- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LSU Basketball Recruiting Thread: 2024 (And Beyond)
Posted on 4/9/24 at 12:32 pm to ForeverLSU5
Posted on 4/9/24 at 12:32 pm to ForeverLSU5
quote:
No player actually good enough to play P6 ball and play a decent amount would do this. Dean prob only did it bc it was his best shot at playing P6 ball.
Here's a question I have that someone who understands the scholarship situation better than I do may be able to answer for me: what is the difference between a player being on scholarship and a player coming on as a walk on and having their school paid for by the NIL collective? Are there certain limitations that apply to walk-ons versus a scholarship player?
1
Posted on 4/9/24 at 12:44 pm to Aforem7
quote:
Here's a question I have that someone who understands the scholarship situation better than I do may be able to answer for me: what is the difference between a player being on scholarship and a player coming on as a walk on and having their school paid for by the NIL collective? Are there certain limitations that apply to walk-ons versus a scholarship player?
The collective cannot pay tuition directly. The NIL money goes tot he player and he decides what to do with it.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 1:49 pm to ForeverLSU5
quote:
No player actually good enough to play P6 ball and play a decent amount would do this. Dean prob only did it bc it was his best shot at playing P6 ball.
Dean deserved the scholarship over Baker IMO
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:06 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
Fwiw Carlos Stewart entered the portal
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:26 pm to Pnels08
quote:
Fwiw Carlos Stewart entered the portal
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:36 pm to Pnels08
quote:Honestly sad that it didn't work out for him here. best of luck Carlos!
Fwiw Carlos Stewart entered the portal
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:41 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:i really hate the negativity towards a Tiger. Baker may not have been the best, but he wasn't the least deserving on last year's team and gave us some good games.
Dean deserved the scholarship over Baker IMO
On another note, we should have 2 open spots now with Stewart leaving, so we are still in the market for the veteran PG and center through the portal. And that doesn't include a potential phantom walk on like Dean was.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:47 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
i really hate the negativity towards a Tiger. Baker may not have been the best, but he wasn't the least deserving on last year's team and gave us some good games.
Agree that he wasn't the least deserving. But let's also be real here, how negative was everyone toward Hunter dean for a significant portion of the year? Plus he wasn't even on scholarship. That's just unacceptable IMO for a Louisiana guy and a guy that gave 110% on the court.
I am harsh on Baker because I like winning. There was a player on the team (Dean) that gave us a better chance at winning. But I promise you, during senior night when they called Baker's name I stood up and cheered for him as hard as I could. I'm thankful he chose to come to LSU, but I'm also a realist.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:54 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:I honestly don't remember anyone being negative on Hunter Dean except an idiot or two in some late season in game threads. On paper he wasn't expected to do much, but everyone who saw him quickly became a fan.
Agree that he wasn't the least deserving. But let's also be real here, how negative was everyone toward Hunter dean for a significant portion of the year?
quote:There were times when that was true and times when Baker helped us win.
I am harsh on Baker because I like winning. There was a player on the team (Dean) that gave us a better chance at winning.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 11:07 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
I honestly don't remember anyone being negative on Hunter Dean except an idiot or two in some late season in game threads. On paper he wasn't expected to do much, but everyone who saw him quickly became a fan.
There were multiple people (imo most people posting) who mentioned that Dean was terrible and didn’t belong on the court in a P6 conference. People only started warming up to Dean in the middle of the season (maybe the Texas game, but even then people still doubted him) when they finally realized Baker was not very good.
I would know, I was probably the first person to champion for Dean and talk about all he could do and how skilled of a player he was, and was met with constant downvotes. It’s really sad that our question of why baker played so much over Dean was finally answered by Dean being not on scholarship. That’s really sad.
quote:
There were times when that was true and times when Baker helped us win.
Yes, he helped us win a few games with his interior scoring. He was very good at that when he was on. However, the areas where our team needed him to excel like rebounding he didn’t step up enough. There were numerous games where he was out rebounded by players almost a foot shorter than him.
That being said, (and I think McMahon is partially blame for this) there were numerous games where he outright sold the game. Nicholls comes to mind the quickest. I think it’s really dumb that Dean didn’t play significant minutes for
the sole reason that he wasn’t on scholarship. That’s incredibly dumb.
Posted on 4/10/24 at 1:43 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:
I think it’s really dumb that Dean didn’t play significant minutes for
the sole reason that he wasn’t on scholarship
how do you know that's the reason
Posted on 4/10/24 at 2:52 pm to jamarr
Bickering over playing time by Dean and Baker shows how weak our center position was last year.
Posted on 4/10/24 at 7:42 pm to jamarr
quote:
how do you know that's the reason
because unless mcmahon is a total idiot and couldn't realize that dean provided much more useful minutes then the only other option is that he didn't play bc he wasn't on scholarship
Posted on 4/10/24 at 9:59 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:
then the only other option is that he didn't play bc he wasn't on scholarship
I don't understand, why does the scholarship or lack of one have anything to do with minutes available?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 12:21 am to jamarr
quote:
I don't understand, why does the scholarship or lack of one have anything to do with minutes available?
locker room politics.
despite the downvotes to my previous post i was actually defending mcmahon because i can actually understand why he played baker over dean bc of the scholarship situation. even though i still think it was the incorrect decision, it makes a lot more sense with the scholarship situation coming to light.
This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 12:23 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 11:49 am to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:
locker room politics
how do you know about this, who is it that is making the rules about who plays how much relative to their scholarship status? how much can a player without a scholarship (but paid via NIL) play without upsetting whoever we are imagining being upset? shouldn't the coach just play who is best? what is the mechanism for the locker room whatever to prevent coach from playing the best player? do players mutiny and present an excel chart with minutes relative to scholarships with the offending player in a red zone of overplay?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 1:56 pm to jamarr
quote:
how do you know about this, who is it that is making the rules about who plays how much relative to their scholarship status? how much can a player without a scholarship (but paid via NIL) play without upsetting whoever we are imagining being upset?
how much media do you consume related to LSU MBB besides the actual games themselves? how many games do you go to in person? the more media you consume the clearer the picture will be. going to games in person allows you to see so much more than on tv. player behavior on the bench, during timeouts, huddles, etc. chemistry issues were blatantly obvious from this. i've seen jalen reed yell at baker to pass the ball to him, get angry when he misses rebounds or a defensive assignment. i've seen baker in turn yell at cook for being a ball hog. locker room management and politics is an important aspect of managing a team.
you do realize the reason hannibal began to play over cook (before cook's injury) was because the other players on the team were getting disgruntled with cook's hogging style of play? this has been confirmed to me out of the mouth of mcmahon himself. while we're on the subject of managing a locker room, let's address collins. i know for a fact the reason he played so little before his injury was because of off the court disciplinary issues. he was supposed to be a key piece of the team because he was tremendous during offseason practice and in scrimmages in the bahamas. but yet, he did something to take him out of the rotation. if this never happened dean would likely have NEVER sniffed playing time. he was NOT a scholarship player.
obviously there is no actual rule that says scholarship players have to play more. but there are unspoken rules in a locker room and there is usually a pecking order on the team. this is abundantly clear if you've ever played a sport at any level above elementary or middle school. i think it's very silly to suggest that baker being recruited to be a focal point of the team and how he received a scholarship (when dean didn't) had zero impact on his playing time. it was very clear baker was recruited to be a poor man's KJ 2.0 and be a significant piece of this team. it's crazy to not see the connection between this and his playing time relative to dean.
quote:
shouldn't the coach just play who is best?
they should but you'd be in denial if you were to claim that mcmahon has done this during his two seasons at LSU. i can list numerous examples of downright questionable lineup and rotation decisions. blatant favoritism to certain players or overvaluing seniority when there are better players riding the pine.
This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 2:17 pm
Posted on 4/11/24 at 2:37 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:
how much media do you consume related to LSU MBB besides the actual games themselves?
quite a bit
quote:
how many games do you go to in person?
