Practice....

[Rusty 54]

Just a thought, maybe DC doesn't play as well with Sam at point instead of Ruff. Ruff should be able to get DC into the offense better and be more of a floor general. Thats not a slam on Sam at all, I think he has been doing a great job this year. But I would think that and experienced senior guard would be able to direct DC more.

[CrouchsCrusaders]

im tired of people saying DC is too weak! he wouldnt be playing bball if he was too weak! so he is a little brittle, its not like he is going to get just run over in lane if someone driving toward him. And if they get the ball in the post double team him and rotate everyone else around.

[Dallas Brave]

I have spending the last 2 hours running stats around DC (as well as all the 4 and 5 players - DC, RA, SS, and MS). I am going to post the information under a new thread. It is staggering and unbelievable that DC is not playing more.

[dogsrus]

I know that term is commonly used by younger people, but it is still considered quite offensive by many. So we will not allow such language.

This is not a new decision. Note that in the Rules for Posting, the first example of unacceptable language specifically states--

Posts should not contain any of the following content:
- Profanity or vulgarities- we will decide what is profane or vulgar, but you know what it is. Consider that there people of all ages that visit this board. So even terms like "sucks" are considered inappropriate.

http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4909

Also not allowed are verbal assaults aimed at specific players. It's OK to criticize their performance on the court, but avoid personal attacks.

For the record DC I'm not calling for censorship . I also am not trying to call out someone who uses the term. I understand, as I stated, fans being upset. I use the term "this $ucks" alot but I just don't like to see us calling out individual players with THAT term.

I post with the idea in mind a player might be reading. What would Salley think of this fanbase if he read this. Yeah its NOT representative of everyone but those comments sting the most IMO.

Sally, Singh, Crouch, Sam, Les, Andrew......everyone is failing right now. You win and lose as a team. Our problems are more then ______$ucks.

JMHO...

[BuBraves55]

somebody must of forgot to tell les that if it aint broke dont fix it. when collins got pt and we were at least competitive

[Scouter]

Just a thought, maybe DC doesn't play as well with Sam at point instead of Ruff. Ruff should be able to get DC into the offense better and be more of a floor general. Thats not a slam on Sam at all, I think he has been doing a great job this year. But I would think that and experienced senior guard would be able to direct DC more.

Considering DC has played, what, eight minutes since Ruffin's been out, I highly doubt that's the problem.

[Beninator]

The 2002-03 roster wasn't a bunch of Tiny Tim's:

7'1" Heemskerk
6'9" Marcetic
6'8" Granger
6'7" Faulknor
6'7" Stewart
6'6" Suggs
6'6" Battle
6'4" Adams
6'4" Gillingham
6'3" Gilbert
6'3" Paul

Les had the opportunity to have a 6'8" Tisby and 6'5" Tucker on that squad as well.

And some of those players couldnt even tiptoe through the tulips or even deserve a division 1 scholarship.

[edmondo15]

Other than Marcetic, I'd love to hear who you think doesn't deserve a D1 scholarship on that team...I think that team had as much if not more talent than this years squad.

[Beninator]

Other than Marcetic, I'd love to hear who you think doesn't deserve a D1 scholarship on that team...I think that team had as much if not more talent than this years squad.

I am not going to put the names out there.... There are two other players on that list who I dont think had division 1 talent. Nice people but they should not have been scholarship recruits.imo

[edmondo15]

Does anybody else wonder what the progression of bigs like DC and Zach Andrews would have been if Al Biancalana was still on the staff?

[BradleyBrave]

Does anybody else wonder what the progression of bigs like DC and Zach Andrews would have been if Al Biancalana was still on the staff?

I don't. Our defense was awful when Al was on the staff and our rebounding wasn't very good either. DC seemed to be developing nicely when he was getting the minutes.

[edmondo15]

Ouch...don't sugar coat it next time, just give it to me straight, lol.

Al B could develop a big man though. POB still credits him to this day for his success.

[Beninator]

I don't. Our defense was awful when Al was on the staff and our rebounding wasn't very good either. DC seemed to be developing nicely when he was getting the minutes.

Very much agree BradleyBrave

[real fan]

Just read in the paper about the Illinois asst coaches telling Bruce that McCamey needs to start even though he does not practice well; he scored 18 points; also I was at a clinic that coach Versace was speaking and he said that he had several players that always seemed to practice great but when the lights were on and the stands were full of people they just couldn"t perform; his statement was every good coach has to decide if they want good practice players or good game players.

[ph]

I believe that most of the time you'll get better teams by playing good practice players. MJ was known as a fierce competitor in practice, so great players can practice well. I have no problem with practice always determining the starting lineup.

I also attribute a great deal of out S16 run to the practice=playing mantra. JJ's contribution in the last 2 years was due to this philosophy.

It needs some flexibility. I think a player can start looking too good against familiar competition (How Salley looked dominant in practice and the red/white, but seems to disappear in real games) Unless a player is obviously not trying in practice, you need some consideration to game performance.