If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
He was offered but wasn't guaranteed anything. I don't think he wanted to be so close to PJ's shadow. I also believe they have family up around E'ville.
Spangler, the explanation that Tunnell committed and signed in the early period with Indiana State because of the opportunity to play immediately came from Royce Waltman, who recruited him. MT also addressed the subject on his coaches' show.
Tunnell was a useful freshman on a physically small, mediocre team that needed him to play a lot of minutes; his contributions have since declined -- not something you'd ordinarily want to see. At WSU, even if he had been interested and come here, he wouldn't have had any minutes to speak of and thus wouldn't have been able to contribute much, if anything. And he certainly wouldn't have taken any of Jared Young's time, because they were entirely different players who played different positions. I personally have never regretted that WSU didn't have Tunnell on their side.
He was offered but wasn't guaranteed anything. I don't think he wanted to be so close to PJ's shadow. I also believe they have family up around E'ville.
IIRC, he was told he would red-shirt just like PJ.
"Don't measure yourself by what you have accomplished, but by what you should accomplish with your ability."
-John Wooden
Did any of you go to the baseball event at the WSU Metroplex tonight? It was great. Darren Dreifort made a great comment in response to Mike Kennedy's question about college teams overusing pitchers which leads to future injury. His reply was great because it speaks to Mark Turgeon and Gregg Marshall. Now I think Gene Stephenson is a better coach than Mark Turgeon and Gregg Marshall put together; in fact, I think Brent Kemnitz is a better coach than MT and GM put together.
Darren said that Gene and Brent did not try to mold players or force them to change their mechanics. He said that the coaches saw something good in players they recruited and they tried to develop the potential of each player. He said that in the pros it is different; at each level people want to change a player's mechanics so they can take credit for this in the future. Darren said he never had injury problems at WSU but he had injuries because people tried to change his pitching mechanics in the pros.
Mark Turgeon and Gregg Marshall each have their "system" and they seem to want clones. They may not be able to maximize the performance of each player, especially if the player does not fit that coach's "system." Mark has never won a national championship. Gregg has never won a national championship. Neither Mark nor Gregg has been national coach of the year (not "mid-major coach of the year"). Gene has three such awards (1982, 1989 and 1993). A really good coach takes the talent at hand and maximizes its performance.
BTW: The alumni panel consisted of: Casey Blake, Joe Carter, Darren Dreifort, Charlie O'Brien, Nate Robertson, Derek Schermerhorn, Phil Stephenson and Eric Wedge. You missed a great event if you didn't attend.
Some posts are not visible to me. :peaceful: Don't worry too much about it. Just do all you can do and let the rough end drag.
Baseball's a totally different animal than basketball...
In basketball, it's harder to mold a system to players. In baseball, you can take a pitcher's natural talents and use them differently than you can a point guard. If a coach has an offense built around a point guard that passes well and doesn't necessarily shoot a lot, then he'll recruit for that.
It just seems that a baseball coach doesn't need to be so dead-set in his ideas that he goes looking for a fast center fielder who has a particular talent for hitting doubles and fielding ground balls on one bounce.
Deep in the heart of couldn't give a crap about college basketball-land and I miss the SHOX.
Students > Alumni
If you EVER want to open your damn mouths about Selection Sunday, READ THIS FIRST: http://www.midmajority.com/p/1296
The ONLY document that means ANYTHING: http://www.bbstate.com/schools/WICH/sheet
Spangler, the explanation that Tunnell committed and signed in the early period with Indiana State because of the opportunity to play immediately came from Royce Waltman, who recruited him. MT also addressed the subject on his coaches' show.
Tunnell was a useful freshman on a physically small, mediocre team that needed him to play a lot of minutes; his contributions have since declined -- not something you'd ordinarily want to see. At WSU, even if he had been interested and come here, he wouldn't have had any minutes to speak of and thus wouldn't have been able to contribute much, if anything. And he certainly wouldn't have taken any of Jared Young's time, because they were entirely different players who played different positions. I personally have never regretted that WSU didn't have Tunnell on their side.
I am with Watcher on this one.
Tunnell offered two advantages.
- He can shoot a decent 3 ball, if left unguarded.
- He takes up space.
Seems to me the timing of his signing was a problem for us. I would hope that we would give a shot to the Kansas player of the year every year. You gotta have role players anyway (if that's the catagory they fit into). It would help build a state-wide fan base to compete with the big guys also.
Hatch for Gris, in starting gig. Gris might need some time to adjust. OR, maybe he is just better coming off the bench. Nothing wrong with that, IMO. All I know is when Hatch was on the court, every player had to be accounted for when we played offense, and that kind of confused the Braves.
________ Find Headshop
Hatch was the leading scorer for the Shox at halftime. I'm of the opinion that this fact is more indicative of the current state of the Shocker program than the prowess of Mr. Hatch.
Hatch was the leading scorer for the Shox at halftime. I'm of the opinion that this fact is more indicative of the current state of the Shocker program than the prowess of Mr. Hatch.
Comment