Eric Cobb Highlights | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Eric Cobb Highlights

I actually was impressed with Kentan the whole year. Everything wasn't always working for him but I saw plenty of effort, aggressiveness and heady play from him. Compared to the three previous years, he took a jump this past year getting his head right and his body stronger and it showed. He was a much improved player.
 
intlzncster said:
That's like saying somebody as a beautiful swing, but he hits .245.
Expand ...
Plus they were probably going up against Enoch in practice. Definitely a confidence builder. Heard they weren't as successful against the chair
 
intlzncster said:
That's like saying somebody as a beautiful swing, but he hits .245.
Expand ...

It's all relative. The guy who hits .245 against MLB pitching will hit .450 against American Legion pitching.
 
pj said:
It's all relative. The guy who hits .245 against MLB pitching will hit .450 against American Legion pitching.
Expand ...

The problem is, we aren't facing American Legion pitching.
 
MadDogRevival said:
I must have been watching a different guy. Facey's singular skill was having a nose for the ball. As in Marcus White level. Dribbling, shooting, screening, defending . . . all suspect. Enjoyed his 4 years here, but don't believe "great athlete" comes close.
Expand ...

He wasn't great athlete...as in tremendously gifted athletically but didn't have the skill to show it off? Did I not see him with very nice hops and the ability to go get the ball over people despite not boxing out as he always utilized his athletic gifts rather than any fundamentals he was taught. Not quite Stanley Robinson but in the same arena. Maybe I missed something.
 
.-.
mauconnfan said:
Not quite Stanley Robinson but in the same arena. Maybe I missed something.
Expand ...
We can respectfully disagree on this. If I gave Stanley a 97% "athletic" rating, and Ed Nelson a 65% "athletic" rating, and Richard Simmons a 35% "athletic" rating, and Pee Wee Herman a 5% "athletic" rating, I'd give Kentan an 85. Which is to say, a damn good athlete, but by no means elite. Hops? Not so sure. Guy was tall with a long reach and he had a great nose for the ball. I never perceived him as "out athleting" people for boards and points.
 
pj said:
It's all relative. The guy who hits .245 against MLB pitching will hit .450 against American Legion pitching.
Expand ...

So you're saying they would dominate Dlll?
 
pj said:
It's all relative. The guy who hits .245 against MLB pitching will hit .450 against American Legion pitching.
Expand ...

And to add to your point, when we're talking about 18-21 year old basketball big men, improvement is expected to continue if the right fundamentals and moves are there.
 
mauconnfan said:
He wasn't great athlete...as in tremendously gifted athletically but didn't have the skill to show it off? Did I not see him with very nice hops and the ability to go get the ball over people despite not boxing out as he always utilized his athletic gifts rather than any fundamentals he was taught. Not quite Stanley Robinson but in the same arena. Maybe I missed something.
Expand ...
MadDogRevival said:
We can respectfully disagree on this. If I gave Stanley a 97% "athletic" rating, and Ed Nelson a 65% "athletic" rating, and Richard Simmons a 35% "athletic" rating, and Pee Wee Herman a 5% "athletic" rating, I'd give Kentan an 85. Which is to say, a damn good athlete, but by no means elite. Hops? Not so sure. Guy was tall with a long reach and he had a great nose for the ball. I never perceived him as "out athleting" people for boards and points.
Expand ...


I'd live to see what Kentan would do this season at UConn.

I don't think a 15pt, 9rpg would be difficult.

Kentan flowed a trend of many UConn bigs of being "late bloomer" with low game instincts. It took time for him to learn the feel of a game.

Cobb looks like a guy whose played a million games.
 
.-.
MadDogRevival said:
We can respectfully disagree on this. If I gave Stanley a 97% "athletic" rating, and Ed Nelson a 65% "athletic" rating, and Richard Simmons a 35% "athletic" rating, and Pee Wee Herman a 5% "athletic" rating, I'd give Kentan an 85. Which is to say, a damn good athlete, but by no means elite. Hops? Not so sure. Guy was tall with a long reach and he had a great nose for the ball. I never perceived him as "out athleting" people for boards and points.
Expand ...

Respectfully disagree no doubt. Not sure I used "elite" athlete anywhere if I did I was wrong. And I did have Stanley on another level and Stanley was elite. Not sure we are far apart and not sure how Ed Nelson or Richard Simmons got on here but whatever makes you drive your point home :rolleyes: . Kentan had hops no doubt must've been watching on a smaller TV, he jumped over people and yes, used his length and reach also to grab rebounds. But people see different things.
 
mauconnfan said:
Respectfully disagree no doubt. Not sure I used "elite" athlete anywhere if I did I was wrong. And I did have Stanley on another level and Stanley was elite. Not sure we are far apart and not sure how Ed Nelson or Richard Simmons got on here but whatever makes you drive your point home :rolleyes: . Kentan had hops no doubt must've been watching on a smaller TV, he jumped over people and yes, used his length and reach also to grab rebounds. But people see different things.
Expand ...

Kentan always had a sweet stroke on his jump shot, but for the first three years of his tenure here, he seemed to avoid contact, and was not a very physical player. Ollie wanted him to be an interior rebounder, and he wasn't comfortable with banging. Most of his modest rebound numbers came on "long reach" rebounds, because he was doing it from 2 to 3 feet too far away. He tended to get the balls that bounded off the rim too high for the guys who were in position, and he got them 5 or 6 feet from the hoop, where the people he was jumping over were often guards rather than other bigs.
It may be just the way I look at the situation I guess, but I believe that the urgent need for his minutes last year may have allowed him to force the issue of getting a little more offensive freedom in exchange for a willingness to get into the bump and grind in the paint a little more. He didn't suddenly develop the offensive fluidity we saw last year, but I felt like it was the first time he was able to uncork that bottle without fear of being benched. But I do think the interior work wore on him over the season, and may have contributed to his late season shooting woes, because until the last 5 or 6 games, he was money from 12 to 15 feet. Then the last few games, he'd short arm a couple, then over compensate and bang it off the back rim a time or two.
 
He's very skilled remind me of Big Fundamentals a little. And he looks tough. I like this move
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,256
Messages
4,560,139
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom