lost the regular season championship. Total me ball in that game and Danny stood with arms crossed the whole game watching it.

Except when you made that comment you were referring not just to Taylor but to the "All Time Scorers" DD has coached. But, then I totally busted that apart with actual facts, so as most dumb people do, instead of admitting they were wrong, you just moved the goalpost.

Had the original post been about Taylor, I probably would have taken it for hyperbole and accepted it as a purposeful over-exaggeration to make a point. But, it wasn't.

[herdorbust2]

Except when you made that comment you were referring not just to Taylor but to the "All Time Scorers" DD has coached. But, then I totally busted that apart with actual facts, so as most dumb people do, instead of admitting they were wrong, you just moved the goalpost.

Had the original post been about Taylor, I probably would have taken it for hyperbole and accepted it as a purposeful over-exaggeration to make a point. But, it wasn't.

Yea yea yea. People know it's street ball, fire away as much as you want and as deep as you want. Facts are facts!!! Let's see how the next 3 years turn out with Danny and his "freedom" system!!!

[Herdalum83]

Yea yea yea. People know it's street ball, fire away as much as you want and as deep as you want. Facts are facts!!! Let's see how the next 3 years turn out with Danny and his "freedom" system!!!

Bust, since you are a facts-are-facts guy after all, care to try again and point out where any of our top scorers under DD or hell any coach in MU's history shot it 30 times a game?

Because for the life of me, I keep on finding proof to the contrary. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe you just don't know what a fact is. But, it's most likely that you knew it wasn't true when you posted it but you're never gonna admit your own "untruths"

[herdorbust2]

Bust, since you are a facts-are-facts guy after all, care to try again and point out where any of our top scorers under DD or hell any coach in MU's history shot it 30 times a game?

Because for the life of me, I keep on finding proof to the contrary. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe you just don't know what a fact is. But, it's most likely that you knew it wasn't true when you posted it but you're never gonna admit your own "untruths"

I've explained it. Fire away boys!!!

[Herdalum83]

I've explained it. Fire away boys!!!

No, you didn't.

Because the only explanation would be "I was wrong." But, we know you'll never admit that.

It's never happened.

[herdorbust2]

No, you didn't.

Because the only explanation would be "I was wrong." But, we know you'll never admit that.

It's never happened.

Sounds like it has you pretty torn up that I'm right so much.

[goherd24]

Sounds like it has you pretty torn up that I'm right so much.

Not sure if you or sturt claim the title for most delusional posters we've ever seen.

You're making a heck of a case