What If.....

[echeese]

goal, wish, desire, hope...sure. but standard? nope. since the polls began in 1936 football has 4. were all the other years  worthless? not to me.

Strawman. . . .a logical fallacy. . . . .an argument based on an misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. It’s called a strawman because the person sets up a false point (the strawman) that the original arguer never made and expends all his energy attacking it, instead of the actual premises of the original argument.

Who said all other years were worthless. . ????

It is the standard for football . ..face it. . .without a Natty .. . CS will be inferior to Mack. . . .

Baseball .. . Women's VBall. . . .Swimming & Diving .. . Track. . . 

All these sports are built around winning a Natty .. . .

But I will leave it at we have different standards I guess .. . . 

 

[BudreauReye]

I'll defer to the bball experts. . . .. 

Can Barnes build a team in the next 2-3 years to win a title?

No offense but Natty's are the STANDARD at TEXAS .. .  .

If yes, why?   If no, who do we get to put us over the top?

Am I correct . .. men's basketball is the ONLY sports program with zero natty's???

goal, wish, desire, hope...sure. but standard? nope. since the polls began in 1936 football has 4. were all the other years  worthless? not to me.

Maybe echeese is overstating his premise, streettoprechel.  I agree with you that we should strongly desire national championships, but no sports team at any university can have that as their standard.  It is too much of a crap shoot to think that that is your standard.  Also, it seems to me that we should sit back and enjoy the next two or three years in men's basketball.  Looks to me that we are trending pretty well. 

It is interesting to me that even when we are trending well, that somebody has to still reflect the last downswing.  Downswings and upswings are natural.. Of course you want to minimize the former and emphasize the later if at all possible.  But, to continue to want to talk about who we might be able to get if we can get rid of our present coach, when, in fact, our present coach may be looking forward to the brightest days of his tenure at Texas, as well as possibly the brightest days of Texas basketball ever  Well, that seems to me to represent a rather gloomy outlook and just plain old unneccesary, to boot.  I just cannot go there. 

Some have said, in the past, before this turnaround, that Coach Barnes just can't get Texas over some perceived hump, to the promised land of the "next level".  Well, I do not know about that, but I do know that there are probably quite a few universities with basketball teams that have historically performed at a higher level than Texas that would be happy, if it were possible,  to change rosters, incoming players, and coaches with Texas over the next three years.  I guess that my belief is that this is the wrong question at the wrong time.  I think Coach Barnes recently turned sixty.  Even if he decided to retire after what looks to be perhaps a pretty good run over the next three years or so, the entire coaching landscape could be quite different by then, even if it were as soon as three years.  I think that I will just wait until such consideration is indeed warranted.  Until then, I will continue licking my chops over the possibilities for next year.

 

[echeese]

PS,

Let me re-state. . .for the basketball guys.(Barnes sycophants seem to have spoken) . .how does this signing impact our game in 2015?   

What will be different. . . ..what does Turner add to our mix?

And for the record. . .I believe that men's basketball is our sole athletic program without a natty . .. I did not say (another assumed strawman) we win a natty every year but there is  a GLARING hole in our trophy case .. . our HC has been here 17 years and is paid Top 15 money (likely soon to be top 10 again). . .

Is it really too much to hold men's basketball to the same standard as every other program on campus?     Face it. . . we haven't even gone to the Sweet 16 in this decade. . . which isn't even BcS bowl level. . . .more like Cotton Bowl or Peach. . . .

but thanks budreau. . . for at least addressing the issue . . ..good thoughts. . . 

 

[BudreauReye]

Strawman. . . .a logical fallacy. . . . .an argument based on an misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. It’s called a strawman because the person sets up a false point (the strawman) that the original arguer never made and expends all his energy attacking it, instead of the actual premises of the original argument.

Who said all other years were worthless. . ????

It is the standard for football . ..face it. . .without a Natty .. . CS will be inferior to Mack. . . .

Baseball .. . Women's VBall. . . .Swimming & Diving .. . Track. . . 

All these sports are built around winning a Natty .. . .

But I will leave it at we have different standards I guess .. . . 

I think you are misstating your premise.  You say here, "All these sports are built around winning a natty ...".  You said before, "... Natty's are the STANDARD at TEXAS ...".  Those statements are not the same.  I do not think that anybody is saying that we would not have high standards.  I, at least, am saying that performing at a very high level should be expected, with the hope that there are some championships of the conference as well as the national variety liberally sprinkled in there.  But, to assume that a coach should be replaced if he or she does not win a national championship when their teams have otherwise performed well, is just not realistic.  If that were the standard, we would not have any coaches in any sports.

 

[BudreauReye]

I'll defer to the bball experts. . . .. 

Can Barnes build a team in the next 2-3 years to win a title?

No offense but Natty's are the STANDARD at TEXAS .. .  .

If yes, why?   If no, who do we get to put us over the top?

Am I correct . .. men's basketball is the ONLY sports program with zero natty's???

goal, wish, desire, hope...sure. but standard? nope. since the polls began in 1936 football has 4. were all the other years  worthless? not to me.

Sycophant:  "a person who acts obsequiously toward someone important in order to gain advantage"

and for good measure ...

Obsequious:  "obedient or attentive to an excessive or servile degree."

Echeese, only three people have responded to your post so far, JimR, streettopeschel, and me.  I do not think any of us are sycophants toward anybody and I do not see any of our responses as obsequious.  I cannot speak for the others, but perhaps the quick and succinct nature of web forum posting may be creating a false sense of confrontation here.  Just to be clear, I do not care for the "We need to get rid of so and so ..."  discussions, or perhaps I should refer to them as rants.  You made a post  proposing discussion on how the basketball program should move forward since Coach Barnes has not reached an assumed standard - winning a National Championship.  Your proposal supposes what, I think, and, I think JimR and streettopeschel think, is an unrealistic premise.  Speaking for myself, only, I do not think you can realistically expect that winning a National Championship is a standard that anyone could realistically achieve.  It can, however, be a realistic goal toward which all programs should aspire.  I am not attacking you or what you said.  I AM, however, suggesting to you that when the first three responders to your post seem to be taking issue with the same point, you might want to rethink your proposal for discussion.  I have no desire to discuss who should replace Coach Barnes under the supposition that he has not done a good job.  If you changed your premise to be that Coach might decide to retire or he might take a different job, so who might replace him ... well then, I might not want to participate in such an exercise, but I would surely be interested in what people thought.  Maybe the idea of what the goals for our basketball team should realistically be another valid discussion.  Just maybe, they might need to be decoupled.

And please, calling people names, even if using a name as sophisticated as "sycophant" does engender discussion.  Unless, of course, it is meant with the greatest spirit of humor.  And, take it from me - one who has tried this many to many times - that the humor route quite often fails miserably,   You old curmudgeon you!    Sorry, I could not resist that.

 

[JimR]

PS,

Let me re-state. . .for the basketball guys.(Barnes sycophants seem to have spoken) . .how does this signing impact our game in 2015?   

What will be different. . . ..what does Turner add to our mix?

And for the record. . .I believe that men's basketball is our sole athletic program without a natty . .. I did not say (another assumed strawman) we win a natty every year but there is  a GLARING hole in our trophy case .. . our HC has been here 17 years and is paid Top 15 money (likely soon to be top 10 again). . .

Is it really too much to hold men's basketball to the same standard as every other program on campus?     Face it. . . we haven't even gone to the Sweet 16 in this decade. . . which isn't even BcS bowl level. . . .more like Cotton Bowl or Peach. . . .

but thanks budreau. . . for at least addressing the issue . . ..good thoughts. . . 

 I am not anyone's sycophant, and more folks than I told you having a NC as the standard is nuts. that means anything less is a bad season because the standard was not achieved. a NC is not the standard for any sport, including football, anywhere, including UT..

 

[Juan]

Let me re-state. . .for the basketball guys.(Barnes sycophants seem to have spoken) . .how does this signing impact our game in 2015?   

The presence of Turner will affect quite a bit.

He can score and has 3P range -- so on offense -- he will drag a large defender all around the court and out of the paint.  This combines to do at least two things - (1) gives us 3P shooting we sorely lack, and (2) will free up space inside for Big Cam to operate.  IMO, this part alone has the potential to really boost our offensive production.

He is also 7-feet and a good shot blocker -- so on defense -- he or Cam can go for blocks while still having another big inside for protection and more importantly rebounds.  This is key as while the shot blocker might block or at least alter the shot, by going for it, he usually has gotten himself out of position to also grab the rebound/missed shot.

More generally, Turner will probably change the entire Barnes philosophy as we will be going from a 3-guard line-up to 3 bigs.  This is assuming Holmes can master or at least handle the SF position -- something he did not fully prove last season.  But, I still think he can and will.  This will/should mean less minutes for both Holland and Felix (which I see as a positive).  I look for Walker to step up and take the starting SG position (may not happen, but this is my hope).  FWIW, I see Barnett most likely as a rotation guy at the 3 (although I admit to already dreaming he can play some 2 -- at 6'7!).

In addition, Turner will allow us to run more zone defense.  My guess is that we will be a majority zone team next season.

These are my thoughts.  I am sure other people have their own ideas.

 

[BudreauReye]

PS,

Let me re-state. . .for the basketball guys.(Barnes sycophants seem to have spoken) . .how does this signing impact our game in 2015?   

What will be different. . . ..what does Turner add to our mix?

To be fair to your request for discussion about the affect of Turner's signing for our team, here is an exchange that juan grande and I had on another thread.  Maybe this will help get the discussion going in a more productive direction.  And of course, Juan responded while I was importing our earlier discussion ... which, I must say, Juan, confused the hell out of me since I was already trying to quote me quoting you ... if that makes any sense.  Eh!  if not who cares!

Juan Grande, on 01 May 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:



My guess is that the front court starters are Ridley, Turner and Holmes

Lammert and Ibeh first off the bench.  

Barnett first off the bench behind Holmes?  (I think Holmes can thrive 3 this season, but admit its still an open question)

The SG is to be determined.  Walker was coming on at end of the year, perhaps he will keep going and take it?

Barnett could possibly play the 2, which would give us a huge line up (he is 6'7).

But my guess for now is Holland but would like to see him develop an outside shot.

Not sure on Croaker. We will just have to wait and see on him.

We know the PG.  I  also like Yancy in the rotation here. (hopefully all of this adds up to less minutes for Felix -- his role should only be an off the bench energizer bunny).

We has depth and talent.

How do you guys see the line up?

budreaureye, on 01 May 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:

I can't really quibble with anything you are saying, Juan. 

I have a feeling that this may be the most talented roster from top to bottom that Coach Barnes has ever had here. In the lead up to Turner's decision, I read someone somewhere say that we would have a clogging of the middle problem with too many bigs vying for space and other than an unproven Barnett, no other real threes to play on the perimeter.  I think this is a nice problem to have and is mitigated quite a bit by the fact that Holmes, Lammert, and Turner can all play either inside or outside setting up on the perimeter when the situation warrants.  All three can set up outside and drive effectively from the three point line.  All three are effective passers (hell, Ridley and The Prince have shown that they can be passable passers at times, as well) that can get involved in a high low post game and Lammert has shown he can be especially effective in the pick and role.  These guys ability to set up outside will immediately help court spacing for all five players on the court and should open up lanes for the guards to drive to the basket or pull up and shoot. 

If we can convince anybody to shoot some threes, all that length on the floor will create opportunities to chase down long rebounds on misses.  On offense, I would welcome the opportunity to have to deal with managing all of that height on the floor at the same time - especially with the guys that we have.  And just for grins, I can see some pretty effective small lineups to put out there as a change of pace.  Put Taylor, Holland, Walker, Barnett, and Turner or some such variation of that combination on the floor at the same time, press the hell out of them, and run them out of the gym. 

And, of course, somebody will say that a lineup with some variation of Taylor, Walker, Holmes Turner, and Ridley will have difficulty defending against smaller guard dominated lineups, especially with Coach Barnes' predilection for man defense.  Well, to that I say, Barnes has developed always had an appreciation of late for the two three zone when it was necessary or could be advantageous.  Can you imagine a two three zone with Holmes, Ridley, and Turner across the back?  Drive on that!  Or, I guess you could platoon in Barnett, The Prince, and Lammert ... well, I am sure that you catch my drift.  Seems to me that that is the kind of defense we ran into against Syracuse and Carmelo Anthony back when we went to the Final Four. 

And, I agree with you Juan, about Felix.  He should shoot nothing but quick catch and release jumpers and threes so he can bring the energy off of the bench.  He already knows how to be a floor general in a pinch.  He may not have been much of a sharpshooter in the past but he should hurry up and find a way to channel one as fast as he is able. 

Where the guard play will come from, other than Taylor, will be interesting to see develop.  We seem to have a glut there as well as other places.  Seems to me that none of those guys have shown a desire to transfer because I can imagine that they can very well see what is coming down the pike, and they, therefore, very much want to be a part of what's coming.  If that is the case, then it behooves them to make sure that they do whatever it takes to get themselves on the court. 

My!  My!  My!  A plethora of possibilities sure seems to be a good thing to have!  Our future so bright allus gotta wear shades!    B) B) B) B) B)

 

[streettopeschel]

Me a Barnes sycophant? Hardly. I thought he should have been fired after 2013 and that the program was in a death spiral going into '14. I was wrong.

And as eloquently posted above, speculating on who could get us to the 'next level' when we have more momentum in the program than we've had in years strikes me as oddly timed at best.

