Re: Cincy Wipes Out The Wave 78-49
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:29 am
Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
Yes. But it sounded quiet.Wave755 wrote:Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
I found it interesting and positive that we are capable of pulling 2800 to see a bad team play a good one. That's kind of new. There must be some good will building up. If Tulane had an NIT level team that would have been a sell out. I was really suprised by that turnout.tpstulane wrote:Yes. But it sounded quiet.Wave755 wrote:Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
Someone posted yesterday that there was a Tuition Giveaway last night, which brought in a whole lot of folks, if true. They were loud early, and seemed to give a nice cheer for Reynolds when he was removed late in the game. The kid they showed power drinking beers in both hands as they went to one of the commercial breaks didn't give the best impression, IMHO, of Tulane.galvezwave wrote:I found it interesting and positive that we are capable of pulling 2800 to see a bad team play a good one. That's kind of new. There must be some good will building up. If Tulane had an NIT level team that would have been a sell out. I was really suprised by that turnout.tpstulane wrote:Yes. But it sounded quiet.Wave755 wrote:Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
True, the announcers noted the subdued Tulane crowd, and said at times it felt like a Cincinnati home game, but sadly a quiet home crowd for such a "beat down" is to be expected.tpstulane wrote:Yes. But it sounded quiet.Wave755 wrote:Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.
It's not so much being denied the ball as it is not being able to create his own shot. He's not a good outside shooter. This is a classic example of why they say stats are for losers.( Not calling you that). He doesn't shoot many to start with and he has had a game or two where he was on fire but generally he's not a threat there. Plus he has no mid-range game whatsoever. So he still has a lot that MD could teach him on the offensive end. Daniels will be better and we have some recruits coming in that are supposed to be good shooters. You have to hope Cornish will be better after being such a disappointment. All those reports of him being the best player on the team last year were flat out wrong. So teams should not be able to focus on him. However the truly good ones get it done no matter what.tpstulane wrote:Evans while in for only 11 mins was 4 for 10 with 5 beyond the arc.
Frazier was 4 for 11 in 34 mins with one beyond the arc. So with 23 more mins played Frazier only attempted one more shot.
Frazier was denied the ball much of the time in his 34 mins.
Reynolds was off so they locked in on Frazier. Frazier shooting 39% from beyond the arc on the year which is good.
With Reynolds leaving all our AAC opponents next season will place more focus on Frazier. He may even hurt his draft stock coming back. It really depends who’s available at the 2/3 spot coming out.
I think he can benefit and needs some weight and muscle on his frame. But he can get that getting paid. The only reason for him to come back is if his draft stock would dramatically rise. I can’t see that happening if he’s projected 1st round now or even high 2nd. He’s going to get better next year no matter where he plays. I’d be shocked if he comes back.winwave wrote:It's not so much being denied the ball as it is not being able to create his own shot. He's not a good outside shooter. This is a classic example of why they say stats are for losers.( Not calling you that). He doesn't shoot many to start with and he has had a game or two where he was on fire but generally he's not a threat there. Plus he has no mid-range game whatsoever. So he still has a lot that MD could teach him on the offensive end. Daniels will be better and we have some recruits coming in that are supposed to be good shooters. You have to hope Cornish will be better after being such a disappointment. All those reports of him being the best player on the team last year were flat out wrong. So teams should not be able to focus on him. However the truly good ones get it done no matter what.tpstulane wrote:Evans while in for only 11 mins was 4 for 10 with 5 beyond the arc.
Frazier was 4 for 11 in 34 mins with one beyond the arc. So with 23 more mins played Frazier only attempted one more shot.
Frazier was denied the ball much of the time in his 34 mins.
Reynolds was off so they locked in on Frazier. Frazier shooting 39% from beyond the arc on the year which is good.
With Reynolds leaving all our AAC opponents next season will place more focus on Frazier. He may even hurt his draft stock coming back. It really depends who’s available at the 2/3 spot coming out.
He is still has a lot of maturing to do as you can usually tell early if he's into a game or not. But as I've said I'm sure he's going and I hope it works out for him and Tulane. I just don't think that will be the case.
