Who will be our Most Valuable Newcomer?

Who will be our Most Valuable New Comer?

  • Bryce Hopkins

    Votes: 40 34.2%

  • Ian Jackson

    Votes: 33 28.2%

  • Oziyah Sellers

    Votes: 8 6.8%

  • Joson Sanon

    Votes: 23 19.7%

  • Dillon Mitchell

    Votes: 8 6.8%

  • The Field

    Votes: 5 4.3%
  • Total voters
    117
BrookJersey Redmen said:
Better deep shooter, not as good as Ron on defense (but who was/is), more rebounding, but you're correct about how special a player Artest was for the Johnnies.

In this day-and-age, no one plays defense like Ron Artest. Heck, that's not only true in college BB, but in the NBA also.

Tom in Simsbury, now Tom in Salem, watched Bryce very closely in his outstanding year at Providence and gave me that comparison. The stats comparison bear it out.
Click to expand...
Not to derail the thread but the thing with Ron is that his court vision and comprehension of the game were both off the charts. He had the Larry Bird-like ability to know where everyone was on the court at all times without looking. And every game he would analyze what the team needed from him to win and then he would do that thing. If it was score, he scored, if it was rebound, he rebounded, if it was pass, he passed. And always defended, of course.

He was just a unique player - almost everyone else has a game and they play their game. Ron played whatever game was needed for that particular game. His brain obviously works differently than your average bear, but it translated into basketball greatness that the stats are not reflective of.

Also TiS doesn't know if the ball is stuffed with air or feathers (bonus points to those of you who get THAT reference).

Back on topic - Mitchell and Scott are very different players but same type of role, yes.
 
lawmanfan said:
Not to derail the thread but the thing with Ron is that his court vision and comprehension of the game were both off the charts. He had the Larry Bird-like ability to know where everyone was on the court at all times without looking. And every game he would analyze what the team needed from him to win and then he would do that thing. If it was score, he scored, if it was rebound, he rebounded, if it was pass, he passed. And always defended, of course.

He was just a unique player - almost everyone else has a game and they play their game. Ron played whatever game was needed for that particular game. His brain obviously works differently than your average bear, but it translated into basketball greatness that the stats are not reflective of.

Also TiS doesn't know if the ball is stuffed with air or feathers (bonus points to those of you who get THAT reference).

Back on topic - Mitchell and Scott are very different players but same type of role, yes.
Click to expand...
Agree completely, Ron Ron was one of a kind who only played two years in college and went on to have a long, stellar NBA career - if he had played 4 years for us he would definitely be one of our 3 or 4 all time greats.
 
lawmanfan said:
Not to derail the thread but the thing with Ron is that his court vision and comprehension of the game were both off the charts. He had the Larry Bird-like ability to know where everyone was on the court at all times without looking. And every game he would analyze what the team needed from him to win and then he would do that thing. If it was score, he scored, if it was rebound, he rebounded, if it was pass, he passed. And always defended, of course.

He was just a unique player - almost everyone else has a game and they play their game. Ron played whatever game was needed for that particular game. His brain obviously works differently than your average bear, but it translated into basketball greatness that the stats are not reflective of.

Also TiS doesn't know if the ball is stuffed with air or feathers (bonus points to those of you who get THAT reference).

Back on topic - Mitchell and Scott are very different players but same type of role, yes.
Click to expand...
Not that I play, but I guess golf balls are stuffed with feathers.
 
lawmanfan said:
Not to derail the thread but the thing with Ron is that his court vision and comprehension of the game were both off the charts. He had the Larry Bird-like ability to know where everyone was on the court at all times without looking. And every game he would analyze what the team needed from him to win and then he would do that thing. If it was score, he scored, if it was rebound, he rebounded, if it was pass, he passed. And always defended, of course.

He was just a unique player - almost everyone else has a game and they play their game. Ron played whatever game was needed for that particular game. His brain obviously works differently than your average bear, but it translated into basketball greatness that the stats are not reflective of.

Also TiS doesn't know if the ball is stuffed with air or feathers (bonus points to those of you who get THAT reference).

Back on topic - Mitchell and Scott are very different players but same type of role, yes.
Click to expand...
Do I get an IPA if I guess the reference correctly ?
 
mjmaherjr said:
Do I get an IPA if I guess the reference correctly ?
Click to expand...
The offer was bonus points. And I already got somebody to agree to buy you an IPA. But yeah, for you, sure - I probably owe you a couple of beers at this point anyway.
 
lawmanfan said:
The offer was bonus points. And I already got somebody to agree to buy you an IPA. But yeah, for you, sure - I probably owe you a couple of beers at this point anyway.
Click to expand...
The person you are referencing in that quote also coined the phrase “ I’ll give you an internet nightmare “ S.A
 
lawmanfan said:
Ron Artest.....Larry Bird-like ability
Click to expand...
LMF, to borrow your phrase about pumping the brakes with our comparisons, OMG. There is the Larry Bird stratosphere, that being just under MJ. Ronnie is great, and I believe (like NCJ said, Ron Ron was unique, terrific, even stellar), but as my St. John's Philosophy prof Lewis Weeks said when you gave a wrong answer: "You're not in the same ballpark, pal."

I saw Larry Bird play and the only Johnny he can even remotely be compared to is Mullin, and that is even a very big, long stretch.

LMF, your comments about court vision, presence, knowing where everyone was without looking, comprehension of the game, made me think you were talking about Mullin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top