100% of the home games for many years. listen to every coaches show, read everything possible. sometimes drive to Nashville. I even go to mcneese games to think about what wade meant to the program. I notice the things you mention, the attitude from cook etc.
but I am not in the locker room. I have no way to know how much being on scholarships matter relative to playing time.
I don't think you know either. the idea that minutes would be restricted based on who pays for the scholarship directly and who uses NIL money seems unsupported by evidence and unlikely.
I think baker proved to be too poor of an athlete. couldn't rebound. wasn't making enough shots to justify his minutes. so dean got more minutes.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 2:45 pm to mcmaniacinsaneasylum
quote:
but there are unspoken rules in a locker room and there is usually a pecking order on the team. this is abundantly clear if you've ever played a sport at any level above elementary or middle school
well tough guy congrats on being an athlete.
everything has a pecking order or hierarchy. its not based on who pays tuition and there is no reason to think the coach cares about that.
quote:
i think it's very silly to suggest that baker being recruited to be a focal point of the team
who said he was the focal point?
quote:
he received a scholarship (when dean didn't) had zero impact on his playing time
again you have shown zero evidence of the relationship between scholarships and restricted or enhanced playing time.
quote:
i think it's very silly...it's crazy
this is a fallacy called appeal to incredulity. you find it really crazy. hard to believe. good for you. no evidence other than you saying its wild or crazy to think otherwise.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 3:38 pm to jamarr
quote:
I don't think you know either. the idea that minutes would be restricted based on who pays for the scholarship directly and who uses NIL money seems unsupported by evidence and unlikely.
I disagree. Up until the point I found out that Dean wasn't on scholarship I was questioning a lot about McMahon and his ability to make lineups and rotations. Finding out Dean wasn't on scholarship answered a lot of my questions. If you cannot come to the same conclusions, that is on you. Agree to disagree.
quote:
I think baker proved to be too poor of an athlete. couldn't rebound. wasn't making enough shots to justify his minutes. so dean got more minutes.
It was painfully obvious where his game was lacking, yet he still played over Dean in many critical situations... most egregious of so was SECT against Miss St.
Can you provide an explanation for why this might be?
I can, it's the scholarship situation. Either that or McMahon can't evaluate talent...and I'd like to go with the former as I don't think he's that bad of a coach.
quote:
again you have shown zero evidence of the relationship between scholarships and restricted or enhanced playing time.
What other explanation is there for Baker playing over Dean when anyone and everyone who watched our team last year came around to thinking Dean deserved more minutes? Either McMahon can't see what a basketball layman can see or locker room politics and the scholarship situation played a part.
Also, I did provide evidence. I gave other examples of McMahon's locker room politics to apply it to the situation of Dean and Baker.
quote:
100% of the home games for many years. listen to every coaches show, read everything possible. sometimes drive to Nashville. I even go to mcneese games to think about what wade meant to the program. I notice the things you mention, the attitude from cook etc.
I'm genuinely glad I'm not the only one.
quote:
everything has a pecking order or hierarchy. its not based on who pays tuition and there is no reason to think the coach cares about that.
Yes everything has a hierarchy. Sports is no different. I disagree however that there is no evidence to suggest this. McMahon is quite clearly very old school. He favors seniority but has also shown a tendency to play favorites. I can make the connection between this and the scholarship situation. If you can't, that's on you- and we'll have to agree to disagree.
quote:
who said he was the focal point?
He quite clearly was from how he was talked about and the scheme that was in place the first few games of the season until we realized it wasn't going to work. He got exposed by Nicholls.
quote:
again you have shown zero evidence of the relationship between scholarships and restricted or enhanced playing time.
I think I have.
"Shouldn't the coach play the best players"
Yes. Dean is better than Baker, but Baker played more.... now like I said previously I'd like for you to explain to me why that is.
quote:
this is a fallacy called appeal to incredulity. you find it really crazy. hard to believe. good for you. no evidence other than you saying its wild or crazy to think otherwise.
It's not really a fallacy of incredulity when I provided evidence as to why I feel the way I do. The sentence before I said "it's crazy" was literally evidence as to why I feel that way, but yet I provide zero evidence. Ok.
Page 36 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News