 

[ATX89]

Count me in the group glad to see Shaunsters onboard and the hoops guru for Hornsports.  I too wondered what the heck he was doing on OB when he gets ripped on so frequently there.  Glad he's back!!

 

[Lukus Alderman]

Count me in the group glad to see Shaunsters onboard and the hoops guru for Hornsports. I too wondered what the heck he was doing on OB when he gets ripped on so frequently there. Glad he's back!!

I concur!

Another big get for HS. Building an all-star staff here!

 

[BudreauReye]

In order to further the discussion on the effect of Myles Turner coming to Texas, I am going to leave this article here.  It is an interesting discussion about the concept of team that the current roster has fought for and that Myles espouses.  In effect, the team vetted him and they were the major players in his recruitment. 

Longhorn players praised as MVP's of Myles Turner’s recruitment.

By Brian Davis - American-Statesman Staff


"Myles Turner has undeniable talent. The newest Texas signee is considered one of those supposed can’t-miss recruits, and nobody passes on a five-star rated, 6-foot-11-inch center who’s ranked as the ninth-best player in the country.  But the Longhorn basketball coaches made it sound as though the Texas players interviewed Turner just as much as he did them.


 
Myles Turner, a five-star rated, 6-foot-11-inch center from Euless Trinity High, listens to a question from an ESPN interviewer Wednesday afterConsidering that locker-room dysfunction nearly destroyed this program two years ago, there’s no way the upperclassmen would let a problem child or prima donna in now.“When he came in, I liked the way he mingled with our guys,†Texas coach Rick Barnes said Thursday after the compliance office gave the green light to talk about Turner publicly.  “He’s very real.“From the first time we met, he told us he wanted to be a part of a team,†Barnes added. “That’s the most important thing. He never made it about himself, saying I’m going to be a savior or I’m going to go in and demand this or that.† Turner said at his signing ceremony that he wanted to stay close to home, and Barnes said he truly cares for his teammates at Euless Trinity. That was a critical reason, Turner said, he delayed announcing his decision, knowing the move would lead more coaches to come watch Trinity play.

Turner wanted that same sort of familial atmosphere in college.

“Just watching Texas work last year, they’re a real blue-collar program,†Turner said Wednesday after announcing his decision. “The only reason I’m here is through hard work, and I feel like that’s what Texas has done and what they can do in the future.â€

Assistant coach Chris Ogden was the point man on Turner’s recruitment, but he said everyone contributed. Still, Ogden said flat out that the current Longhorns “were the MVPs.† “Really what it comes down to, are the players that used to play for you and the players here now, are they selling your program?,†Ogden said. “Are they having a good experience? And our guys are. They felt that he knew that. You can’t fake that when you come on campus.â€

Barnes said he’s not into comparing one player against another, but he can see how Turner’s style is similar to that of LaMarcus Aldridge, a big man with a three-point shooting touch who’s unafraid to get physical inside.  Just by adding Turner, the Longhorns will be the odds-on favorite next season to dethrone Kansas, a program that’s won 10 straight Big 12 regular-season titles. That’s what the players expect to do, anyway. Turner just helps their cause even more.  “I really think he chose the University of Texas because of what we’ve got going right now,†Barnes said.

 

[BudreauReye]

Aw hell ... ima goin all out!  So now I will rip off these comments by Derka Derka over at ShaggyBevo ... I know!  I am just a basketball slut!  But, at least I properly attribute everybody.  Good thoughts.  He sez ...

"Here's my take on that situation:

Javan Felix- shot .255 from deep as a freshman, and then shot .343 as a sophomore. If he has even half of the improvement this offseason as he did last, he'll be a legit outside weapon.

Jonathan Holmes- has gone from .250, to .289, to .333. He shot over 50% from the field and he shot 74% at the line, so it stands to reason that he could improve his shot up to 37% or higher, especially with his known work ethic.

Martez Walker- shot over 35% from 3 as a freshman and really came on late in the year. Not afraid to shoot, and with the way he hustles, crashes the glass, and gets to the line, he should be playing 20+ mpg easily next season, if not 25+. Coaches said before the season that he can really shoot, and it's not unreasonable to think that he could be up near 40% himself.

Kendal Yancy- shot the exact same percentage as Walker, in a much smaller sample size. However he did look confident shooting when given the chance late in the year, and if nothing more should be a capable catch-and-shoot guy from 3.

Connor Lammert- shot .239 as a freshman, up to .340 as a sophomore. Just like Javan, if he makes even a slight improvement this season he will be up in that 38% territory. And again, these are not unreasonable expectations. Some people here say he's going to lose minutes if Turner commits, but Lammert has great vision for a big man and is going to play.

