Jerome Dyson to the NBA | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Jerome Dyson to the NBA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Prezidint said:
...
He's a loser ...
...
So all you weak minded simpletons ... enjoy it while it lasts.
Expand ...
That's some fine Freudian projection you got going there. I speak for myself, but I suspect others would second the motion,
Why don't you take a flying ducku_c_k at a rolling donut, arschloch!
 
Waquoit said:
No...SEND IT IN, JEROME!
Expand ...
Ha ha....I was thinking of that but I figured that was linked to Jerome Lane.

The other good one was the alley-oop to Stanley against Texas. When they did the replay, Kellogg had the best tag line when he said "Go get it Stanley!"
 
There's no doubt jerome has the athleticism for the league:

 
Prezidint said:
Of course, what this really shows is how G-d-awful New Orleans is.
Their winning percentage is .263. That's horrible. Awful.
Of course, it's about the same as Jerome's 3-pt shooting percentage in the D-League (.285).
If this is in fact correct, and Jerome is getting signed, then he certainly had a fine last game in the D-League.
Team lost.
He went 3 of 12 from the field, 1 of 4 from 3, and 1 of 2 from the line.
4 assists - 5 turnovers.
Classic Jerome! Ahh, the memories! His 1 for X games, with X being greater than 10, stand out among the greatest - Allen going off on Georgetown. Kemba owning Pitt.

No, I won't "get over" it, just like you don't "get over" other tragedies that befall you in life.
Did we "get over" it when the Germans bomber Pearl Harbor?
Did we "get over" it when we started hating Dook?
Did we "get over" it when Ross cheated on Rachel (albeit, they were on a break)?

I'm not getting over it. You can ban me, but you can't get me over it. I won't willingly let you live in your make-believe world where Jerome's copious on-court sins (and a few off-court) are all forgiven.

Jerome, on the basketball court, was a loser. He's currently a basketball loser.
His team, Tulsa, is a losing team.
The team he's going to, NO, is a losing team.
His teams at UConn were losing teams, except the year he got hurt, then they won to the final four. They won without him.

He's a loser on the court.

This is not a coincidence. It's because he's a self-centered cancer who drains the life out of his teammates with his selfish and bone-headed plays. Nothing takes the air out of a team more than a ball hog who doesn't look for his teammates first and who commits regular momentum-killing turnovers.

Sure, he plays hard. But he plays hard for the wrong reason. He plays hard to self-aggrandize, not to win as a team.

That's the way it was, that's the way it is, and that's the way it's always going to be. A leopard can't change his spots.

So all you weak minded simpletons who want to trumpet the fact that "NBA U" just put another guy in the NBA, enjoy it while it lasts.

Fact is, if the guy had figured out how to play UConn team ball in the 4 years he was here, rather than his me-first, crash to the rim, turnover machine, and bomb crap shots technique, he would have been drafted right out of UConn.
Expand ...

Speaking of losers....
 
UChusky916 said:
There's no doubt jerome has the athleticism for the league:
Expand ...
Nonsense.
He's a one trick pony with the 2 step, run up dunk. Find a video of any other dunk by Dyson that doesn't have these elements: 1. Running, 2. two step run up to rim, 3. Dunk with right hand. You won't find one, because he only has one dunk. For a 6/3 guy, that's not NBA athletic.

His athleticism is well below the average NBA player.

I can't believe I didn't get any likes for my last post. It was so well written.

The Dyson illusion. New Orleans sees it.
 
Prezidint said:
Nonsense.
He's a one trick pony with the 2 step, run up dunk. Find a video of any other dunk by Dyson that doesn't have these elements: 1. Running, 2. two step run up to rim, 3. Dunk with right hand. You won't find one, because he only has one dunk. For a 6/3 guy, that's not NBA athletic.

His athleticism is well below the average NBA player.

I can't believe I didn't get any likes for my last post. It was so well written.

The Dyson illusion. New Orleans sees it.
Expand ...

If you're pleading for likes, maybe don't trash a player that did so many good things in a UConn uniform.

And your argument that someone can't be an NBA athlete because they're a one-dimensional dunker is one of the more ridiculous things I've seen on here. Dyson could never attempt another dunk in his life and it wouldn't affect his capability on an NBA roster.

A lot more goes into becoming an NBA player than "how many ways you can dunk." The Hornets executives obviously looked at the bigger picture. Congrats to Jerome, look forward to seeing him join Emeka in NOLA
 
.-.
7774 said:
Speaking of losers....
Expand ...
I'll place myself in the losing winner category. I was lost but just now I found the ignore function! Winner, winner, chicken dinner! I am no longer tempted by the SIWOTI syndrome.
Oh and congratulations to Jerome. It is worth noting he has accomplished more by age 25 than a certain troll will accomplish in his entire life!
 
Welcome to the Boneyard where a guy who had his education paid for by basketball, who makes a living playing basketball and is now entering the pinnacle of his sport is a loser while some yahoo in his pajamas banging away at his keyboard in between bites of waffle no doubt considers himself a winner.
 
In which we finally prove that 09' was ours and UNC lucked out when we lost a starter and future NBAer to injury.

Suck it, UNC!
 
glad to hear, I was hoping Jerome would go to Europe after this year so he could make some bank but ultimately the D-League stint worked out for him with the year end call up. hopefully he makes an impression and earns either a training camp spot next year and/or a contract.
 
Good luck to Jerome. Hopefully, he has matured in the last couple of years. Not sure if New Orleans is the best location for him - but we will see what he makes of it.
 
.-.
Chief00 said:
Good luck to Jerome. Hopefully, he has matured in the last couple of years. Not sure if New Orleans is the best location for him - but we will see what he makes of it.
Expand ...

Based on your post Jerome has done more maturing the last couple of years than you have. Let.It.Go.
 
Fishy said:
Welcome to the Boneyard where a guy who had his education paid for by basketball, who makes a living playing basketball and is now entering the pinnacle of his sport is a loser while some yahoo in his pajamas banging away at his keyboard in between bites of waffle no doubt considers himself a winner.
Expand ...
Welcome to the Boneyard, where "basketball loser" gets transmogrified into "loser" in a post where a bunch of words that add up to "click "like" if Prezidint pisses you off" are disguised as innovative thought.

Hey. Look at it this way. I've won as many NCAA tourni games as Jerome. And as many High School championships (11 and 11 senior year premonition). And as many NBA games.

He "makes a living" playing basketball? That's 12-25 grand a year in Tulsa.

He's "entering the pinnacle" of his sport? Oh my my Fishy - I've never seen your panties wadded up your ass quite so far. It's the pinnacle of the sport to get a 10 day contract or some such thing? Playing for one of the 2 or 3 worst teams in the NBA? On what is likely to be a short term contract?

You Dyson huggers can keep your fairy tale alive, but there is no disputing his track record - everywhere the man has played he has lost, including the Proctor Academy, UConn, Tulsa, and now, it seems, New Orleans.

Hey, in his defense, maybe he just has never figured out why he doesn't win. Maybe he's a nice guy who sincerely has never figured out that his style of basketball is a blueprint for losing. Maybe. Maybe he should read this:
Your shot form is awful and you're a bad shooter - stop shooting the 3.
You turn the ball over constantly because you're constantly crashing into traffic. Learn to pick you spots and don't be so predictable.
You become better when you are a threat to pass after you begin your drive.
If you make your teammates better with better passing, that will open up the floor for you.
If the team loses, you don't win, even if you get a 10 day contract in the NBA.

Maybe that will help.

Lord I hope he never ends up coaching at UConn.
 
Evidently, given the NBA uniform he put on today, he is better at his job than you are at yours.

Perhaps some introspection on your part is in order...you know, to figure out why you never made it to the top of the mountain.
 
He doesn't have the athleticism to play in the NBA?

Apparently you have the same bats**t crazy definition of "athleticism" as Waylon (as in you have no idea what the word means).
 
.-.
Lmao. Prezident stfu.

Jerome was one of Calhoun's favorite players and now an NBA team is willing to give him a shot.

Do you want to claim you know more than Calhoun and NBA executives? Be my guest.
 
dyson-hornets-tulsa-120410-650.jpg
 
johnhuskies95 said:
UConn was 23-1 with Dyson in 2009 and #1 in the country.
They were 8-4 without him.
Expand ...
We've done this before.
The 4 losses were, IIRC:
Excellent Pitt team twice, Syracuse 6 OT, and FF.
He only makes a difference in the 6OT game for manpower alone. We don't beat Pitt that year with JD.
Stan's stats shot up the moment Dyson went out. Stan's input more than made up for JD being out, and was a big part of getting to the FF.
Rewatch the FF game - Mr. TO makes the margin of loss bigger, not smaller.
We were 23 and 1 DESPITE him in the lineup, not because of him.
And BTW, the 1 loss was a miserable loss to georgetown where Mr. Ball Hog went 1 for 15 or some god awful thing, and the 8 wins we had without him were better quality wins than we had with him in any case (and no awful losses like GTown).
It's a myth that he was an important part of that team. He was along for the ride, and his poor shooting and turnovers were covered up by the play of the rest of the team.
What's not a myth is that JC loved him because JC was blinded by JD's constant motor on the court, which he no doubt had. But his play was destructive, as his record shows in the other years, when he didn't have a prime AJ to cover for him.
Given that we had several guys with motivation issues all around JD, it's not hard to see why JD became JC's pet. JC's big on constant effort, and that was Dyson's strength. I'd argue his only strength.
That's why a huge talent like Stan played 1 minute against Louisville that year - JC hated the fact that he could never get 100% out of Stan.
So Dyson got full minutes, having never broken the golden JC rule.
Oh yeah. Until the end, when he sold out in his last few games and completely gave up on the team. Remember?
 
What a strange and unnecessary use of the word transmogrification.
 
Huge congrats to Jerome. Making the league as an undrafted free agent is no small accomplishment.

From an athleticism and toughness standpoint, Jerome is certainly an NBA level talent. By all appearances, he has become a much better defender. I really hope he sticks and gets a full contract for next season.
 
.-.
Prezidint said:
We've done this before.
The 4 losses were, IIRC:
Excellent Pitt team twice, Syracuse 6 OT, and FF.
He only makes a difference in the 6OT game for manpower alone. We don't beat Pitt that year with JD.
Stan's stats shot up the moment Dyson went out. Stan's input more than made up for JD being out, and was a big part of getting to the FF.
Rewatch the FF game - Mr. TO makes the margin of loss bigger, not smaller.
We were 23 and 1 DESPITE him in the lineup, not because of him.
And BTW, the 1 loss was a miserable loss to georgetown where Mr. Ball Hog went 1 for 15 or some god awful thing, and the 8 wins we had without him were better quality wins than we had with him in any case (and no awful losses like GTown).
It's a myth that he was an important part of that team. He was along for the ride, and his poor shooting and turnovers were covered up by the play of the rest of the team.
What's not a myth is that JC loved him because JC was blinded by JD's constant motor on the court, which he no doubt had. But his play was destructive, as his record shows in the other years, when he didn't have a prime AJ to cover for him.
Given that we had several guys with motivation issues all around JD, it's not hard to see why JD became JC's pet. JC's big on constant effort, and that was Dyson's strength. I'd argue his only strength.
That's why a huge talent like Stan played 1 minute against Louisville that year - JC hated the fact that he could never get 100% out of Stan.
So Dyson got full minutes, having never broken the golden JC rule.
Oh yeah. Until the end, when he sold out in his last few games and completely gave up on the team. Remember?
Expand ...

If you want to play that game, then let's have it both ways:

-UConn doesn't beat Gonzaga that year without Dyson. 21 points on 5-12 shooting, with 9 rebounds, 4 assists and 3 steals. Who got the rebound and then passed it to AJ who hit the game tying shot? Jerome Dyson.

-UConn doesn't beat Mchigan that year without him. 19 points on 6-13 shooting, including 3-4 from 3 to go along with 4 rebound and 4 steals. Manny Harris, the guard from Michigan who was first team all Big 10 that year and 2nd in the league in scoring? Jerome held him to 5-16 shooting.

-UConn doesn't beat Villanova without Dyson. 19 points on 6-11 shooting with 4 rebounds and 3 steals.

And those are only the games that were close. In the 24 games with Dyson, UConn won 15 games by double digits. In the 12 without him, they won 5 by double digits. Yes, the competition was easier in the beginning of the year, but UConn won 8 games against ranked teams with him.

You're also significantly undervaluing his defense. He always guarded the other team's best perimeter scorer, and almost always shut the guy down.

You have let your irrational hatred for a former college athlete impair your thinking.
 
Prezidint said:
We were 23 and 1
Expand ...

The only FACT in that unbearable rant was that we were 23-1 and #1 in the country with Jerome. Everything else is pure speculation on your part.

NBA executives - not random message board users - say he's good enough for a shot.

Seems like you're the only one that's blinded here.
 
Prezidint said:
We've done this before.
The 4 losses were, IIRC:
Excellent Pitt team twice, Syracuse 6 OT, and FF.
He only makes a difference in the 6OT game for manpower alone. We don't beat Pitt that year with JD.
Stan's stats shot up the moment Dyson went out. Stan's input more than made up for JD being out, and was a big part of getting to the FF.
Rewatch the FF game - Mr. TO makes the margin of loss bigger, not smaller.
We were 23 and 1 DESPITE him in the lineup, not because of him.
And BTW, the 1 loss was a miserable loss to georgetown where Mr. Ball Hog went 1 for 15 or some god awful thing, and the 8 wins we had without him were better quality wins than we had with him in any case (and no awful losses like GTown).
It's a myth that he was an important part of that team. He was along for the ride, and his poor shooting and turnovers were covered up by the play of the rest of the team.
What's not a myth is that JC loved him because JC was blinded by JD's constant motor on the court, which he no doubt had. But his play was destructive, as his record shows in the other years, when he didn't have a prime AJ to cover for him.
Given that we had several guys with motivation issues all around JD, it's not hard to see why JD became JC's pet. JC's big on constant effort, and that was Dyson's strength. I'd argue his only strength.
That's why a huge talent like Stan played 1 minute against Louisville that year - JC hated the fact that he could never get 100% out of Stan.
So Dyson got full minutes, having never broken the golden JC rule.
Oh yeah. Until the end, when he sold out in his last few games and completely gave up on the team. Remember?
Expand ...
It's weird how you think your opinions are facts.
 
We also won big at Louisville with Dyson (Louisville was a one seed) and beat up on Wisconsin to win the tourney in St. Thomas. It wasn't the best Wisconsin team ever assembled, but they made the second round of the NCAA and Bo Ryan's team can be a bitch to play sometimes. Dyson was hands down the best player on the floor in that one - and there wasn't a close second.

If you actually go back and watch the Michigan State game, you'll observe that MSU had a Ricky-type defensive specialist named Travis Walton (I had to look up his name) who they put on AJ and he made AJ's life miserable (5-20 from floor, one assist). Kemba had a case of freshmanitis and even admitted he was overwhelmed by the moment, and Austrie was Austrie (4 FG attempts in 36 minutes). Meanwhile, Kailin Lucas was the best guard in the game, and we had a hard time covering him.

I sat there watching that game wishing Missouri Kemba would come back, or wishing we had another scoring option in the backcourt to take some of the pressure off AJ because he was trying to take on a guy who's only role was to stop him and the guy was every bit the defensive stopper that was advertised. Robinson only had six shot attempts (a couple on follow-up dunks) so he wasn't involved in the offense, and it sure wasn't Dyson's fault -- since he was in a suit.
 
johnhuskies95 said:
If you want to play that game, then let's have it both ways:

-UConn doesn't beat . . .
Expand ...
Some very good points to be sure. Your numbers leave out Turnovers, momentum killing bonehead plays, and inopportune fouls, of course, but point taken.
The problem is we can never swap out Dyson for other players and see what the effect would have been. Except for after he got hurt, at which point Stan took off, put up great numbers and much better than previously, and was a substantial part of the run to the FF. We didn't miss a beat after Jerome went down. In fact, we were better.
Stan put up 15 points and 13 boards on 5 of 6 shooting, 4 for 4 from the line, and 1 for 1 from 3 against Michigan State - no way, no how is anybody going to convince me that having Dyson take those minutes gives us a better result. He played about 15 more minutes a game after Dyson went down. His success was directly attributable to 2 things - 1. He was getting Dyson's minutes and Calhoun couldn't hook him for his preferred pet, 2. His game wasn't being stiffled by Dyson's ball hogging, energy vampire style.

Fun to argue about this.
 
Look - the team had great games with Dyson and great games with Stanley. Both had their ups and downs though.

I don't understand why it has to be so black and white.

Here's a thought - maybe when Dyson went down it coincided with Stanley rounding back into basketball shape after missing the first part of the season. It's not like he immediately took off as soon as JD went down. Don't paint that picture - it's not true.

Here's an even crazier though - maybe with a healthy Dyson taking more of Austrie's minutes - not Stanley's minutes - the final product could have beat Michigan State and maybe UNC.

Thing is - we'll never know. The only fact is that we we're 23-1 and #1 when Dyson went down.

Jerome made the NBA - someone out there doesn't think he is a basketball 'loser'. Just give the guy credit and move on.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,228
Messages
4,558,297
Members
10,444
Latest member
Billy Boy


Top Bottom