Most of the mock drafts have him going in the second if he gets drafted. No guaranteed money there.tpstulane wrote:I think he can benefit and needs some weight and muscle on his frame. But he can get that getting paid. The only reason for him to come back is if his draft stock would dramatically rise. I can’t see that happening if he’s projected 1st round now or even high 2nd. He’s going to get better next year no matter where he plays. I’d be shocked if he comes back.winwave wrote:It's not so much being denied the ball as it is not being able to create his own shot. He's not a good outside shooter. This is a classic example of why they say stats are for losers.( Not calling you that). He doesn't shoot many to start with and he has had a game or two where he was on fire but generally he's not a threat there. Plus he has no mid-range game whatsoever. So he still has a lot that MD could teach him on the offensive end. Daniels will be better and we have some recruits coming in that are supposed to be good shooters. You have to hope Cornish will be better after being such a disappointment. All those reports of him being the best player on the team last year were flat out wrong. So teams should not be able to focus on him. However the truly good ones get it done no matter what.tpstulane wrote:Evans while in for only 11 mins was 4 for 10 with 5 beyond the arc.
Frazier was 4 for 11 in 34 mins with one beyond the arc. So with 23 more mins played Frazier only attempted one more shot.
Frazier was denied the ball much of the time in his 34 mins.
Reynolds was off so they locked in on Frazier. Frazier shooting 39% from beyond the arc on the year which is good.
With Reynolds leaving all our AAC opponents next season will place more focus on Frazier. He may even hurt his draft stock coming back. It really depends who’s available at the 2/3 spot coming out.
He is still has a lot of maturing to do as you can usually tell early if he's into a game or not. But as I've said I'm sure he's going and I hope it works out for him and Tulane. I just don't think that will be the case.
He has to go if he enters the draft. What you're missing is that if he enters and goes in the second round he's not guaranteed any money and likely won't make an NBA team. So he doesn't get to develop there. If he goes thru the combine and they don't evaluate him as a first rounder he should come back. He won't but he should.tpstulane wrote:Or come back and get hurt and or not improve much. If he’s drafted I think he’s going. He’s more valuable as a Jr. than a Sr. to the NBA brass.
All these players got guaranteed money in the 2nd round from last year.winwave wrote:He has to go if he enters the draft. What you're missing is that if he enters and goes in the second round he's not guaranteed any money and likely won't make an NBA team. So he doesn't get to develop there. If he goes thru the combine and they don't evaluate him as a first rounder he should come back. He won't but he should.tpstulane wrote:Or come back and get hurt and or not improve much. If he’s drafted I think he’s going. He’s more valuable as a Jr. than a Sr. to the NBA brass.
46 out of the 60 drafted got it. The last 14 in round 2 didn’t.winwave wrote:So half got it and half didn't. The point is first round contracts have to be guaranteed. Second round don't.
I was in town, and was able to attend the Cincy game. The crowd was into it for the first 5 minutes, when we hung with them. By the 10 minute point, the game was over and the crowd began focusing on their iPhones. It was a good crowd, and was like a poor man's Staples Arena when the Lakers play, a lot of Tulane celebrities. The floor seats were filled with high heeled alums, who Dannen and his assistants were working very hard. Willie Fritz and his wife were there, and Tanzel Smart made an appearance. But the big crowd, celebs, the free tuition contest, ESPN, and senior night couldn't overcome the brutal massacre that we had to witness. Cincy is extremely talented and a very hard working team--every players goes all out all the time. Not only does Tulane not have the talent, the players looked like they just wanted to get it over with--so did we in the crowd.galvezwave wrote:I found it interesting and positive that we are capable of pulling 2800 to see a bad team play a good one. That's kind of new. There must be some good will building up. If Tulane had an NIT level team that would have been a sell out. I was really suprised by that turnout.tpstulane wrote:Yes. But it sounded quiet.Wave755 wrote:Both Devlin and the crowd looked good on TV.tpstulane wrote:Attendance was 2,824.