The Official #17 Tennessee vs. #25 Missouri Game Thread, 3:30 PM ET, ESPN

#1,301
#1,301
Freak said:
Pretty cool we got to number one. Did our football program?

We’ve had a ton of injuries this year and lost a few games we shouldn’t have. But we’re a 4-seed in the tournament and have a chance. as someone who’s watched a lot of poor Tennessee basketball over the years, this doesn’t feel terrible to me. I’d like our chance better with Z though.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure football was ranked #1 at one time last year. Not that it matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dergibvol
#1,303
#1,303
C-south said:
One had an overall fg% under 40% and the other was over 50. Maybe an idiot can’t figure that out.
Click to expand...
That’s cherry picking. One shot 80% from the paint and one shot 80% from outside. Compare 3 pointers and Grant is at 29.1% (on WAAAY fewer attempts) and Santi is 37.7%. Best comparison of two players who play vastly different positions is “effective field goal %”. Grant was 53.0%, Santi 53.1%. Effectively the same…
 
#1,306
#1,306
Zues1 said:
I laugh at people beating up on Vescovi.
He's been the main catalyst for so many wins since he stepped off the plane at McGhee Tyson.
He will be missed.
Click to expand...
Vescovi is very under appreciated. Guy has capped out on his ability, was a leader and hit many big shots over 4 years. Those FT misses against Vandy and Missouri are going to haunt him, but the guy is a player. His defense improved significantly over 4 years and just was a solid all around college basketball player. His freshman year he could barely dribble going to his right. Guys was more impactful for UT by far than the recent one and dones (Chandler, Johnson, Springer) that we got so excited about for their brief tenures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruisedOrange, Hbg, Hoggervol and 6 others
#1,307
#1,307
Tenacjim said:
That’s cherry picking. One shot 80% from the paint and one shot 80% from outside. Compare 3 pointers and Grant is at 29.1% (on WAAAY fewer attempts) and Santi is 37.7%. Best comparison of two players who play vastly different positions is “effective field goal %”. Grant was 53.0%, Santi 53.1%. Effectively the same…
Click to expand...

Lol wtf is “effective fg%. That’s like some per capita statistic. Their percentage is what it is and they aren’t close. We have nobody to go to when we have to have a bucket with this team.
 
#1,308
#1,308
Was at the game all the silly turnovers in the 1st half were bad. Mizzou made more shots in the 2nd half and we couldn’t guard the ball or get a rebound when it counted. Hopefully we get streaky starting next week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennrich1
#1,311
#1,311
C-south said:
One had an overall fg% under 40% and the other was over 50. Maybe an idiot can’t figure that out.
Click to expand...

My guy, Grant shot 1064 field goals in his career here, only 103 were from 3 (and he was a career 29.1% from 3). Santi has shot 1006 field goals (before today's game) and 713 were from 3 where he's a career 37.7% (4th for a career in school history).

So which of those is one dimensional exactly?

Career totals:
Santi -1275 points, 452 rebounds, 352 assists, 168 steals, 14 blocks, FG: 39.8%, 3PT: 37.7%, FT: 79.2%
Grant - 1629 points, 678 rebounds, 219 assists, 89 steals, 160 blocks, FG: 51.6%, 3PT: 29.1%, FT: 75.8%

And the craziest part is that because of his shortened freshmen year and COVID Santi has played just 111 games (so far) to Grant's 104.

Santi leaves top 3 in 3 pointers made, top 5 in 3 point %, top 10 in defensive rebounds, top 7 in steals, top 7 in steals per game, top 7 in assist percentage per game, top 5 in steal percentage, top 5 in defensive win shares, top 10 in win shares

But yeah he's "one dimensional"
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, VolsAgainstTheWorld15, DuckInAPen and 1 other person
#1,312
#1,312
C-south said:
Lol wtf is “effective fg%. That’s like some per capita statistic. Their percentage is what it is and they aren’t close. We have nobody to go to when we have to have a bucket with this team.
Click to expand...
are you “too lazy to look it up” (your response to someone else) For “effective field goal %”?

OK, I’ll play. Uros’ career FG % is 57.8%. Therefore he is a “better shooter“ than Grant or Santi!

When you are in a hole, stop digging….
 
Last edited:
#1,314
#1,314
MoCo_Vol said:
My guy, Grant shot 1064 field goals in his career here, only 103 were from 3 (and he was a career 29.1% from 3). Santi has shot 1006 field goals (before today's game) and 713 were from 3 where he's a career 37.7% (4th for a career in school history).

So which of those is one dimensional exactly?

Career totals:
Santi -1275 points, 452 rebounds, 352 assists, 168 steals, 14 blocks, FG: 39.8%, 3PT: 37.7%, FT: 79.2%
Grant - 1629 points, 678 rebounds, 219 assists, 89 steals, 160 blocks, FG: 51.6%, 3PT: 29.1%, FT: 75.8%

And the crazies part is that because of his shortened freshmen year and COVID Santi has played just 111 games (so far) to Grant's 104.

Santi leaves top 3 in 3 pointers made, top 5 in 3 point %, top 10 in defensive rebounds, top 7 in steals, top 7 in steals per game, top 7 in assist percentage per game, top 5 in steal percentage, top 5 in defensive win shares, top 10 in win shares

But yeah he's "one dimensional"
Click to expand...


Who gives a crap about just shooting 3s at a decent percentage? It’s about having a guy that can score without having a wide open shot that they’re going to miss 6 times out of 10. Grant is playing in the nba. I’d wager Santiago never does. He’s a good ball player. That’s it.
 
#1,317
#1,317
Tenacjim said:
are you “too lazy to look it up” (your response to someone else) For “effective field goal %”?

OK, I’ll play. Uros’ career FG % is 57.8%. Therefore he is a “better shooter“ Grant or Santi!

When you are in a hole, stop digging….
Click to expand...

Lol. Grant’s resume and skill is far superior to both. Sec player of the year….twice. All American. All sec. Yea I’m digging.
 
#1,318
#1,318
I have to say today I thought Barnes left James and Vescovi on the bench to long, especially James. No matter what, we just lose to much offense when they are out for long stretches. GBO
 
#1,319
#1,319
jeff1vol said:
We've said that for FOUR years now. Hes soft as a puppy's belly. The only guys that play hard every time out is Vesco and ZZ. The rest can go. They are pretty much Horizon League talent anyway. And not much better than Horizon league coaching and recruting. But Barnes is a HOFer, you know.
Click to expand...
Holy over reaction Batman! Recruiting rankings and making the tournament every year prove you wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: berryvol
#1,320
#1,320
hUTch2002 said:
Unfortunately being a lottery pick no longer matters. He’s gone.
Click to expand...
Okay, goodbye and good luck then if true. If I was Barnes and I thought a player like him was going to bolt after 1 year and not give me big college production I would tell them to go on to the G league. I like Phillips but he is no where NBA ready. That is just a fact. GBO
 
  • Like
Reactions: rdavis007
#1,321
#1,321
StickMan said:
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just have some predetermined issue with Vescovi. Because otherwise you're just a fool.
Click to expand...

I have no issue with him aside from thinking he’s a great player. If you think he can carry a team or make those around him better maybe you’re the fool.
 
#1,325
#1,325
C-south said:
Lol. Grant’s resume and skill is far superior to both. Sec player of the year….twice. All American. All sec. Yea I’m digging.
Click to expand...
No one is disputing that!

You started it all by saying Grant is a way better shooter. Hilarity ensued.

”LOL”. Enjoy your evening. I’m watching the Baseball Vols….
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top