Chris Obekpa

I think that Chandler is the most important. I think he is an impact player and will blend in beautifully with Karr and the rest.

Obekpa certainly will help us as a defensive presence but his offensive skills are suspect. Sanchez is a Juco similar to what GG was.

If GG was first coming in to this team now, we would have thought he would have a significant impact . He really did not. So, I look at Sanchez as a Juco who still is around for the picking so he is of questionable Big East capability.

Michael Chandler, on the other hand is a four star 6' 10" talent. If we can get him to sign, then we are legitimately on our way..
 
I think that Chandler is the most important. I think he is an impact player and will blend in beautifully with Karr and the rest.

Obekpa certainly will help us as a defensive presence but his offensive skills are suspect. Sanchez is a Juco similar to what GG was.

If GG was first coming in to this team now, we would have thought he would have a significant impact . He really did not. So, I look at Sanchez as a Juco who still is around for the picking so he is of questionable Big East capability.

Michael Chandler, on the other hand is a four star 6' 10" talent. If we can get him to sign, then we are legitimately on our way..
 

Chandler would be fantastic.. Provided he is eligible.. I think your Sanchez comment was way off however.. Watching the kid twice showed me ( and most on this board) that Sanchez is without question a Big East talent .
 
I think that Chandler is the most important. I think he is an impact player and will blend in beautifully with Karr and the rest.

Obekpa certainly will help us as a defensive presence but his offensive skills are suspect. Sanchez is a Juco similar to what GG was.

If GG was first coming in to this team now, we would have thought he would have a significant impact . He really did not. So, I look at Sanchez as a Juco who still is around for the picking so he is of questionable Big East capability.

Michael Chandler, on the other hand is a four star 6' 10" talent. If we can get him to sign, then we are legitimately on our way..
 

Chandler would be fantastic.. Provided he is eligible.. I think your Sanchez comment was way off however.. Watching the kid twice showed me ( and most on this board) that Sanchez is without question a Big East talent .
 

Yeah Sanchez and Gift should not be in the same sentence.
 
If GG was first coming in to this team now, we would have thought he would have a significant impact . He really did not. So, I look at Sanchez as a Juco who still is around for the picking so he is of questionable Big East capability.
 

Huh? Marcus Hatten was still around for the picking during the late signing period, so obviously that meant he was questionable to play in the Big East, as well, right?

GG and Sanchez are totally different players. I had the chance to watch Sanchez last week (twice), and he can certainly play in the Big East. I'm pretty sure others who watched Sanchez will agree that he isn't similiar to GG. GG can also play in the Big East. He's just not a guy who should be logging a ton of minutes nor be counted on to carry the load. 

Other than that, Obekpa will be a big coop for us, if he were to land in Queens. 
 
So Tony Parker is a bad prospect because he hasn't committed to a school as of yet? Sanchez wants to take a few officials.. Thats an illogical leap.  
 
So Tony Parker is a bad prospect because he hasn't committed to a school as of yet? Sanchez wants to take a few officials.. Thats an illogical leap.  
 

I think he was referring to just a JUCO being around this late.
Doesn't matter the logic is messed up either way.
 
So Tony Parker is a bad prospect because he hasn't committed to a school as of yet? Sanchez wants to take a few officials.. Thats an illogical leap.  
 

I think he was referring to just a JUCO being around this late.
Doesn't matter the logic is messed up either way.
 



I think that if Ricardo Gathers was still here, we would not have looked at Sanchez. Now that he is not Sanchez is the object of our affections and mucho hoopla ! I think, similarly to other schools, we hype our recruits. Why wouldn't we. It's a good feeling to hope and think the best for our guys.

I have never seen either Gathers or Sanchez play. I just feel that the percentages are against late signing Jucos. It's like picked over fruit. Only every now and then you get a good one.

Now you mention, in contradiction to my position, Jucos who became stars. There are always exceptions to the rule.. If you want to argue that the exceptions are the rule, I think that is a glaringly fallacious position for you to take.
Some posters have said that they have seen Sanchez play twice and he was terrific.

Although, that's far from conclusive, I'm happy to read that.

I never said that Sanchez was not the real thing. I inferred that he was suspect. I would feel great if he proved those suspicions to be wrong.

My argument with the previous poster is that they found my reasoning to be, "Illogical."

My position is that they are talking with their hearts. I can't blame them for that, I just don't agree with them..
 
 I think that if Ricardo Gathers was still here, we would not have looked at Sanchez. Now that he is not Sanchez is the object of our affections and mucho hoopla ! I think, similarly to other schools, we hype our recruits. Why wouldn't we. It's a good feeling to hope and think the best for our guys.

I have never seen either Gathers or Sanchez play. I just feel that the percentages are against late signing Jucos. It's like picked over fruit. Only every now and then you get a good one.

Now you mention, in contradiction to my position, Jucos who became stars. There are always exceptions to the rule.. If you want to argue that the exceptions are the rule, I think that is a glaringly fallacious position for you to take.
Some posters have said that they have seen Sanchez play twice and he was terrific.

Although, that's far from conclusive, I'm happy to read that.

I never said that Sanchez was not the real thing. I inferred that he was suspect. I would feel great if he proved those suspicions to be wrong.

My argument with the previous poster is that they found my reasoning to be, "Illogical."

My position is that they are talking with their hearts. I can't blame them for that, I just don't agree with them..
 

I think most observers of Sanchez would still be happy and satisfied with garnering him, if we still had Gathers. It's probably true that we probably wouldn't have gone after him, if Gathers was on board. OTOH, whether, we had Gathers or not is irrelevant when it comes to Sanchez's game.

So, why are late signing JUCO's any different than late signing high school players? Are JUCO's suppose to commit or sign early? Are late signing high school players "suspect" and "picked over fruit," as well? So, Sanchez should've signed somewhere in November or otherwise, the chances are slim of him fairing well in the Big East, right? This is how your reasoning is coming off, IMO.

The fact you haven't seen Sanchez play takes away from your argument in this case. Who knows what Sanchez will do once he ends up playing major D-1 ball. But, I'm willing to find out based on what I've heard and, more importantly, witnessed (a couple of times) last week.    
 
So Tony Parker is a bad prospect because he hasn't committed to a school as of yet? Sanchez wants to take a few officials.. Thats an illogical leap.  
 

I think he was referring to just a JUCO being around this late.
Doesn't matter the logic is messed up either way.
 



I think that if Ricardo Gathers was still here, we would not have looked at Sanchez. Now that he is not Sanchez is the object of our affections and mucho hoopla ! I think, similarly to other schools, we hype our recruits. Why wouldn't we. It's a good feeling to hope and think the best for our guys.

I have never seen either Gathers or Sanchez play. I just feel that the percentages are against late signing Jucos. It's like picked over fruit. Only every now and then you get a good one.

Now you mention, in contradiction to my position, Jucos who became stars. There are always exceptions to the rule.. If you want to argue that the exceptions are the rule, I think that is a glaringly fallacious position for you to take.
Some posters have said that they have seen Sanchez play twice and he was terrific.

Although, that's far from conclusive, I'm happy to read that.

I never said that Sanchez was not the real thing. I inferred that he was suspect. I would feel great if he proved those suspicions to be wrong.

My argument with the previous poster is that they found my reasoning to be, "Illogical."

My position is that they are talking with their hearts. I can't blame them for that, I just don't agree with them..
 

If you haven't seen him play why are you skeptical?
 
 
I think most observers of Sanchez would still be happy and satisfied with garnering him, if we still had Gathers. It's probably true that we probably wouldn't have gone after him, if Gathers was on board. OTOH, whether, we had Gathers or not is irrelevant when it comes to Sanchez's game.

Sanchez's game is now depicted like Gathers. Outstanding, terrific and if GG was a recruit now , he would be amazing

So, why are late signing JUCO's any different than late signing high school players? Are JUCO's suppose to commit or sign early? Are late signing high school players "suspect" and "picked over fruit," as well? So, Sanchez should've signed somewhere in November or otherwise, he's not gonna stack up well in the Big East, right? This is how your reasoning is coming off, IMO.
.
They only have two years to be productive, usually. They usually didn't have the grades to get into college and may not be able to stay for academic reasons The competition they play against may not be as good. The demand for their services from their preferred schools may not have ever been realized.

Late in the picking season, it is often said there is not much left. There is good reason for that statement. That doesn't mean that there is any definite formula here. Just if you make up a check list, all things being equal, I'd rather have our recruits being fought over from the beginning and we win out.
.

The fact you haven't seen Sanchez play takes away from your argument. Who knows what Sanchez will do once he ends up playing major D-1 ball. But, I'm willing to find out based on what I've heard and, more importantly, witnessed (a couple of times) last week

The fact that you have seen him play twice doesn't add much. Coaches/scouts/bird dogs, practically live with kids before they offer.
 
 
I think most observers of Sanchez would still be happy and satisfied with garnering him, if we still had Gathers. It's probably true that we probably wouldn't have gone after him, if Gathers was on board. OTOH, whether, we had Gathers or not is irrelevant when it comes to Sanchez's game.

