Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

UW had good to great point guard play for the better part of 15 years

2»

Comments

  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    Crisp is shooting almost 50% from 3 in conference play this year. He’s playing well at the right time. He’s still flawed and we need a better PG, but he’s shooting well and when we need it.
  • HillsboroDuckHillsboroDuck Member Posts: 9,186

    Crisp is shooting almost 50% from 3 in conference play this year. He’s playing well at the right time. He’s still flawed and we need a better PG, but he’s shooting well and when we need it.

    Completely agree
  • theknowledgetheknowledge Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 4,933 Founders Club

    Dentmon was not a good player for three out of his four years, Gaddy was either hurt or disappointing in his four years here and Andrews was not good three of his four years here. I like the idea of 15 years of good PG play but those three were only good for 2.5 of their 12 years of UW basketball. Thats a lot of shitty PG play to watch waiting for a light to come on or for the referees to give them "senior calls" like Andrews lived off his senior year. That cat scored as much from the line as he did from the floor.

    Most of this is true though I’d argue Dentmon was good as a frosh as well as a senior. Gaddy being disappointing is obviously very true but it doesn’t mean he wasn’t a better at running point than Crisp was - he had huge expectations he never lived up to but he could handle the ball and distribute it far better than Crisp even if he couldn’t score anything like what Crisp does.

    And while the truth that those guys weren't necessarily good until their seniors years is true, most of them played alongside another one of them earlier in their careers who was good.

    (Bad PG play years in bold)

    04: Will and Nate
    05: Will and Nate
    06: Roy and Good Dentmon
    07: Disastrous PG play by Dentmon and Appleby kept us from being a tourney team with Hawes and Brockman.
    08: Bad Dentmon/Appleby/Overton (mediocre year here, not the disaster of 07 by any means)

    09: Good Dentmon/IT/Overton
    10: IT/Overton
    11: IT/Overton
    12: Bad Gaddy/Wroten (Wroten had more turnovers than assists)
    13: Good Gaddy
    14: Bad Andrews
    15: Bad Andrews
    16: Good Andrews
    17: Fultz
    18: Crisp
    19: Crisp


    So basically before Crisp took over point there had been four or five seasons of bad PG play of our last 14.

    So I overstated it a bit but that's 9 years of good PG at worst and I would say eight of those years (04, 05, 06, 09, 10, 11, 16 and 17) were excellent.
    I'll buy this. I like talking basketball with you degenerates. We seem to be able to point/counterpoint without contracting AIDS or SCREAMING AT EACH OTHER!!!!
  • HillsboroDuckHillsboroDuck Member Posts: 9,186

    Dentmon was not a good player for three out of his four years, Gaddy was either hurt or disappointing in his four years here and Andrews was not good three of his four years here. I like the idea of 15 years of good PG play but those three were only good for 2.5 of their 12 years of UW basketball. Thats a lot of shitty PG play to watch waiting for a light to come on or for the referees to give them "senior calls" like Andrews lived off his senior year. That cat scored as much from the line as he did from the floor.

    Most of this is true though I’d argue Dentmon was good as a frosh as well as a senior. Gaddy being disappointing is obviously very true but it doesn’t mean he wasn’t a better at running point than Crisp was - he had huge expectations he never lived up to but he could handle the ball and distribute it far better than Crisp even if he couldn’t score anything like what Crisp does.

    And while the truth that those guys weren't necessarily good until their seniors years is true, most of them played alongside another one of them earlier in their careers who was good.

    (Bad PG play years in bold)

    04: Will and Nate
    05: Will and Nate
    06: Roy and Good Dentmon
    07: Disastrous PG play by Dentmon and Appleby kept us from being a tourney team with Hawes and Brockman.
    08: Bad Dentmon/Appleby/Overton (mediocre year here, not the disaster of 07 by any means)

    09: Good Dentmon/IT/Overton
    10: IT/Overton
    11: IT/Overton
    12: Bad Gaddy/Wroten (Wroten had more turnovers than assists)
    13: Good Gaddy
    14: Bad Andrews
    15: Bad Andrews
    16: Good Andrews
    17: Fultz
    18: Crisp
    19: Crisp


    So basically before Crisp took over point there had been four or five seasons of bad PG play of our last 14.

    So I overstated it a bit but that's 9 years of good PG at worst and I would say eight of those years (04, 05, 06, 09, 10, 11, 16 and 17) were excellent.
    I'll buy this. I like talking basketball with you degenerates. We seem to be able to point/counterpoint without contracting AIDS or SCREAMING AT EACH OTHER!!!!
    The free hoops bored at Dawgman was normally a refuge from idiocy as well with the occasional reese23 type exception, at least until spadoFS showed up.
Sign In or Register to comment.