1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The problem with your first point is that you're completely missing the mark of the difference between talent and a good team. Yes, all those guys had talent. But if you go look at all the guys you talked about, you have freshman, sophomore, freshman, sophomore, and freshman. Even if Romar didn't suck, when you combine with how good the PAC was, even a good coach would probably struggle to get them past the first weekend of the NCAA. You are also forgetting that Pondexter was a shell of what he would be as a freshman and Dentmon really struggled as he had to shoulder more of the load.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby Phil Nelson Hans Gasser Artem Wallace Brandon Burmeister
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The problem with your first point is that you're completely missing the mark of the difference between talent and a good team. Yes, all those guys had talent. But if you go look at all the guys you talked about, you have freshman, sophomore, freshman, sophomore, and freshman. Even if Romar didn't suck, when you combine with how good the PAC was, even a good coach would probably struggle to get them past the first weekend of the NCAA. You are also forgetting that Pondexter was a shell of what he would be as a freshman and Dentmon really struggled as he had to shoulder more of the load.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby Phil Nelson Hans Gasser Artem Wallace Brandon Burmeister
What the fuck are you even trying to tell me?
I fully agree that you need to supplement one and dones with good upperclassmen. Everyone does.
Disagree on Pondexter. He averaged 15 a game in non conference. We all loved him. He scored 25 in one half against Arizona. Romar completely broke him down an it continued to mid way through his junior year.
Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
You can question whether or not Hawes was the caliber of player that should have left after one year. He averaged 15 and 6 as a freshman ... good but far from elite. But more importantly, he was pretty vocal about the fact that he was going to be a one and done even before he came to UW ... so it wasn't like that wasn't a known factor.
If you also recall, QP also was very vocal that first year about being a one and done player until he got a large dose of humble pie realizing that he was far away from being a high end college player much less a NBA player.
It's not that the one and done player by themselves per se has set the UW program backwards. The problem is that the underlying infrastructure of the UW program under Romar has not been established in a manner that allows for absorbing for the players coming into the program that are going to leave early without digging a massive hole. When you factor that in with the number of transfers that the program has experienced, then the going after the one and dones has absolutely hurt the program.
On top of that, when you look at the nature of guys that have traditionally left early at UW, the guys that are leaving either before getting in school (Webster), after a year, or after two years have by and large had underwhelming NBA careers because they've left before they were ready. It's the guys that have stayed 3 or 4 years that have had the successful NBA careers as they've developed to the point of being able to step into the league and being contributors. The fact that Romar can't leverage that when talking with players is beyond comical to me ... almost as much as saying that one and dones haven't hurt this program.
I can't respond to every point in your never ending tl, read some dreck.
Of course Hawes should have been a one and done. You are pretending like I think Hawes sucked. He didn't. He was pretty good, although there were better bigs in the conference. I personally have a hard time being a fan of a 7 footer grabs 6 rebounds per game in college.
Since when does 15 and 6 in college translate to being a great NBA player?
You'll never hear me say that kids that decide they want to go get a payday in the NBA that they shouldn't do that if their goal is to get to the NBA.
But if your goal is to get a big 2nd check in the NBA, to be an All-Star, etc., then leaving after one year in college isn't the way to go unless you are quite clearly a generational player.
People forget that the guard play was so bad that year, Hawes was the one taking shots at the end of the shot clock/game. Like the USC game...
Sure Appleby could hit 3s, but he could not create for himself or others. Dentmon was really exposed that year once he didn't have Roy carrying him anymore. Oliver and Nelson sucked during their time at UW.
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
Blaming one and done players for the faults in the program is king doog level fucking stupid.
4 and 5 year players don't dictate the culture of a program with the same HC for 14 years. A player that stays on campus for 8 months sure as fuck doesn't either.
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The problem with your first point is that you're completely missing the mark of the difference between talent and a good team. Yes, all those guys had talent. But if you go look at all the guys you talked about, you have freshman, sophomore, freshman, sophomore, and freshman. Even if Romar didn't suck, when you combine with how good the PAC was, even a good coach would probably struggle to get them past the first weekend of the NCAA. You are also forgetting that Pondexter was a shell of what he would be as a freshman and Dentmon really struggled as he had to shoulder more of the load.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby Phil Nelson Hans Gasser Artem Wallace Brandon Burmeister
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
Blaming one and done players for the faults in the program is king doog level fucking stupid.