DaMarcus Croaker- only shot .297 as a freshman, but Rick Barnes himself said that he "can really shoot from anywhere on the court". He also said that he "needs to adjust his attitude towards practice", although that was over 2 months ago now. Since then he has continued to praise everyone for working hard and has said that he expects Croaker to be a contributor. Has a lot of competition for PT, but his reputation is that of a shooter.

Isaiah Taylor- Rick said of Zay, "He can really shoot. Anyone with that kind of soft touch can shoot." Rick said it is 100% about confidence and shot selection for Isaiah. Compared him to TJ Ford in that neither of them scored much in HS because neither tried to. Said he needs to get used to it, but he says that the shot is there.

So that is what we already have on campus in terms of shooting. And to that point, one of the overlooked areas where Myles Turner would have an immediate impact is opening up the perimeter for open jumpers. With Ridley and Turner (and possibly Holmes, Lammert, or even Ibeh (yikes!)) in the post, the perimeter should definitely open up on offense. We may not have a plethora of natural shooters, but we absolutely have guys who can hit an open, rhythm jumper. This year we had teams play lots of sagging zone against Texas just daring our guards to shoot off the dribble. If Turner comes to Texas we have the best front court in the conference and one of the 5-10 best in America. You have to believe that his presence will also help out our team 3-point percentage as a whole."

 

[utisdabomb12]

I don't know about national championship, but I really love what Barnes is doing on the recruiting trail. Turner was huge, but Barnett was an absolute steal. Grandstaff is the real deal and I honestly don't know why it took so long for him to blow up. If Texas is able to pull Turner, Barnett and Grandstaff that's three very good players. I'm also starting to fully believe that Turner is not a one and done. 

 

[echeese]

And please, calling people names, even if using a name as sophisticated as "sycophant" does engender discussion.  Unless, of course, it is meant with the greatest spirit of humor.  And, take it from me - one who has tried this many to many times - that the humor route quite often fails miserably,   You old curmudgeon you!    Sorry, I could not resist that.

Actually I was mocking the incessant excuse making more than anything. . . . . ..but then several are "dish it out but can't take it types'. . .. . I do enjoy mocking double standards

Thanks for the real basketball insight. . . .at least some here are capable of dealing with the issues. . .

 

[BudreauReye]

Actually I was mocking the incessant excuse making more than anything. . . . . ..but then several are "dish it out but can't take it types'. . .. . I do enjoy mocking double standards

Thanks for the real basketball insight. . . .at least some here are capable of dealing with the issues. . .

I appreciate your comments.  I also think that my previous thought about the nature of "fast and furious" web posting causing problems when in fact no offense was intended, does in fact cause some of our miscommunication problems, and, in effect, cuts down on what could be interesting discussions.  That's my perspective .., but then again, look at my posts ... if somebody dares to disagree with me in a manner that I take issue with, I am liable to bury them with words.  I have been known to end many a thread, knowing that it is not possible, but well imagining that I can hear the gasping for breath of my adversary, over the WWW as they drown in my words.  Nevertheless, I look forward to many more productive exchanges with you in the future ... and you too, Juan!  Whether you like it or not!  Sigh!  See, that is the impulse control thing that gets me into trouble ... over and over, again. 

 

[echeese]

 I am not anyone's sycophant, and more folks than I told you having a NC as the standard is nuts. that means anything less is a bad season because the standard was not achieved. a NC is not the standard for any sport, including football, anywhere, including UT..

It is funny that after explaining what a strawman is. . . you build another one. . . btw, I doubt you understand so I underlined. . .. 

But yes. . .expecting a Natty from a sports team at TEXAS is "nuts" since every other program has pulled it off. . . 

 

[3xhorndad]

I concur!

Another big get for HS. Building an all-star staff here!

Same here. Welcome Shaunsters. Glad to see you over here. Your inputs are welcome here. Look forward to more good basketball news and info.

 

[streettopeschel]

Actually I was mocking the incessant excuse making more than anything. . . . . ..but then several are "dish it out but can't take it types'. . .. . I do enjoy mocking double standards

Thanks for the real basketball insight. . . .at least some here are capable of dealing with the issues. . .

talk about a strawman. who is making incessant excuses?

and yes, right or wrong there IS a double standard at Texas re football v hoops. There's a double standard at duke, uk, ku and indiana too. the histories, traditions and interests of the fanbases are what dictate it. doesn't mean we can't want a NC or aim for excellence but it just doesn't matter to as many people. never will. 

 

[JimR]

Screw you, echeese. You are smarter than everyone else on every subject. Don't read my posts and I won't read yours.

Did you make All American when you played? Did you even go to Texas? That's the standard, you know.