If Jalen Adams plays anywhere near this level all year

[intlzncster]

Dyson was coming off injury and was almost the same thing that Purvis is now. Sticks and Gavin were decent role players. AO was a 4-star frosh with potential. That team was nowhere close to being "fairly loaded" by any conventional interpretation of the term.

Are we comparing Kemba and Shabazz as sophomores? Because that's where Jalen is at right now. Not Jr Kemba or Sr Shabazz.

 

[NielsisGood]

Are we comparing Kemba and Shabazz as sophomores? Because that's where Jalen is at right now. Not Jr Kemba or Sr Shabazz.

My first post was in response to some hyperbolic Jalen/Kemba/Bazz comparison and then about the talent on Kemba's soph team vs this team.

 

[Excalibur]

Dyson and Purvis are practically the same player. Too early to compare anyone on this year's team with Sticks or AO, can't compare an established season of work to 6 games where people's roles have drastically changed due to injuries.

Purvis is a poor man's Dyson -- weaker handle, shower, not as explosive a leaper, inferior rebounder and passer.

 

[Kitaman]

Ollie is the best coach in the country in making Jalen an NBA ready point guard. The silver lining for Jalen with AG out is that Jalen will be spending primarily all his time at the point, even with Vital on the floor. I think this will accelerate his development. His handle and vision should improve as well. I would like to see Ollie have Jalen run some plays, unless he already has him running invisible plays.

Sure he could be a 2 guard at the next level, but I really think he could make a nice career as an NBA point guard. He just has that size, confidence and leadership quality.

 

[jfuchs91]

Dyson and Purvis are practically the same player.

Dyson gets crap around here, but Purvis isn't in the same stratosphere as a player. Dyson was actually getting a little POY chatter his senior year before the team fell apart (and posted essentially identical P/R/A to junior year Shabazz). We very well could've won it all with a healthy Dyson in 2009.

Purvis may have a similar "game," but Dyson was a markedly better and more impactful player.

As for the real topic of this thread, Jalen will be a stud in the NBA. Not sure if I've seen this comparison before, but he reminds me of a less physically strong Derrick Rose.

I'm excited to watch Jalen grow as a player, and hope we can manage to keep him around for another season.

Also: comparisons to peak Kemba and Shabazz are unfair. Both of their guys had their share of struggles in their sophomore campaigns.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

I'm still trying to figure out why most on this board think a guy averaging 5.7 assists a game is a 2G. Jalen is a playmaking PG in a Russell Westbrook form. There's no way he's a 2G in the NBA.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I'm still trying to figure out why most on this board think a guy averaging 5.7 assists a game is a 2G. Jalen is a playmaking PG in a Russell Westbrook form. There's no way he's a 2G in the NBA.

Absolutely. And those numbers are held down by the fact that Ollie foolishly had him playing off guard to Gilbert at times. Gilbert is actually the guy who can play off the ball of the two of them, and Adams is a much better passer right now. I don't understand what people are seeing in saying he can't run the offense. We have mostly faced zone, and against the zone, drive and find the open man is what the PG should be doing. Adams does that very well. Sadly he was standing outside the 3 point line most of the game against Wagner and Northeastern, or we might have won those games.

He's our best player, and he was always going to be coming in to the season. That would be true with or without the Larrier injury.

 

[JSM1970]

Both NBAdraft.net and Draftexpress have updated mocks (after Maui tourney) and neither lists JA in 2017

Doesn't mean anything, just that he hasn't suddenly become a can't miss yet

NBAdraft did remove TL in 2017, so they are monitoring current events

Absolutely. And those numbers are held down by the fact that Ollie foolishly had him playing off guard to Gilbert at times. Gilbert is actually the guy who can play off the ball of the two of them, and Adams is a much better passer right now. I don't understand what people are seeing in saying he can't run the offense. We have mostly faced zone, and against the zone, drive and find the open man is what the PG should be doing. Adams does that very well. Sadly he was standing outside the 3 point line most of the game against Wagner and Northeastern, or we might have won those games.

He's our best player, and he was always going to be coming in to the season. That would be true with or without the Larrier injury.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Both NBAdraft.net and Draftexpress have updated mocks (after Maui tourney) and neither lists JA in 2017

Doesn't mean anything, just that he hasn't suddenly become a can't miss yet

NBAdraft did remove TL in 2017, so they are monitoring current events

I didn't say anything about the timing. I am simply saying he's a PG. In the past, present and future. He is not now nor will he become a shooting guard. He needs to cut down on the TOs, and will.

 

[NielsisGood]

Dyson gets crap around here, but Purvis isn't in the same stratosphere as a player. Dyson was actually getting a little POY chatter his senior year before the team fell apart (and posted essentially identical P/R/A to junior year Shabazz). We very well could've won it all with a healthy Dyson in 2009.

Purvis may have a similar "game," but Dyson was a markedly better and more impactful player.

Look at their stats. Purvis is actually more efficient and doesn't turn the ball over as much. They both had the same skillset and the same negatives as well. Dyson looked better than he was because that 09 team was pretty great, but he got kind of exposed the next season for being inefficient and turning the ball over a ton and committing a lot of charges with his head down drives into traffic.

 

[jfuchs91]

Look at their stats. Purvis is actually more efficient and doesn't turn the ball over as much. They both had the same skillset and the same negatives as well. Dyson looked better than he was because that 09 team was pretty great, but he got kind of exposed the next season for being inefficient and turning the ball over a ton and committing a lot of charges with his head down drives into traffic.

Stats don't always tell the whole story, but in this case, they clearly show that Dyson was the more productive player across the board, and had a larger role on his teams.

Dyson averaged more points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks in his career despite playing alongside more talented rosters.

Rodney is the superior 3-point shooter. Dyson was better everywhere else, especially with the ball in his hands. Dyson was a great slasher, never tallying fewer than 100 FTA in a season. Rodney has never eclipsed that mark. Dyson's 28.1 AST% as a senior is nearly double Purvis' career high (14.6% last year).

Sure, Dyson's FG% is lower and TOs higher, but that can largely be attributed to the fact that his usage rate was substantially higher. Dyson was often the man on his teams, whereas Purvis has been limited to a more complementary role because he lacks the handle/playmaking ability to be a go-to guy.

Frankly, this really isn't much of a debate. The "eye test" already made it obvious enough that Dyson was the more talented player, but the stats just further demonstrate that he was a more well-rounded, productive player than Purvis.

By all accounts Rodney is a great guy, and has been a good ambassador for our program. But he just flat out is not as good as Dyson was.

 

[Onions]

Kemba, Stanley, Jerome, AO, Coombs-McDaniel, Majok, Okwandu (would love either of the latter 2 in the middle right now), Gavin and Donnell? I'll take that squad over this one with the injuries especially and it's not too close.

Having said that, no biggie here both need(ed) to get better than where they were early soph years in many ways to be that big prospect. Fact now is while Jalen showed he can score the ball, he still hasn't shown he can run the offense and this is exactly what he will need to do next level. Ways to go no doubt!

That you think Majok would be an improvement over anyone on this teams roster explains much. As for Okwandu's junior year, he averaged 1 point and 1.6 rebounds in 7 minutes of play during which he also got .4 blocks and picked up 1.4 fouls.

 

[Onions]

Majok and coombs were very highly rated and if not for Majok handler pulling all the strings rather than listening to Calhoun he would have been very good had he stayed. Coombs I believe was a top 40ish recruit and Majok top 20ish.

You are wrong saying that team wasn't loaded and had more talent than this current team.

In his one season with Uconn Majok averaged 2.3 points, 3 rebounds, 1.6 blocks in 14 minutes while picking up 2 personal fouls. He was a great athlete but he was not a good basketball player. His turnover to assist ratio was negative 4 to 1 - that is 4 turnovers for every assist. I can't remember a game he played where he was not called for traveling.

 

[FeedTheDove]

Stats don't always tell the whole story, but in this case, they clearly show that Dyson was the more productive player across the board, and had a larger role on his teams.

Dyson averaged more points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks in his career despite playing alongside more talented rosters.

Rodney is the superior 3-point shooter. Dyson was better everywhere else, especially with the ball in his hands. Dyson was a great slasher, never tallying fewer than 100 FTA in a season. Rodney has never eclipsed that mark. Dyson's 28.1 AST% as a senior is nearly double Purvis' career high (14.6% last year).

Sure, Dyson's FG% is lower and TOs higher, but that can largely be attributed to the fact that his usage rate was substantially higher. Dyson was often the man on his teams, whereas Purvis has been limited to a more complementary role because he lacks the handle/playmaking ability to be a go-to guy.

Frankly, this really isn't much of a debate. The "eye test" already made it obvious enough that Dyson was the more talented player, but the stats just further demonstrate that he was a more well-rounded, productive player than Purvis.

By all accounts Rodney is a great guy, and has been a good ambassador for our program. But he just flat out is not as good as Dyson was.

Yeah. It's not even close.

Can't forget, also, that Dyson was doing all of this at the peak of the Big East's power. I really like Rodney - he's been an awesome part of the UConn family, but he would s--- his pants facing the defense that Dyson saw in the Big East.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Look at their stats. Purvis is actually more efficient and doesn't turn the ball over as much. They both had the same skillset and the same negatives as well. Dyson looked better than he was because that 09 team was pretty great, but he got kind of exposed the next season for being inefficient and turning the ball over a ton and committing a lot of charges with his head down drives into traffic.

Rodney's problem has always been that while he has a lot of skill he also has a lot of very fatal flaws. The most obvious is his free throw shooting. He's basically a 60% FT shooter, so for a guy who makes a living penetrating to the hoop you have to be able to make free throws. It's well known if you hack Purvis when he gets there and don't allow him to get off a good layup/shot attempt there's a better chance he'll miss a free throw. He's also not a good enough outside shooter to make up for that deficiency. We all know his decision making at times is suspect to say the least. So while he's got a lot of skill, there's a few things he does that haven't improved that have hindered his ability to move beyond being a B-minus level player.

 

[upstater]

Rodney's problem has always been that while he has a lot of skill he also has a lot of very fatal flaws. The most obvious is his free throw shooting. He's basically a 60% FT shooter, so for a guy who makes a living penetrating to the hoop you have to be able to make free throws. It's well known if you hack Purvis when he gets there and don't allow him to get off a good layup/shot attempt there's a better chance he'll miss a free throw. He's also not a good enough outside shooter to make up for that deficiency. We all know his decision making at times is suspect to say the least. So while he's got a lot of skill, there's a few things he does that haven't improved that have hindered his ability to move beyond being a B-minus level player.

He can hit free throws. He did last year. He's fine there.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

He can hit free throws. He did last year. He's fine there.

He was a 65.7% FT shooter last year, 53.8% the year before. 54% is woeful for a 2 guard (or any position really), 66% is still well below average. For a guy who makes his living penetrating, it's not acceptable.

 

[upstater]

He was a 65.7% FT shooter last year, 53.8% the year before. 54% is woeful for a 2 guard (or any position really), 66% is still well below average. For a guy who makes his living penetrating, it's not acceptable.

He was a bad free throw shooter who improved massively the last 20 games of last year when he shot 80%.

 

[7774]

He was a bad free throw shooter who improved massively the last 20 games of last year when he shot 80%.

And he did the same thing his sophomore year. It never seems to carry over to the following year.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

And he did the same thing his sophomore year. It never seems to carry over to the following year.

Right, and it appears it hasn't carried over to this year either as he's off to a 60% start. Plain and simple, he's at best a mediocre free throw shooter and has at times been putrid.

 

[alfonse]

Why in a thread talking about Jalen is there basically a whole page talking smack about Purvis. Are there not already like 18 threads discussing that very topic? Can't we choose one of those to have this discussion? If Jalens numbers continue as they currently are he will get an NBA look there is no doubt about it. He is long, fast, athletic and the right size for a point guard in the nba and he is an amazing one on one player something the nba puts a high value on.

 

[upstater]

And he did the same thing his sophomore year. It never seems to carry over to the following year.

Are you looking at the stats? Because this is incorrect.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I'm going off this: Rodney Purvis College Stats | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com

 

[upstater]

Right, and it appears it hasn't carried over to this year either as he's off to a 60% start. Plain and simple, he's at best a mediocre free throw shooter and has at times been putrid.

It's actually plainly incorrect. There was no improvement in his shooting sophomore year. He shot 51% in the last 20 games of his sophomore year.

And you're using a teeny teeny sample for this year. He's 1-3, 7-12, 3-4, 1-1 this year.

 

[upstater]

I'm going off this: Rodney Purvis College Stats | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com

?????

He was 51% in his last 20 games in his sophomore year.
He was 80% in his last 20 games of his junior year.