Purvis Returning

[MexicoHusky]

Purvis had a respectable year (which isn't over yet). I don't care for him in crunch time, but he's a decent player and a good guy.

 

[Leebo]

There's a certain "shiny new toy" phenomenon at play where people can't wait for the new players. There was once a Boneyard sentiment that it's just as well that Rip turns pro because we need his minutes for Ajou Deng.

Yeah, Purvis is Purvis, but "someone else" could be the GOAT!

 

[intlzncster]

There's a certain "shiny new toy" phenomenon at play where people can't wait for the new players. There was once a Boneyard sentiment that it's just as well that Rip turns pro because we need his minutes for Ajou Deng.

Jesus. I don't remember that. Guess this place has always been bonkers.

 

[TasteofUConn]

Purvis will have been here 4 total years, so his understanding of the offense . . . means a smooth transition for Gilbert into the rotation.

GOLD!

 

[AZHuskiePop]

There's a certain "shiny new toy" phenomenon at play where people can't wait for the new players. There was once a Boneyard sentiment that it's just as well that Rip turns pro because we need his minutes for Ajou Deng.

That's right according to JC we beat Duke with our best player ineligible.
I think Rodney coming back is a mistake not for us but him. Especially if he graduates this year.
I believed the same about him as I did about Ryan coming back
It's just wasting a valuable year of earning potentential on a very slim chance at the NBA
In Ryan's case he needed to grow 3 or 4 inches. That last year at UConn cost him huge dollars
Rodney lacks the size to play the three and the handle to play the two
Can he really improve enough to catch on somewhere as a classic tweener?
The other difference is RB had the flair they love in Europe to make him a star and favorite.. I don't think Rodney has that same appeal.
Neither of these kids owed us the extra year, in RB case we understand.but remember Rodney was a practice player on the NC team and a stalwart on two other 20 win teams so he also has paid his dues.
I wish him luck in anyhing he decides, he has represented us well.

 

[TasteofUConn]

Can't understand why some wouldn't want a player averaging over 12ppg on 43% shooting,

Because the game is about much, much more than ppg.

a player who defends well,

True, he's a good one on one defender, but many guys defend well.

a player who is bound to show improvement next year on the team.

Disagree. He'll be substantially the same player he is right now.

Not to mention the way he represents the program.

Rather have a guy who can shoot/pass/rebound than a UN ambassador.

Is he NBA caliber, probably not

Not "probably not." Just "not." And not close, to be fair.

. . . but I'd bet he'll have a great final season for us.

I'll take that bet. Lots of people bet he'd have a great this season for us, but that didn't work out.

I'll try really hard to refrain from posting on Purvis again. Not trying to attack the person, just trying to counter the irrational expectations that have been with this kid since he announced the transfer, and trying to offset the myopic attention to ppg rather than total team play.

The reason that me and many others would prefer RP to just move on is because we want a fresh start. We're looking down the barrel of back to back NITs, like it or not, or, hopefully, a first round NCAA appearance. Fair or unfair, RP was a central component of those two teams. Most would agree that he's a frustrating, inconsistent player and that's he's underperformed for two years now.

With that in mind, it's not so much the "him leaving" part as it is the "let's get on to what's next part."

Final comment (I promise I'll try). The guy is just bad chemistry. He's our Carmelo. Just something about the way he plays the game, it's not conducive to consistent winning.

 

[intlzncster]

There's a certain "shiny new toy" phenomenon at play where people can't wait for the new players.

I said this in a post on another thread, but 'the shiny new toy' phenomenon appears to apply to assistant coaches as well.

 

[Leebo]

The guy is just bad chemistry.

I know you're trying to talk about how he melds with the team in game action, but that's only part of what people talk about when they say "chemistry."

Purvis is "bad for team chemistry," and this team is "awful." Yeah, yeah, nothing can be outside of the extremes.

 

[intlzncster]

True, he's a good one on one defender, but many guys defend well.

Not on this team. He's one of our most valuable players in that respect.

Final comment (I promise I'll try). The guy is just bad chemistry. He's our Carmelo. Just something about the way he plays the game, it's not conducive to consistent winning.

He's not even close to Carmelo. Carmelo's a black hole on offense, who seem(ed) incapable of getting along with other stars and incapable of wanting to play within a team framework.

Purvis shares none of those characteristics. When he's on, he can score in bunches and even play make; We've seen that this year. All he really needs to do is work on his consistency, and eliminating one or two boneheaded plays again. Also, improve that handle and draw contact. That's it. All of those things are fixable.

And in terms of team chemistry, as it's traditionally known, he's one of the best we've ever had at UCONN. Huge asset to the team imo.

 

[Candyman]

I agree with almost everything @TasteofUConn said above about Purvis except I disagree with his main point of wanting to clean the slate. We lose Purvis we have only two true guards and no shooters. Like him or not kid can shoot threes and play solid defense. I'd like Gilbert and Adams to start with Purvis providing scoring off the bench. I'd like to see him spotting up more next year and not try to do too much.

 

[lange10]

I agree with almost everything @TasteofUConn said above about Purvis except I disagree with his main point of wanting to clean the slate. We lose Purvis we have only two true guards and no shooters. Like him or not kid can shoot threes and play solid defense. I'd like Gilbert and Adams to start with Purvis providing scoring off the bench. I'd like to see him spotting up more next year and not try to do too much.

If Purvis comes off the bench next season I'd almost guarantee chemistry issues will exist. I'm curious if Ollie would be willing to go real small in his starting line up and feature:
1. Gilbert
2. Adams
3. Purv
4. Dham
5. Brimah

Purvis will be a better fit in next years offense as he will be more of a spot up shooter - one of his strong suits - considering Gilbert and Adams are more natural PG's than Gibbs, especially Gilbert. Offense should run a bit more smoothly.

 

[intlzncster]

If Purvis comes off the bench next season I'd almost guarantee chemistry issues will exist. I'm curious if Ollie would be willing to go real small in his starting line up and feature:
1. Gilbert
2. Adams
3. Purv
4. Dham
5. Brimah

Purvis will be a better fit in next years offense as he will be more of a spot up shooter - one of his strong suits - considering Gilbert and Adams are more natural PG's than Gibbs, especially Gilbert. Offense should run a bit more smoothly.

A lot more smoothly I'd think. Adams year of seasoning will be huge for that kid. He's one of those guys that I think can post a strong 2nd season, even if the best part is only the 2nd half of the year.

And Gilbert, with his makeup and style of play, comes in ready made to be a solid number 2 PG.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Because the game is about much, much more than ppg.

True, he's a good one on one defender, but many guys defend well.

Disagree. He'll be substantially the same player he is right now.

Rather have a guy who can shoot/pass/rebound than a UN ambassador.

Not "probably not." Just "not." And not close, to be fair.

I'll take that bet. Lots of people bet he'd have a great this season for us, but that didn't work out.

I'll try really hard to refrain from posting on Purvis again. Not trying to attack the person, just trying to counter the irrational expectations that have been with this kid since he announced the transfer, and trying to offset the myopic attention to ppg rather than total team play.

The reason that me and many others would prefer RP to just move on is because we want a fresh start. We're looking down the barrel of back to back NITs, like it or not, or, hopefully, a first round NCAA appearance. Fair or unfair, RP was a central component of those two teams. Most would agree that he's a frustrating, inconsistent player and that's he's underperformed for two years now.

With that in mind, it's not so much the "him leaving" part as it is the "let's get on to what's next part."

Final comment (I promise I'll try). The guy is just bad chemistry. He's our Carmelo. Just something about the way he plays the game, it's not conducive to consistent winning.

Your points are all in a vacuum and completely ignore what we have (or don't have) to replace him next year. There are two guards left on the team including one freshman next year, neither of which are known to be outside shooting threats at this point. Any suggestion that this team benefits from him leaving is plainly absurd. Is he a perfect player? No. Is he better than the alternative? Absolutely.

 

[krinklecut]

This thread is so silly. If Purvis plays on the team, no matter the capacity, we are better than without him. If he leaves we have 2 schollys to fill, who are we replacing him with? He is greater than 0. Come on now.

 

[TasteofUConn]

"Are we better next year with Purvis?" is the wrong question.
The right question is, "are we better going forward without Purvis?"
We need to start looking down the road. Next year we are not going to be much better than we are now. We lose our best all around player and a decent back up center. We gain Larrier, a purvisian/gibbsian unknown, and a freshman point.

Adams and Alterique are the future. Purvis is the past. Don't muddle the future with the past.
Okay - I'm trying again.

 

[upstater]

We gain Larrier, a purvisian/gibbsian unknown, and a freshman point.
Adams and Alterique are the future. Purvis is the past. Don't muddle the future with the past.
Okay - I'm trying again.

Vance Jackson is a 6'8" outside shooter

 

[TasteofUConn]

Vance Jackson is a 6'8" outside shooter

That's awesome!!! I think we should get him a bunch of playing time next year with Adams and Rique and Larrier and Hamilton.

 

[upstater]

That's awesome!!! I think we should get him a bunch of playing time next year with Adams and Rique and Larrier and Hamilton.

We need guards. Guards. Who is your 3rd guard?

 

[intlzncster]

Adams and Alterique are the future. Purvis is the past. Don't muddle the future with the past.
Okay - I'm trying again.

Thing is, you never want to sacrifice the present for the future. The future is unknown. For example, Jalen could blow up next year and jump. Then he's out of the picture.

Purvis gives you strong upgrade in the present (next year). We've probably got a lot of good players coming back, so next years team could very easily be better than this one. I expect it to be. We have a chance to make a run. Never sacrifice that on some possibility of the future that might never eventuate. jmo

 

[TasteofUConn]

Thing is, you never want to sacrifice the present for the future.

Completely disagree, 180 degrees. We applied your concept this year by pounding the Gibbs square peg into the point guard round hole for 4 months. In October Gibbs gave us the best shot of winning. But now in March, chickens have come home.
Would rather have had Adams running point from the git-go, live with the errors, with the hope we'd be peaking now.
But that'd have been sacrificing the fall for the spring.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

"Are we better next year with Purvis?" is the wrong question.
The right question is, "are we better going forward without Purvis?"
We need to start looking down the road. Next year we are not going to be much better than we are now. We lose our best all around player and a decent back up center. We gain Larrier, a purvisian/gibbsian unknown, and a freshman point.

Adams and Alterique are the future. Purvis is the past. Don't muddle the future with the past.
Okay - I'm trying again.

What are you talking about? Is your point that we won't be better than this year so why even try? Your recommended course of action means they are absolutely screwed if it comes to foul trouble or injury. Sam Cassell Jr. would be getting starting minutes or Daniel Hamilton would be manning the 2.

 

[Leebo]

What are you talking about? Is your point that we won't be better than this year so why even try? Your recommended course of action means they are absolutely screwed if it comes to foul trouble or injury. Sam Cassell Jr. would be getting starting minutes or Daniel Hamilton would be manning the 2.

You have to remember that according to him we are currently "awful" (move over, BC and Rutgers).

So, he just wants to purge.

 

[intlzncster]

Completely disagree, 180 degrees. We applied your concept this year by pounding the Gibbs square peg into the point guard round hole for 4 months. In October Gibbs gave us the best shot of winning. But now in March, chickens have come home.
Would rather have had Adams running point from the git-go, live with the errors, with the hope we'd be peaking now.
But that'd have been sacrificing the fall for the spring.

We can make the tournament right now. If Adams was playing from the get go, I don't think we get enough wins in the all important 1st half of the year (OOC). I thought it was fairly obvious he wasn't ready at the start. So we might have torched the season. That would have been a waste. This is all complete conjecture of course.

 

[krinklecut]

Man having a senior on the team who has a ton of experience and who helped recruit these kids and can put up decent numbers would really hurt the future of the program.

 

[CallMeBruce]

I can't believe people are still arguing with this goober. He obviously has a blind spot about Purvis. Move on.