Huskers sweep KU volleyball

No one on hand Saturday knew for sure how the two teams tied (I guess it happened back in the '70s) but the most logical guess was that they ran out of time during a match back when they used to have time limits.

November 22, 2009 at 2:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Which Jayhawk currently has the most NBA value?

Nobody's knocking Chalmers here.... Not in the least.

I think the thing some of us are trying to get across is that there's more to NBA experience than just starting games.

Starting is huge. And Mario has a ton of experience there already. But Julian has another year on him in terms of things like: The grind of an NBA travel schedule, scouting opponents, playing (and practicing) the NBA game, which is vastly different from college basketball.

Anyway, that's the point, not that Chalmers doesn't have great experience. He does. About as much as a one-year veteran can. But Julian has some experience that Mario doesn't... For now.

I guess we can agree to disagree.

October 15, 2009 at 11:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Which Jayhawk currently has the most NBA value?

Throughout the course of his two seasons in the NBA, Wright has started a handful of games, played in dozens more and experienced big-time playoff basketball.

He might not have been the focal point in any of that but just being around it lends a certain amount of experience.

Don't you agree?

October 14, 2009 at 9:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Nebraska or Missouri? Plus, Big 12 WR team rankings

Nice work, Eric.

I agree with whitechocolate, it would be cool to see how KU's receivers stack up against the rest of the nation. I, too, think KU might have the best corps.

As for tonight's game, I'm going with the Huskers.

Better coach, better talent and revenge for last year's beating.

NU 31, MU 21

October 8, 2009 at 1:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

Typically, minutes played aren't a factor in fantasy hoops.

But... like anything, some of the real hardcore leagues out there might actually reward/penalize players for minutes played.

October 7, 2009 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

Here's my question... Would the Hornets have won those games without Wright on the roster? My answer: Probably.

I love the NBA and I wish Wright would get more minutes and have the chance to develop into the player we all know he can become. Thus far, however, his minutes have been severely limited and all about offense. Until he figures out how to play consistent defense or gets shipped to another team, where he can have a fresh start, I just can't imagine him producing much, especially with the players who are ahead of him on the Hornets' depth chart.

Enough about Wright, though. How about the rest of the guys? Seems like Darrell's per-minute numbers should have him a little higher. I was also surprised to see Collison as high on the rankings as he was.

October 7, 2009 at 1:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

I just went back and read over Hollinger's blog and I think the most important thing to remember here is that the PER rankings are based on a PER-MINUTE SCALE...

Even I've forgotten that.

With that said, it makes a little more sense that Wright would be ranked higher than a lot of guys because he hasn't played a ton of minutes and has done fairly well when receiving those minutes (mostly dunks and layups and high-percentage shots like that late in games)...

It's easy to see why Wright would be so "valuable" in this sort of ranking but I think Wright's case alone might be the best indicator of why the PER formula is not the best to rank players on the whole.

Sorry for the confusion...

October 7, 2009 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

It's his formula, though, right? And because of that he can choose which stats he uses and which stats he doesn't therein shaping the list in his image a little bit.

"Pace of play" is not a stat but he incorporates that into his rankings.

I get what you're saying and I agree to a large extent. But if this guy's stat-based formula ranks Wright ahead of Hinrich then the whole thing might be garbage. Hinrich has done more, has played more, has greater potential (at least for 2009-10) and is on a team that knows how to use him.

Again, I'm not hating on Wright here, I just don't think the guy has garnered enough stats to be ranked ahead of so many other people who have.

October 7, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

You got me there.

I'm just saying, Pierce should be ranked substantially higher than Wright on lists like these because for every quality minute that Wright has played, Pierce has played 20.

justanotherfan - Thanks for the insight. Good stuff.

October 7, 2009 at 10:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Julian Wright ranked ahead of Kirk Hinrich? What gives?

Agreed, d_prowess.... I think the biggest issue of all here is not that Julian's ahead of Kirk or that Pierce is so low, but that Rush is SOOOOO low.

I didn't look too closely, but at 285 in the rankings, he has to be the lowest rated projected starter on the list. Wonder why?

Is it because he's still widely unknown at the NBA level? Is B-Rush's ranking hindered by that "pace of play" element? The Pacers aren't really a run-and-gun kind of team.

Still, to have him starting yet ranked more than 100 spots behind guys who aren't, seems a bit crazy.

Remember, though. This is just one guy's opinion. And even though he may have a few guys out of place, I commend Hollinger for tackling such a large task.

October 7, 2009 at 10:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )