Liam recovering on fast track? | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Liam recovering on fast track?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stew has had some really good games in his absence (Nova and there was another 14 point game in there). Overall though the injury is crushing to this season. By the time he comes back, gets into game shape, regains chemistry etc the season will be about over. One of our highest rated recruits in history and we’re only going to get to see him play for half a season.

In terms of this season I think tonight’s game against X is the most important game of the year. Lose this and we are looking at 10-11 losses with 2 games left against Marquette and St John’s, @ Creighton, BET, Nova, GT etc.
 
superjohn said:
This idea that we're better off that Liam got injured is totally nuts.
Expand ...
He never said we’re better off without Liam. His premise was they can’t afford to rush Liam back because his future depends on it.

He then proceeded to provide a potential positive outcome from this negative. I didn’t read anything that stated we are better off from Liam’s injury in his post. You overreacted.
 
ctchamps said:
He never said we’re better off without Liam. His premise was they can’t afford to rush Liam back because his future depends on it.

He then proceeded to provide a potential positive outcome from this negative. I didn’t read anything that stated we are better off from Liam’s injury in his post. You overreacted.
Expand ...
Pretty sure his point is in regards to any “potential dividends” from Liam’s injury (there basically are none)
 
UConnTrumbull said:
Pretty sure his point is in regards to any “potential dividends” from Liam’s injury (there basically are none)
Expand ...
If that was his point he could have expressed it.

As to "potential dividends" several posts have expressed that little ( by Stewart) or nothing has has been demonstrated up to this point. Which is not quite true. I've seen development from players getting minutes that otherwise would not have happened if Liam hadn't got injured. Is it enough to give me confidence that their play is the deciding factor for a win in tonights game or games in the upcoming schedule. No. But I have hope.

If there is an issue with @JesusAllen11 post it should have been over the declarative "it will pay dividends instead of it may pay dividends. That's as egregious as the out right dismissing of future potential.
 
Palatine said:
Not only has no one "elevated" their game. No one has even "gone off" in a game. An unexpected 15 or 20 point game would be nice.
Expand ...
Considering that you have two players in Alex and Solo ahead of him I think Stewart has "gone off" as a third scoring option.
 
.-.
ctchamps said:
Considering that you have two players in Alex and Solo ahead of him I think Stewart has "gone off" as a third scoring option.
Expand ...
Stewart has two 14 point games too. It’s not 15, but it’s right there lol
 
Looking at the glass half full Hass, Solo, Sam, Tarris have in my mind elevated their game or exceeded expectations to some extent. Alex is Alex and Liam is what we expected from a potential lottery pick.
 
HuskyWarrior611 said:
Stewart has two 14 point games too. It’s not 15, but it’s right there lol
Expand ...

That is basically the same Stewart all year. Good game. Bad game. Score 16, score 6, score 0, score 16. He's hit double figures 5 times and never followed it up. 14 points is not going off. It's more of the same inconsistency. You expect him to have these games.
 
Palatine said:
That is basically the same Stewart all year. Good game. Bad game. Score 16, score 6, score 0, score 16. He's hit double figures 5 times and never followed it up. 14 points is not going off. It's more of the same inconsistency. You expect him to have these games.
Expand ...
Since he had only 4 points in 33 minutes against Butler, I'm expecting 15 points from him tonight.
 
.-.
woodchuck68 said:
I have breaking news from the game. I was chatting with the uconn Tainerr for a bit and he assured me that Liam will be back... soon
Expand ...
Define "soon". At least the announcers said he looked good in shoot around.
 
I could have imagined this but I could have sworn that I read (about ten days ago) that Dan Hurley said McNeeley won't play until February. Hummel (announcer tonight) mention that Liam looked great in the shootaround so I imagine the plan is to prepare him for Marquette (which may or may not include minutes against DePaul).
 
.-.
This team isn’t a title contender at all. But with Liam, we can certainly do damage in the tournament. Some people maybe overreacting to a close loss on the road against a good Xavier team without our best player.
 
HooperScooper said:
So much for that. Got a big nothing from Stewart. Besides the 3 fouls he committed I couldn't even tell you if he was on the court. Him and Ross are just not adding much.
Expand ...
Feels like Ross and Stewart may have played themselves out of playing time once Liam returns.
 
superjohn said:
This idea that we're better off that Liam got injured is totally nuts.
Expand ...
Whose idea was that, other than yours?

Sure, change the wording just slightly enough and your take has a certain appeal.

But read the two side by side, and then wonder why you chose not to quote the post exactly. I suspect that it might weaken your typically hyperbolic labeling. "Totally" leaves no room for qualification, and "nuts" is used to turn a disagreement into a mandate by use of means of claiming mental illness as a pejorative. You present enough indication of extreme claims regarding mental and/or emotional imbalance to suggest your own uneasiness in such matters, and a corresponding seeming unwillingness or inability to shift course. It's a genuine wonder that you ever might imagine anybody else might pause, examine, and/or change themselves, whether it be a coach, a player, or a fellow fan.

Submitted for your consideration: I at least mock myself by writing arguably too many words rather than mocking you by aping your brevity by writing (something akin to*), "STFU, moron."

* Oh wait, that was literal, but I felt some 'need' to suggest that I had a choice of options to be aggressive & derisive in order to try and control the narrative. In other words, nobody said what you wrote, so your comment can't be directly refuted, but it also has no value. If I were a bettor, I'd say you won't change. Stay precious.
 
.-.
Get a Job said:
Expand ...

Borges thinks it's unlikely McNeeley will play tomorrow. But we'll wait for the 5:00 update.

Fact is, UConn can't overlook any opponent right now, especially with Liam McNeeley out with a high ankle sprain. Dan Hurley will give an update on McNeeley's status at a media availability around 5 p.m. Tuesday, but it seems unlikely the 6-foot-7 freshman will be available on Wednesday night. And even if he is, it will likely be in a limited role as he shapes back into form.

 
HooperScooper said:
Borges thinks it's unlikely McNeeley will play tomorrow. But we'll wait for the 5:00 update.

Fact is, UConn can't overlook any opponent right now, especially with Liam McNeeley out with a high ankle sprain. Dan Hurley will give an update on McNeeley's status at a media availability around 5 p.m. Tuesday, but it seems unlikely the 6-foot-7 freshman will be available on Wednesday night. And even if he is, it will likely be in a limited role as he shapes back into form.

Expand ...
TAKE YOUR TIME, LIAM. The last thing we need is for him to rush back early, he re-injures his ankle and all of a sudden his UConn career is done. Even if it means we might drop another game or 2, wait till he's 100% healthy as if we lose him, I 100% believe the chances for a 3-peat are gone with him. I don't think we are seriously in danger of missing the tourney even with another couple L's, and getting maybe a 5 seed vs a 6 or 7 seed really doesn't matter that much big picture.
 
ctbro1999 said:
TAKE YOUR TIME, LIAM. The last thing we need is for him to rush back early, he re-injures his ankle and all of a sudden his UConn career is done. Even if it means we might drop another game or 2, wait till he's 100% healthy as if we lose him, I 100% believe the chances for a 3-peat are gone with him. I don't think we are seriously in danger of missing the tourney even with another couple L's, and getting maybe a 5 seed vs a 6 or 7 seed really doesn't matter that much big picture.
Expand ...
Ankles are weird, not really something you re-injure. They just hurt like mofos until fully healed. There comes a point where you can push your way through them if you can tolerate the pain, without risking reinjury. Look at a guy like Mahomes, who has had multiple high ankles sprains and almost always played on them. I would think it's more the McNeeley camp that is pushing for caution, rightfully. Broome only missed two games with his.

I personally wouldn't want to be dropping another couple losses without him - we drop Depaul and we are legit looking at the bubble territory with a number of tough games ahead. Him coming back on the road at Marquette isn't ideal. Not sure if you've checked recently, but we are closer to an 8 seed than a 5. God forbid we lose to DePaul then get run in these next 3 very tough games, we may be looking at a play in game, with very little time to build any momentum going into the tourney season. I'd rather get him back ASAP even if he has a little lingering pain, and see him tough it out for the team. This team isn't so good even with him that they can just plug him in and expect instant magic. Im really hoping he can suit up and get on the floor for 5-10 tomorrow.

 
HooperScooper said:
A no update update. I guess that's better than nothing. :confused:
Expand ...
He will be back sometime, probably when his ankle heals. I heard that from a guy at the car wash. Also said he would definitely play in the next game that starts at 11:11. Going for Blaze pizza after the game, too.
 
RuffRuff said:
Ankles are weird, not really something you re-injure. They just hurt like mofos until fully healed. There comes a point where you can push your way through them if you can tolerate the pain, without risking reinjury. Look at a guy like Mahomes, who has had multiple high ankles sprains and almost always played on them. I would think it's more the McNeeley camp that is pushing for caution, rightfully. Broome only missed two games with his.

I personally wouldn't want to be dropping another couple losses without him - we drop Depaul and we are legit looking at the bubble territory with a number of tough games ahead. Him coming back on the road at Marquette isn't ideal. Not sure if you've checked recently, but we are closer to an 8 seed than a 5. God forbid we lose to DePaul then get run in these next 3 very tough games, we may be looking at a play in game, with very little time to build any momentum going into the tourney season. I'd rather get him back ASAP even if he has a little lingering pain, and see him tough it out for the team. This team isn't so good even with him that they can just plug him in and expect instant magic. Im really hoping he can suit up and get on the floor for 5-10 tomorrow.

Expand ...
I would hope we can beat DePaul without him, but who knows for sure.
 
ctbro1999 said:
TAKE YOUR TIME, LIAM. The last thing we need is for him to rush back early, he re-injures his ankle and all of a sudden his UConn career is done. Even if it means we might drop another game or 2, wait till he's 100% healthy as if we lose him, I 100% believe the chances for a 3-peat are gone with him. I don't think we are seriously in danger of missing the tourney even with another couple L's, and getting maybe a 5 seed vs a 6 or 7 seed really doesn't matter that much big picture.
Expand ...
Hey I love Lunardi latest brackets with Huskies as 8 seed and Duke a 1
I hope we match up with them with a healthy McNeeley.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,183
Messages
4,556,008
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom