Rick Issanza (C, 7'1", 225) to visit

[ToolzieFan]

Well, let's take a look, see if we can't convince you.

As a sophomore, Carlton averaged 9.0 points, 6.2 rebounds, 1.8 blocks, 3.1 fouls on .607 shooting, .627 from the line. His /40 numbers were 16.2 points, 11.1 rebounds, 3.2 blocks, 5.5 fouls.

Knight's per game numbers were 2.5 points, 2.9 rebounds, 1 block, 2.3 fouls on .439 shooting, 50% from the line. /40 numbers are 8.3 points, 9.9 rebounds, 3.3 blocks, 7.9 fouls.

Armstrong's per game numbers were 2.4 points, 2.8 rebounds, 0.7 blocks, 1.6 fouls, 50% shooting, .388 from the line. /40 numbers were 10.2 points, 12.3 rebounds, 3.0 blocks, 6.9 fouls.

By any reasonable statistical measure, Carlton was, by far, the best player as a sophomore. Why do you feel otherwise?

Good work, Bruce. I had looked these numbers up and was just coming here to chime in. When the differences are the that large, I don’t think the conference really matters. And for those who will discuss minutes and opportunities: we’ll never know what Knight or Armstrong would have done with more minutes, but it’s clear Carlton was the more productive player as a sophomore.

 

[ToolzieFan]

Bottom line, Travis and Hilton had similar per-minute statistics on much stronger teams and with much less offense running through them.

Did you look at the per-minute statistics? Carlton scored almost twice as many points per 40 minutes as Knight.

 

[gtcam]

We need @tcf15 to put together 2nd year highlights of Travis, Jake, Hilton and Boone. Let’s see if he can get 12 minutes on any of them. They all turned out to be important players but I believe Carlton had the better soph season.

the competition was/is different
Josh did improve no doubt but needs to find consistency
still need another 5 for next season

 

[selles]

Good work, Bruce. I had looked these numbers up and was just coming here to chime in. When the differences are the that large, I don’t think the conference really matters. And for those who will discuss minutes and opportunities: we’ll never know what Knight or Armstrong would have done with more minutes, but it’s clear Carlton was the more productive player as a sophomore.

Knight actually did have the opportunity for big minutes his soph year. Calhoun was desperate for him or Hayward to seize the main post role but neither could do it.

Travis was still gangly and weak as a sophomore but he really blossomed as a junior.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Prepare yourself for an avalanche of dubious OBE/AAC claims.

Fortunately, we have SOS data on that, and it doesn't come close to explaining the difference there.

 

[pj]

Did you look at the per-minute statistics? Carlton scored almost twice as many points per 40 minutes as Knight.

Points are the only category with a significant difference, and they are explained by having Ray Allen, Doron Sheffer, Donyell Marshall, Donny Marshall, Kirk King, and Brian Fair as teammates. Travis had a good shot out to 12 feet at that time but he wasn't allowed to take it.

 

[ToolzieFan]

Points are the only category with a significant difference, and they are explained by having Ray Allen, Doron Sheffer, Donyell Marshall, Donny Marshall, Kirk King, and Brian Fair as teammates. Travis had a good shot out to 12 feet at that time but he wasn't allowed to take it.

But Knight shot 43.9% and Carlton shot 60.7%. You could make the case that Carlton got more attention from opposing defenses since he has much less support around him.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Points are the only category with a significant difference, and they are explained by having Ray Allen, Doron Sheffer, Donyell Marshall, Donny Marshall, Kirk King, and Brian Fair as teammates. Travis had a good shot out to 12 feet at that time but he wasn't allowed to take it.

If he wasn't allowed to shoot from far out, why did he only shoot 44%? Knight also fouled far more often despite playing on a better defensive team. Of course, this doesn't mean that Carlton is going to be a better player the next two years than Knight was in his last two, but any argument that he hasn't been better through his first two years is based entirely in delusion.

 

[UconnU]

Carlton is MILES beyond where Hilton and Knight were at the same age.

Knight? No way.

 

[Chief00]

Good work, Bruce. I had looked these numbers up and was just coming here to chime in. When the differences are the that large, I don’t think the conference really matters. And for those who will discuss minutes and opportunities: we’ll never know what Knight or Armstrong would have done with more minutes, but it’s clear Carlton was the more productive player as a sophomore.

Statistics used by well intended casual fans can be misleading. If we had Ray Allen, Rip or Donyell on last season’s team do you think anyone would have average as many points or rebounds as they did? Of course not. Why would you have CV shooting threes when Ray could? Why would Josh post rather than Donyell? Why would Tyler score vs. Rip? With an additional 2 or 3 Bigs who could actually rebound, do you think Josh or CV would have got as many rebounds as they did?
Real competitive games are a much different dynamic than First Night, where rebounds are there for the taking.

