Anderson is a unique player and hard to judge by stats, especially points scored. He played 22 minutes against Cal Poly and took two shots so he obviously wouldn't have scored much. However, he did have 5 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 steals, and a block so it's not like he wasn't doing anything. I'm not saying he played well; I don't know how he is playing because I haven't seen UCLA, but many cautioned the Andersons that UCLA and especially Howland, was a bad fit for KA. Obviously, they thought otherwise.
He also had 3 fouls and 2 turnovers Logen.
I would have loved to get KA but lets face it this board would go crazy with stats like that.
Let's face it, many people who post here aren't exactly basketball mensas; they are fans. I don't know how KA is playing but I know he cannot be judged by points. Many here don't like Sir Dom and I think without question he is one of our better players. ESPN has raised a generation of "fantasy" fans who think you judge a player by points scored, rebounds,etc. Stats matter but only in the context of the game and a players role on the team. Take Obekpa for instance, if his role is to go after every shot, his rebound totals will suffer and taken out of context he becomes a "poor" rebounder. Then reverse it and say the staff tells him to stop going after shots and rebound but he continues to go after shots and he blocks 10 shots but we get killed on the boards and lose because of it. The board will be full of "experts" posting about what a great game Obekpa had when in reality he obviously didn't do his job. It is very difficult to judge anything other than the obvious mistakes because one does not know the role a player has been assigned. For instance, and this is strictly hypothetical, the board has been full of the "Jones can't rebound" posts with plays taken out of context where he didn't go for the ball. But what if his role was to just box out his man and NOT chase the ball because he is proficient at putting a body on a man and plays the other teams best offensive rebounder? Back to the subject, I don't know how KA is playing but the "gloating in his failure" tone of some of the posts led to my response; he is a real talent but cannot be judged by stats. I think he made a very poor choice of schools and I believe said that at the time. I actually thought SJU was a good fit simply because Lavin has a reputation for looking at and experimenting with his teams early in the season and figuring out and then implementing what works; it is the phase we are in now and you can see him juggling lineups, etc. I thought he was the best coach to integrate KA's talents into his team, as Hurley did
You call people who commented on KA fans, but you haven't seen him play and are scanning a box score. How does that work?
Kyle has looked out of place. Him playing PG at St. Anthony's kind of stunted the full development of his overall game from what I have seen of him so far at UCLA. When he tries to score near the basket, he has very little lift off the ground and he is so slow to rise that he's getting a lot of his shots blocked. He also looks terrible shooting from the outside probably because he didn't have to as much because he was so skillful in getting in the lane in HS.
And I do not think SJU was the best fit for Kyle. I think, like the previous poster, Georgetown was because of their offense. It would've been perfect for a slow-footed kid like Kyle to be able to flash into the paint or create assists from up high. And his length would fit right in to the players they have now.
Seton Hall would've probably been the easiest transition for him and he could step right in on Day 1 and be the man.
Lavin's PGs have to be able to push the pace. That's not KA's strong point.
The "gloating in failure" is a reach. I have issue with him spurning us (sour grapes) for sure. But when his father took to Zags to bitch about his son and Howland's use of him, I felt all gloves were off.
