McBee steppin' up

#51
#51
volbreaker said:
It is my recolection that his minutes were increasing in conjunction with the rate of the number of times that you were calling for him to be benched.
Click to expand...

nope clearly incorrect. once again good try though. i was asking for him to be benched early in the year, and he was for the most part, just when he'd come in i'd want him to sit back down. i said he needs to shoot more consistently to earn these minutes.

towards sec play when he started seeing more minutes i also was asking for him to sit down, becaues HE CONTINUED TO SHOOT POORLY, i said if he shot better he would deserve more minutes.

then recently ccm gives him the start and he shows some signs of shooting better, i oblige that if he shoots consistently he is deserving of these minutes.

then the last 2 games getting major minutes he has shot lights out, and i say that if he shoots consistently he is absolutely deserving of these kind of minutes.


see the trend?

i have stated all along that if the kid shoots consistently he should play major minutes, and if he isnt hitting consistently then he doesnt deserve big time minutes. very simple, and his minutes have increased and decreased with his shooting % so clearly im in the same ball park as ccm thought process.
 
#52
#52
bleedingTNorange said:
i dont know if you're referring to me, but let me be clear. i didnt say pull his scholarship and tell him either pay your way or leave.

what i said was if he qualifies for hope, or other scholarships/grants that would equal what he gets via scholarship present the idea to him. it wouldnt effect him financially as either way his school is being paid for, and itd help the team, its not like your kicking him off. as i said though, if he doesnt qualify for enough or doesnt wanna do it, then thats fine by me to leave him on scholarship.
Click to expand...

If a single sport athlete is receiving a scholarship of any kind he is counted against the scholarships allowed for that team. It doesn't matter if the scholarship is "athletic" or "academic". That's not how the NCAA views scholarship athletes. Having Hope funds pay his way doesn't free a scholarship, it just saves the athletic fund a tiny amount of money. Walk-ons have to pay their own way to be considered "non-scholarship" players. The rules on this are fairly convoluted, but it's not possible to do what you keep suggesting.
 
#53
#53
Now if we could get him a football scholarship, he could count against that total rather than basketball. Good luck with that though.
 
#54
#54
dlw4n said:
If a single sport athlete is receiving a scholarship of any kind he is counted against the scholarships allowed for that team. It doesn't matter if the scholarship is "athletic" or "academic". That's not how the NCAA views scholarship athletes. Having Hope funds pay his way doesn't free a scholarship, it just saves the athletic fund a tiny amount of money. Walk-ons have to pay their own way to be considered "non-scholarship" players. The rules on this are fairly convoluted, but it's not possible to do what you keep suggesting.
Click to expand...

That's inaccurate, I have known walk ons in the past to receive grants and scholarships and they weren't considered scholarship players.

Someone posted awhile ago, the rule is if you are recruited and then brought in and given walk on status but receive hope or grants you then have to sit a year. They mention it as if you take an OV to th school being the deciding point in this. In skylars case he Did not take a OV, so from my understanding would be able to do so. In fact, I'm pretty sure in his first year e did receive grants an scholarships.

I also remember Steven pearl when he was a walk on it being talked about the he received grants or something. He wasn't counted towards our scholarship players.

I could be dead wrong, but I swear I remember walk ons receiving some sort f financial aid. And as I eluded to in stokes recruitment Memphis writers came out ad said he could be brought on and given financial aid and grants, but that becuse he was recruited he would have to sit out a year. That's their rule to keep teams from say KY from having 15 5* guys and just putting a few as walk ons and receiving financial aid.
 
Last edited:
#55
#55
bleedingTNorange said:
That's inaccurate, I have known walk ons in the past to receive grants and scholarships and they weren't considered scholarship players.

Someone posted awhile ago, the rule is if you are recruited and then brought in and given walk on status but receive hope or grants you then have to sit a year. They mention it as if you take an OV to th school being the deciding point in this. In skylars case he Did not take a OV, so from my understanding would be able to do so. In fact, I'm pretty sure in his first year e did receive grants an scholarships.

I also remember Steven pearl when he was a walk on it being talked about the he received grants or something. He wasn't counted towards our scholarship players.
Click to expand...

I may be off a bit then. I do recall the NCAA rules being fairly convoluted on this matter. It's sort of a moot discussion at this point, because there is absolutely no way we pull an athletic scholarship from someone who is contributing the amount of play he is.
 
#56
#56
dlw4n said:
I may be off a bit then. I do recall the NCAA rules being fairly convoluted on this matter. It's sort of a moot discussion at this point, because there is absolutely no way we pull an athletic scholarship from someone who is contributing the amount of play he is.
Click to expand...

And that's fair, I'd like to personally see him keep It I think he has deserved that honor of being a scholarship player for the university.

I was just bringing up options, which wa weeks ago now, in which we could gain a scholarship.
 
#57
#57
bleedingTNorange said:
And that's fair, I'd like to personally see him keep It I think he has deserved that honor of being a scholarship player for the university.

I was just bringing up options, which wa weeks ago now, in which we could gain a scholarship.
Click to expand...

I also don't think it was (only) you who suggested that dropping his scholly was a possibility. I have seen that a lot more than once in the past 6 months.
 
#58
#58
dlw4n said:
I also don't think it was (only) you who suggested that dropping his scholly was a possibility. I have seen that a lot more than once in the past 6 months.
Click to expand...

Probably true. IMO its very simple, mcbee please shoot a consistent 40-45% home and road and you are deserving of both minutes and a scholarship.
 
#59
#59
bleedingTNorange said:
Probably true. IMO its very simple, mcbee please shoot a consistent 40-45% home and road and you are deserving of both minutes and a scholarship.
Click to expand...


So are we setting our own expectations for all players to be deserving of a scholarship? And McBee needs to shoot 40-45% to be deserving?

Apply that stat based philosophy to all NCAA teams and you will have 3-5 scholarship players on each team. It appears you still believe that shooting well is the only thing he brings to the table, otherwise, a "deserving of a schlarship" conversation wouldn't occur.
 
#60
#60
Spartacavolus said:
So are we setting our own expectations for all players to be deserving of a scholarship? And McBee needs to shoot 40-45% to be deserving?

Apply that stat based philosophy to all NCAA teams and you will have 3-5 scholarship players on each team. It appears you still believe that shooting well is the only thing he brings to the table, otherwise, a "deserving of a schlarship" conversation wouldn't occur.
Click to expand...

i thought you had me on ignore? why are you trying to pick fights with my opinion once again.

yes it's my belief that really the only STRONG suite mcbee brings to the floor is his ability to shoot, and doesnt turn it over much. if he played offense like josh richardson who would get more minutes, josh or skylar?

josh no question about it. that stat doesnt apply to every team in the ncaa, why would i expect a post player to shoot 40-45% from 3, what an absurd statement. the stat applies to a very select group, a pg or sg that was brought on and given a scholarship because he has the ability to be deadly from 3.

what exactly is your point? that its unfair to ask skylar to be a good 3 point shooter? do you have any idea how many walk ons have proven to be good players? so why is it unfair to ask skylar to be a consistent 3 point shooter, im missing something apparently. jajaun smith was rated a lower recruit than skylar was coming out of high school and look what he turned his career into. im not saying skylar should do the same, i just dont understand why you find it unfair to ask him to be a consistent 3 point shooter.
 
Last edited:
#61
#61
bleedingTNorange said:
i thought you had me on ignore? why are you trying to pick fights with my opinion once again.

yes it's my belief that really the only STRONG suite mcbee brings to the floor is his ability to shoot, and doesnt turn it over much. if he played offense like josh richardson who would get more minutes, josh or skylar?

josh no question about it. that stat doesnt apply to every team in the ncaa, why would i expect a post player to shoot 40-45% from 3, what an absurd statement. the stat applies to a very select group, a pg or sg that was brought on and given a scholarship because he has the ability to be deadly from 3.
Click to expand...


I don't have anyone on ignore. And I didn't say anything about a 3 or 4 shooting 45% from 3. I said a stat driven basis, which could mean rebs, assists, points, etc. What stats do the other players on the team have to reach in order to stay on sholarship?

The board is about opinions. It's also about opining about opinions. I opine that your idea that an sg be required to hit 40% from 3 or not be on scholarship is a terrible opinion.
 