 

[HuskyHawk]

If he wasn't allowed to shoot from far out, why did he only shoot 44%? Knight also fouled far more often despite playing on a better defensive team. Of course, this doesn't mean that Carlton is going to be a better player the next two years than Knight was in his last two, but any argument that he hasn't been better through his first two years is based entirely in delusion.

I’m going from memory, but Travis was fairly athletic and ran the floor well. He also blocked or bothered a lot of shots, rebounded and made good outlet passes. He was the more complete player. Lakers drafted him for a reason.

Carlton has better post offensive moves. Better at that than Boone as well. Hilton was never very good back to basket, his game was facing. Carlton is a poor man’s version of Kevin McHale. His back to the basket skills are very high, even if his athleticism is low. And in this era, not many guys play that way. So defenders aren’t good at defending it. On a team with shooters, he’s going to be hard to stop.

 

[mauconnfan]

I’m going from memory, but Travis was fairly athletic and ran the floor well. He also blocked or bothered a lot of shots, rebounded and made good outlet passes. He was the more complete player. Lakers drafted him for a reason.

Carlton has better post offensive moves. Better at that than Boone as well. Hilton was never very good back to basket, his game was facing. Carlton is a poor man’s version of Kevin McHale. His back to the basket skills are very high, even if his athleticism is low. And in this era, not many guys play that way. So defenders aren’t good at defending it. On a team with shooters, he’s going to be hard to stop.

Good call on Travis. If he had to score more he would have, they had lots of scorers. He was a very good rebounder, very good outlet passer as well as at half court offense, also shot the ball really well. Different players for now but would love to see Josh add a nice 10-15 foot jumper to his artillery.

You could run some offense through Travis and jake for that matter both very good passers for 5's.

 

[Towney007]

Josh Carlton is Travis Knight. I've now heard it all.

 

[superjohn]

Statistics used by well intended casual fans can be misleading. If we had Ray Allen, Rip or Donyell on last season’s team do you think anyone would have average as many points or rebounds as they did? Of course not. Why would you have CV shooting threes when Ray could? Why would Josh post rather than Donyell? Why would Tyler score vs. Rip? With an additional 2 or 3 Bigs who could actually rebound, do you think Josh or CV would have got as many rebounds as they did?
Real competitive games are a much different dynamic than First Night, where rebounds are there for the taking.

It's as if some on this board haven't watched us the past few years and don't realize how much we've sucked. Jalen and maybe Alterique are the only guys who would have gotten any time on those past UConn teams.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I like Carlton, and think he has improved quite a bit and will continue to be a big piece for us.

People are having quite a bit of amnesia in forgetting the quality of players and quality of teams that Hilton and Knight played on. Using numbers put up on a bad UConn team in a bad league to defend the argument provides no context or basis in reality.

 

[mauconnfan]

Josh Carlton is Travis Knight. I've now heard it all.

Did someone say that? I don't see that anywhere.

 

[Towney007]

It's as if some on this board haven't watched us the past few years and don't realize how much we've sucked. Jalen and maybe Alterique are the only guys who would have gotten any time on those past UConn teams.

*The only guys* who'd have played on those teams at all.

I'm not even sure we've had many bench guys from those teams. I'm just trying to think back to 2015 and the guy's we've had, who I think Calhoun would've even recruited.

Boat was one of his guys so he doesn't count. Miller would have played. Maybe Purvis. Brimah was a high motor guy.... but outside of that I really can't think of anyone.

What we've had the past few years were just soft-ish, unfocused, but really athletic/talented guys. Nice kids, but not Calhoun kids. I'm not even sure he'd have gone after Adams, Hamilton, Vital, etc.

It's been almost the exact opposite of what Calhoun would want..

 

[Towney007]

Did someone say that? I don't see that anywhere.

People are using numbers to suggest Carlton is *better* or *further along* even than Knight. It's absurd.

 

[mauconnfan]

People are using numbers to suggest Carlton is *better* or *further along* even than Knight. It's absurd.

He is further along than Travis was after his soph year though. Only because Travis only played 11 minutes a game of course. Only in numbers mind you, by all means Travis may have been really good on this team as a soph but only comparisons are by the numbers of the 2 after 2 years of college. I loved Travis and can only hope that Carlton brings the overall impact that he did to UConn.

 

[Chief00]

He is further along than Travis was after his soph year though. Only because Travis only played 11 minutes a game of course. Only in numbers mind you, by all means Travis may have been really good on this team as a soph but only comparisons are by the numbers of the 2 after 2 years of college. I loved Travis and can only hope that Carlton brings the overall impact that he did to UConn.

In fairness to the current guys - Hilton did not play much early in his career because of talent in front of him - but when he finally got more time, he was ready. He also did the work in the weight room with heavy metal.

 

[HuskyHawk]

People are using numbers to suggest Carlton is *better* or *further along* even than Knight. It's absurd.