4 and 5 year players don't dictate the culture of a program with the same HC for 14 years. A player that stays on campus for 8 months sure as fuck doesn't either.
But great slave master mentality.
You clearly missed the post that I made earlier in the week that showed over 70% of the starters for the Sweet 16 teams being juniors and seniors.
You can say it is FS all you want ... but the stats are the stats.
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
Blaming one and done players for the faults in the program is king doog level fucking stupid.
4 and 5 year players don't dictate the culture of a program with the same HC for 14 years. A player that stays on campus for 8 months sure as fuck doesn't either.
But great slave master mentality.
You clearly missed the post that I made earlier in the week that showed over 70% of the starters for the Sweet 16 teams being juniors and seniors.
You can say it is FS all you want ... but the stats are the stats.
Ummm, that's not the point. Nobody is saying older players aren't valuable.
The point is that one and done talent is also valuable. Are you really arguing Turd's point that we? should never take one and done players at UW??? If so, you're an idiot. If not, you missed the point of my response to his post.
You can blame roster composition, timing, etc., for the poor results of one and done players at UW, but ultimately it comes down to UW being one of the worst programs at utilizing young NBA caliber talent.
That's the fault of one person, not a type of player.
Comments
box score: http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/article/Huskies-LSU-box-score-1223001.php
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby
Phil Nelson
Hans Gasser
Artem Wallace
Brandon Burmeister
I fully agree that you need to supplement one and dones with good upperclassmen. Everyone does.
Disagree on Pondexter. He averaged 15 a game in non conference. We all loved him. He scored 25 in one half against Arizona. Romar completely broke him down an it continued to mid way through his junior year.
If you also recall, QP also was very vocal that first year about being a one and done player until he got a large dose of humble pie realizing that he was far away from being a high end college player much less a NBA player.
It's not that the one and done player by themselves per se has set the UW program backwards. The problem is that the underlying infrastructure of the UW program under Romar has not been established in a manner that allows for absorbing for the players coming into the program that are going to leave early without digging a massive hole. When you factor that in with the number of transfers that the program has experienced, then the going after the one and dones has absolutely hurt the program.
On top of that, when you look at the nature of guys that have traditionally left early at UW, the guys that are leaving either before getting in school (Webster), after a year, or after two years have by and large had underwhelming NBA careers because they've left before they were ready. It's the guys that have stayed 3 or 4 years that have had the successful NBA careers as they've developed to the point of being able to step into the league and being contributors. The fact that Romar can't leverage that when talking with players is beyond comical to me ... almost as much as saying that one and dones haven't hurt this program.
Fuck you are pressing badly today.
Of course Hawes should have been a one and done. You are pretending like I think Hawes sucked. He didn't. He was pretty good, although there were better bigs in the conference. I personally have a hard time being a fan of a 7 footer grabs 6 rebounds per game in college.
You'll never hear me say that kids that decide they want to go get a payday in the NBA that they shouldn't do that if their goal is to get to the NBA.
But if your goal is to get a big 2nd check in the NBA, to be an All-Star, etc., then leaving after one year in college isn't the way to go unless you are quite clearly a generational player.
Spencer Hawes was not a generational player.
Sure Appleby could hit 3s, but he could not create for himself or others. Dentmon was really exposed that year once he didn't have Roy carrying him anymore. Oliver and Nelson sucked during their time at UW.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
4 and 5 year players don't dictate the culture of a program with the same HC for 14 years. A player that stays on campus for 8 months sure as fuck doesn't either.
But great slave master mentality.
You can say it is FS all you want ... but the stats are the stats.
The point is that one and done talent is also valuable. Are you really arguing Turd's point that we? should never take one and done players at UW??? If so, you're an idiot. If not, you missed the point of my response to his post.
You can blame roster composition, timing, etc., for the poor results of one and done players at UW, but ultimately it comes down to UW being one of the worst programs at utilizing young NBA caliber talent.
That's the fault of one person, not a type of player.