#62
#62
Spartacavolus said:
I don't have anyone on ignore. And I didn't say anything about a 3 or 4 shooting 45% from 3. I said a stat driven basis, which could mean rebs, assists, points, etc. What stats do the other players on the team have to reach in order to stay on sholarship?

The board is about opinions. It's also about opining about opinions. I opine that your idea that an sg be required to hit 40% from 3 or not be on scholarship is a terrible opinion.
Click to expand...

well lets see the last walk on to get a scholarship for multiple years that i recall was a man by the name of jajuan smith. he brought quite a bit to the table, much more than just shooting so yea, to me he was very deserving of the scholarship. he did lots of things to earn his scholarship and i had no issue what so ever with him being on scholarship.

if the sg is capable of bringing other elite attributes to the team then no, they shouldnt have to be a great outside shooter. your gonna sit here and tell me if skylar shot 10% on his career from 3 he should be a scholarship sg for this team?
 
#63
#63
bleedingTNorange said:
well lets see the last walk on to get a scholarship for multiple years that i recall was a man by the name of jajuan smith. he brought quite a bit to the table, much more than just shooting so yea, to me he was very deserving of the scholarship. he did lots of things to earn his scholarship and i had no issue what so ever with him being on scholarship.

if the sg is capable of bringing other elite attributes to the team then no, they shouldnt have to be a great outside shooter. your gonna sit here and tell me if skylar shot 10% on his career from 3 he should be a scholarship sg for this team?[/QUOTE]

No, I'm not going to say anyone shooting 10% needs to be on the floor long.
But I'm also not going to suggest pulling Skylar's scholly, if he shoots 35% from 3, as you are suggesting should be the basis for him to have/not have a scholarship. I think CM would laugh if you suggested such.
Click to expand...
 
#64
#64
Count me in as a McBee hater. I thought for sure USC was a fluke. Then he lit it up against Florida on the road. If he can sustain this level of play (which I doubt), we can beat anyone. If we can get Tatum to contribute something, then we'll really be a threat.

I haven't looked at his stat line, but what has he shot the past 2 games, like 75%?
 
#65
#65
Thrasher865 said:
Count me in as a McBee hater. I thought for sure USC was a fluke. Then he lit it up against Florida on the road. If he can sustain this level of play (which I doubt), we can beat anyone. If we can get Tatum to contribute something, then we'll really be a threat.

I haven't looked at his stat line, but what has he shot the past 2 games, like 75%?
Click to expand...

4-7 FG, 6-6 FT, 1 steal in 31 min in the USCjr game.

4-7 FG, 1-2 FT, 2 rebounds, 1 assist in 38 min in the Fla game.

Most telling stat is that he didn't turn the ball over in either game.
 
#66
#66
Yeah, just looked up the stats. 4-7 is great, but to be honest, I only remembered 1 miss in the USC game, so I guess I was just shocked he was shooting so well.

I really hope he can keep it up.

4-7 is a more sustainable stat line. If he can stay above 40%, I'll be really happy.
 
#67
#67
Spartacavolus said:
bleedingTNorange said:
well lets see the last walk on to get a scholarship for multiple years that i recall was a man by the name of jajuan smith. he brought quite a bit to the table, much more than just shooting so yea, to me he was very deserving of the scholarship. he did lots of things to earn his scholarship and i had no issue what so ever with him being on scholarship.

if the sg is capable of bringing other elite attributes to the team then no, they shouldnt have to be a great outside shooter. your gonna sit here and tell me if skylar shot 10% on his career from 3 he should be a scholarship sg for this team?[/QUOTE]

No, I'm not going to say anyone shooting 10% needs to be on the floor long.
But I'm also not going to suggest pulling Skylar's scholly, if he shoots 35% from 3, as you are suggesting should be the basis for him to have/not have a scholarship. I think CM would laugh if you suggested such.
Click to expand...

Ok I'll try to be more realistic and embracing, if skykar isn't shooting 40-45 he doesn't need to see major minutes. Ccm would agree with this as early in the year when he was laying bricks he was seeing about 15 mins a game. Due to our leak of depth skylar is going to play no matter what, how many minutes pretty much depends on how he's been shooting it.

This has been shown, is it a coincidence that his last 2 games has played his most minutes while hooting his best? I don't think so. It's very simple, he shoots good and ccm plays him more he shoots like he did early in the year and hell be back to 16 mpg like he was early in the year.