Well he is further along. He started from freshman year, because all we had we the great black hole, David O. Travis played 11 minutes as a freshman and soph, then 23 and 25 as a Junior and Senior. Josh was 14 and 23 mpg so far. They have comparable block and point numbers looking at Josh soph vs Travis Junior year. Travis with a big edge on the boards (taller, better athlete). Travis also has much better assist numbers and averaged 2 a game by senior year. He was a very complete basketball player.

Josh had a better sophomore year for sure. By necessity. Josh is a better scorer around the rim, he just is. But Travis rebounded better, had a better jumper, could dribble, run in transition and was a very good passer. Better player? No. Will he score more ppg this year than Travis ever did? Probably. It's not just other options (which Travis' teams had more no doubt). Josh is pretty gifted scoring in close as his 60% pg% attests.

 

[mauconnfan]

In fairness to the current guys - Hilton did not play much early in his career because of talent in front of him - but when he finally got more time, he was ready. He also did the work in the weight room with heavy metal.

As a soph Hilton wasn't ready though I do agree playing against such very good players in practice all the time helped him tremendously his last 2 years. What helped him even more as ou noted was how much stronger he became. It helped him in the lane, rebounding and made him look NBA ready so really helped him get paid early on after he left.

 

[ktuck911]

His game looks like dunks and blocked shots. That's fine with me, it adds something we lack.

young fella knows what to do in the paint.. just gotta be a little more consistent keeping the ball up as high as he can without gathering too low..

 

[Com'rGordon]

Gonna love having a 20 page thread on a guy that ends up going JUCO or to Towson

 

[navery12]

Gonna love having a 20 page thread on a guy that ends up going JUCO or to Towson

Or a guy who already committed to Oklahoma?

 

[Stainmaster]

*The only guys* who'd have played on those teams at all.

I'm not even sure we've had many bench guys from those teams. I'm just trying to think back to 2015 and the guy's we've had, who I think Calhoun would've even recruited.

Boat was one of his guys so he doesn't count. Miller would have played. Maybe Purvis. Brimah was a high motor guy.... but outside of that I really can't think of anyone.

What we've had the past few years were just soft-ish, unfocused, but really athletic/talented guys. Nice kids, but not Calhoun kids. I'm not even sure he'd have gone after Adams, Hamilton, Vital, etc.

It's been almost the exact opposite of what Calhoun would want..

You're still using the "what would Calhoun want?" standard to measure the overall caliber of UConn recruits?

Congratulations. You're going to be miserable every single day of the rest of your life as a UConn fan.

 

[Stainmaster]

I like Carlton, and think he has improved quite a bit and will continue to be a big piece for us.

People are having quite a bit of amnesia in forgetting the quality of players and quality of teams that Hilton and Knight played on. Using numbers put up on a bad UConn team in a bad league to defend the argument provides no context or basis in reality.

In turn, people are exaggerating how much the competition disparity says about who is the better player. Do you think sophomore Travis/Hilton would've put up those numbers starting on last year's team?

People are too emotionally upset about UConn not being at its peak, as it was during Travis and Hilton's careers, to have this conversation. It's preventing them from being able to accurately evaluate players whom they associate with a worse program and worse teams.

 

[mauconnfan]

In turn, people are exaggerating how much the competition disparity says about who is the better player. Do you think sophomore Travis/Hilton would've put up those numbers starting on last year's team?

People are too emotionally upset about UConn not being at its peak, as it was during Travis and Hilton's careers, to have this conversation. It's preventing them from being able to accurately evaluate players whom they associate with a worse program and worse teams.

No it's not at all I think you can evaluate the players from watching them play back then no doubt. But again while things aren't great I'm not going to do the woe is me crap you're flinging right now. Yeah there's a good chance the Huskies may never be Calhoun like again but I'm going with the whole scene changes for everyone soon as coaches change. Hurley can maybe get us where we are still having fun as fans, maybe not you, but I'm not that spoiled that a few good trips in the NCAA's and runs will make me happy again.

 

[Stainmaster]

No it's not at all I think you can evaluate the players from watching them play back then no doubt. But again while things aren't great I'm not going to do the woe is me crao you're flinging right now. Yeah there's a good chance the Huskies may never be Calhoun like again but I'm going with the whole scene changes for everyone soon as coaches change. Hurley can maybe get us where we are still having fun as fans, maybe not you but I'm not that spoiled that a few good trips in the NCAA's and runs will make me happy again.

You missed my point. I'll be happy with where Hurley gets us 100%. The people complaining about how far we are from the Calhoun days will not.

 

[mauconnfan]

You missed my point. I'll be happy with where Hurley gets us 100%. The people complaining about how far we are from the Calhoun days will not.

100% of Hurley? It’s not going to be the same as you say, maybe never right. It’s almost fun to have a new phase to our success as fans do become spoiled. Only problem is we’ve already exceeded the time we need to take to get back to “close.”

I hope I’m wrong but we won’t ever see that 4 in 15 years again no way no how and anyone thinking we will, well the disappointment has begun. But I’m good with some NCAA games and small runs which will hopefully result in a long one eventually.