Sanchez's game is now depicted like Gathers. Outstanding, terrific and if GG was a recruit now , he would be amazing

So, why are late signing JUCO's any different than late signing high school players? Are JUCO's suppose to commit or sign early? Are late signing high school players "suspect" and "picked over fruit," as well? So, Sanchez should've signed somewhere in November or otherwise, he's not gonna stack up well in the Big East, right? This is how your reasoning is coming off, IMO.
.
They only have two years to be productive, usually. They usually didn't have the grades to get into college and may not be able to stay for academic reasons The competition they play against may not be as good. The demand for their services from their preferred schools may not have ever been realized.

Late in the picking season, it is often said there is not much left. There is good reason for that statement. That doesn't mean that there is any definite formula here. Just if you make up a check list, all things being equal, I'd rather have our recruits being fought over from the beginning and we win out.
.

The fact you haven't seen Sanchez play takes away from your argument. Who knows what Sanchez will do once he ends up playing major D-1 ball. But, I'm willing to find out based on what I've heard and, more importantly, witnessed (a couple of times) last week

The fact that you have seen him play twice doesn't add much. Coaches/scouts/bird dogs, practically live with kids before they offer.
 


Kindly expound further. Tomes!!!
 
I think that Chandler is the most important. I think he is an impact player and will blend in beautifully with Karr and the rest.

Obekpa certainly will help us as a defensive presence but his offensive skills are suspect. Sanchez is a Juco similar to what GG was.

If GG was first coming in to this team now, we would have thought he would have a significant impact . He really did not. So, I look at Sanchez as a Juco who still is around for the picking so he is of questionable Big East capability.

Michael Chandler, on the other hand is a four star 6' 10" talent. If we can get him to sign, then we are legitimately on our way..
 

Chandler would be fantastic.. Provided he is eligible.. I think your Sanchez comment was way off however.. Watching the kid twice showed me ( and most on this board) that Sanchez is without question a Big East talent .
 

Yeah Sanchez and Gift should not be in the same sentence.
 

My feeling also.
 
 
Sanchez's game is now depicted like Gathers. Outstanding, terrific and if GG was a recruit now , he would be amazing
 

Where did I depict Sanchez's game to Gathers? Please tell me.... I don't know how you comprehended such a thing from my post. What does GG has to do with Sanchez? The only similiarities I've seen was both of 'em were JUCO players. Please elaborate on their other similiarities....

They only have two years to be productive, usually. They usually didn't have the grades to get into college and may not be able to stay for academic reasons The competition they play against may not be as good. The demand for their services from their preferred schools may not have ever been realized.

Late in the picking season, it is often said there is not much left. There is good reason for that statement. That doesn't mean that there is any definite formula here. Just if you make up a check list, all things being equal, I'd rather have our recruits being fought over from the beginning and we win out.

I can understand that you may not want players who only have two years to be productive. That's plausible. But, there are high school players who generally come in and only play two years. Quite frankly, I only saw Harkless being here for two years, but he bolted after one. I also only see Sampson to be here for two seasons, as well. So, why not balance out the roster with JUCO players?

Most JUCO players go that particular route to get their grades in order. So, most of 'em come to major D-1 without any issues with being eligible. The competition they play is also a good reasoning. But, what if they are playing in a legit league? Not to mention, the JUCO circuit is starting to bloom once again. So, there are some talented players now going back to JUCO.

Once again..... What is the deal with late signing JUCO's versus late signing high school players? What if the JUCO player was being fought over since the beginning of the season? How do you know Sanchez hasn't been fought over throughout the course of the season?

The fact that you have seen him play twice doesn't add much. Coaches/scouts/bird dogs, practically live with kids before they offer.

So, the fact I've only seen him twice doesn't add much, huh? You might be right. But, I trust my eyes more than I trust your belief. I also feel I have a pretty decent idea about a player once I've seen them play a few times.

Finally, I've seen him two more times than you, and can make, at least, a reasonable assessment of his game versus someone who has never seen him, but has all the answers.  
 
You say that now but would you have said that if GG was first coming in.--- think back a year ago !  Moose in answer to your questioning my skepticism--- for all of the above reasons that I mentioned in the above exchanges.
 
We need bodies. We need size.

Sanchez is not going to come in and be a star. He is a role player. I wouldn't touch Chandler with a ten foot pole. We need to put a premium on character guys.
 
You say that now but would you have said that if GG was first coming in.--- think back a year ago !  Moose in answer to your questioning my skepticism--- for all of the above reasons that I mentioned in the above exchanges.
 

Honestly I can't make sense of your last post because I think there are parts of Dinkins response to you in the post, so I'm not sure what your words and his words are.
 
Back
Top