Should his scholarship get pulled if he's shooting 30%? No that's a bit harsh I'll admit, but I was just trying to explain my stance. Skylar minutes are solely based on how he is shooting and that is obvious, so if his shooting turns horrible like it wa in the beginning of the year, then he doesn't deserve many minutes, and he didn't get them. As I said though, with this team he's going to get some minutes no matter what so it really is a moot point.

Skykar will be here 2 more years and on scholarship for both. I hope he makes the most out of it and continues to improve that 3 point shot. If he can hit 45% consistently as he has shown he can the last few games, he brings this team a whole new dimension and makes us a lot better. I have been hard on the kid but an very impressed by his improvement an work ethic, and his live of the game and Tennessee. I wish him nothing but the best going forward, and as I said the better he shoots from 3 the better we are as a team.
Click to expand...
 
#68
#68
bleedingTnOrange, Skylar has only one more year after this one doesn't he? You might be counting this year when you said he has two more years. I know he has played three years, one as a walk on, but I assume that counts. Correct me if I'm wrong but be gentle.
 
#69
#69
bigorange61 said:
bleedingTnOrange, Skylar has only one more year after this one doesn't he? You might be counting this year when you said he has two more years. I know he has played three years, one as a walk on, but I assume that counts. Correct me if I'm wrong but be gentle.
Click to expand...

No you're right, he's a junior. I was counting this as 1 year and next as year 2. You are correct sir, I should have been clearer.
 
#71
#71
At this point, we simply don't have many perimeter threats, which (obviously) stretch the defense and open up the paint for Maymon, Hall, and Stokes.

I think McStache adds more than some people realize when he is a realistic threat. I saw a bunch of open back-door baskets that are completely dependent on keeping defenders away from the off-side of the paint. Keep it up McBee!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#72
#72
kiddiedoc said:
At this point, we simply don't have many perimeter threats, which (obviously) stretch the defense and open up the paint for Maymon, Hall, and Stokes.

I think McStache adds more than some people realize when he is a realistic threat. I saw a bunch of open back-door baskets that are completely dependent on keeping defenders away from the off-side of the paint. Keep it up McBee!
Click to expand...

Bingo!

the better he continues to shoot from 3, or consistent at this ponit as he's now shooting good, they better we are as a team.

it makes every aspect of our game on the offensive side better. allows golden more room to work and drive, and keeps post from really doubling maymon, stokes and hall down low.

as you said...keep it up stache'
 
#73
#73
bleedingTNorange said:
Bingo!

the better he continues to shoot from 3, or consistent at this ponit as he's now shooting good, they better we are as a team.

it makes every aspect of our game on the offensive side better. allows golden more room to work and drive, and keeps post from really doubling maymon, stokes and hall down low.

as you said...keep it up stache'
Click to expand...

According to the stats, if he scores ten points we seem to win. 9-0 in games where Skylar has 10 or more. That's not a completely telling statistic since a few of those were against less than stellar competition, but it has been completely true during the SEC schedule as well.
 
#74
#74
RhodesVol said:
According to the stats, if he scores ten points we seem to win. 9-0 in games where Skylar has 10 or more. That's not a completely telling statistic since a few of those were against less than stellar competition, but it has been completely true during the SEC schedule as well.
Click to expand...

Yea I saw that. It goes back to what I've been saying, very simple, if he can shoot consistently well we are a much better team. He has been doing that lately and if he shoots consistently well he will score right sound double figures most games. We need him to knock down those 3's it makes us much better as a team all the way around, and it's proven by that stat.


Keep up the good work skylar!
 
#75
#75
bleedingTNorange said:
Yea I saw that. It goes back to what I've been saying, very simple, if he can shoot consistently well we are a much better team. He has been doing that lately and if he shoots consistently well he will score right sound double figures most games. We need him to knock down those 3's it makes us much better as a team all the way around, and it's proven by that stat.


Keep up the good work skylar!
Click to expand...

Don't mind him going to the free throw line either. I know he doesn't get in a position to be fouled often, but he is almost automatic from the stripe. Did you see how almost insistent FL was about not fouling him at the end of the game?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top