Cane Broome | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Cane Broome

If you look at his stats, he had a few very bad shooting days at the start of the season which weigh his %'s down, but he's been a serviceable shooter through his 4 year career, and he had to take a lot of the scoring load at Sacred Heart which doesn't help stats. One thing he does give you is a left handed presence which i believe is an advantage. It helps to be able to mix it up, and Cincy has the luxury of several kids on the perimeter who are lefties. The frosh kid from Cali Johnson looks to be another guy Cronin has mined in recruiting. He looked solid today. Same with the kid from Brooklyn, Williams. Looked pretty green last year, but has improved significantly this year. They all drive the ball to the hoop very well for undersized guys.
 
tzznandrew said:
Player A

8.3 ppg, 2.5 apg, 1.8 rpg, 0.7 spg, 0.0 bpg, 42% shooting, 25% 3pt

Player B

8.4 ppg, 2.3 apg, 2.8 rpg, 1.0 spg, 0.3 bpg, 42% shooting, 24% 3pt

One of those guys is Smith and the other is Broome.
Expand ...

Tre Jones at Duke has similar stats too. Throw him him in your little post
 
he's made some clutch shots this season but his career here has been largely disappointing. People were hyping him as the next nick van exel lmao.
 
If you dig a bit deeper, that last second heave by Broome left me wondering how many more kicks to the groin does this program have to endure?
 
I’m more concerned with seemingly taking smith and b Adams over Xavier Johnson.
 
Stainmaster said:
Hurley and staff deserve far more deference than you’re giving them.
Expand ...

This was less about burying Hurley than saying I’d rather have Johnson than broome anyway
 
the Q said:
I’m more concerned with seemingly taking smith and b Adams over Xavier Johnson.
Expand ...
We didn't take Smith over Xavier Johnson. Your concern should be alleviated once you see Jalen Gaffney play. Guards are never the problem, it's the bigs that seem to always escape us.
 
superjohn said:
We didn't take Smith over Xavier Johnson. Your concern should be alleviated once you see Jalen Gaffney play. Guards are never the problem, it's the bigs that seem to always escape us.
Expand ...
Also, if Johnson came here, Gaffney would not. So while we have to wait until next year, Gaffney will be the much better player over time.
 
superjohn said:
We didn't take Smith over Xavier Johnson. Your concern should be alleviated once you see Jalen Gaffney play. Guards are never the problem, it's the bigs that seem to always escape us.
Expand ...

I am excited about gaffney.

Maybe it was an either/or scenario, but Johnson the combo guard with the true point gaffney sounds pretty sweet to me
 
the Q said:
I am excited about gaffney.

Maybe it was an either/or scenario, but Johnson the combo guard with the true point gaffney sounds pretty sweet to me
Expand ...

Bouknight sounds better though?
 
tzznandrew said:
Player A

8.3 ppg, 2.5 apg, 1.8 rpg, 0.7 spg, 0.0 bpg, 42% shooting, 25% 3pt

Player B

8.4 ppg, 2.3 apg, 2.8 rpg, 1.0 spg, 0.3 bpg, 42% shooting, 24% 3pt

One of those guys is Smith and the other is Broome.
Expand ...
One of those guys would be around for several years helping to build chemistry and having the opportunity to improve with quality coaching. The other is a one year lease.
 
WingU-Conn said:
One of those guys would be around for several years helping to build chemistry and having the opportunity to improve with quality coaching. The other is a one year lease.
Expand ...
Sure. In retrospect.

At the time, though, they had non-shoulder-injured Gilbert coming in, sophomore Jalen Adams, Vance Jackson coming in at the wing, and were expecting a commitment from Vital.

Really, I think the choice was Broome or Vital at that moment.
 
tzznandrew said:
Sure. In retrospect.

At the time, though, they had non-shoulder-injured Gilbert coming in, sophomore Jalen Adams, Vance Jackson coming in at the wing, and were expecting a commitment from Vital.

Really, I think the choice was Broome or Vital at that moment.
Expand ...

I'm sure you support the decision to take Vital over Broome?
 
UofCT2009 said:
I'm sure you support the decision to take Vital over Broome?
Expand ...
I do.

Four years vs. two.

Vital is better by every statistical measure in his Junior year than Broome is his senior.

PER
Vital: 20
Broome: 17

Win Shares
Vital: 3.4
Broome: 2.1

Box +/-
Vital: +7.0
Broome: +2.8

This, in addition to having worse teammates, playing more minutes, having a lower usage %, and having better traditional statistics across the board.

And he was better than Broome (though it was closer) last year as well.
 
tzznandrew said:
I do.

Four years vs. two.

Vital is better by every statistical measure in his Junior year than Broome is his senior.

PER
Vital: 20
Broome: 17

Win Shares
Vital: 3.4
Broome: 2.1

Box +/-
Vital: +7.0
Broome: +2.8

This, in addition to having worse teammates, playing more minutes, having a lower usage %, and having better traditional statistics across the board.

And he was better than Broome (though it was closer) last year as well.
Expand ...

Eh, I still think you're overrating Vital, who will go down as the biggest loser (wins wise) in UConn recent history. I'd rather have Broome who makes winning plays and contributes towards a winning program. Vital is what he is. A good player on a bad team 3 years in a row now.
 
UofCT2009 said:
Eh, I still think you're overrating Vital, who will go down as the biggest loser (wins wise) in UConn recent history. I'd rather have Broome who makes winning plays and contributes towards a winning program. Vital is what he is. A good player on a bad team 3 years in a row now.
Expand ...
How many more wins does UConn have the last two years if you replace Vital with Broome?
 

Online statistics

Members online
399
Guests online
3,120
Total visitors
3,519
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,175
Messages
4,385,982
Members
10,195
Latest member
ArtTheFan


.
..
Top Bottom