Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2018 11:05:27 GMT -8
Tinkle on the VirginsCORVALLIS, Ore. – It will be Oregon State vs. Old Dominion in the opening round of the 2018 U.S. Virgin Islands Paradise Jam. ... “We’re thrilled to be part of the Paradise Jam in the Virgin Islands,” Oregon State head coach Wayne Tinkle said. “It’s a very competitive field and our young team will be glad to be tested so early in the season.” ... Nov. 16, 2018 Oregon State vs. Old Dominion at 11 a.m. Kennesaw State vs. Missouri at 1 p.m. Northern Iowa vs. Penn at 3:30 p.m. Eastern Kentucky vs. Kansas State at 5:30 p.m. Clearly, ODU (25-7) thinks they're going to whip OSU's (16-16) behind and play Missouri next: "I like the side of the bracket we're on because Missouri's on that side," [Old Dominion AD] Selig said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on May 10, 2018 12:34:58 GMT -8
I like Tinks, but it is time to drop the "young team" rhetoric.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2018 13:08:30 GMT -8
I like Tinks, but it is time to drop the "young team" rhetoric. Only 3 of our returning players are upperclassmen, so it sounds reasonable to me. |
|
bill82
Sophomore
OSU's 10,157th Best Donor
Posts: 1,000 
|
Post by bill82 on May 10, 2018 13:22:18 GMT -8
I like Tinks, but it is time to drop the "young team" rhetoric. Only 3 of our returning players are upperclassmen, so it sounds reasonable to me. Our new theme song can be "Forever Young." The Beavers will be.... |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on May 10, 2018 13:31:42 GMT -8
I like Tinks, but it is time to drop the "young team" rhetoric. Only 3 of our returning players are upperclassmen, so it sounds reasonable to me. So maybe he told Drew, Kone & Manuel to all leave, so he could still use that saying for this year.
I'm just sick of hearing that because it sounds like an excuse. There is rarely a team in the Pac-12 that is not young, because the ones that get the high level recruits are always having players declare early. The teams also have players transfer out their junior or senior years for numerous reasons. I'm not expecting any team in the league to ever have their top 7 or 8 players be juniors & seniors unless those players are all grad transfers.
It's his 4th year and we've had a "young" team every year according to him.
|
|
|
|
OSU vs ODU
May 10, 2018 16:56:37 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on May 10, 2018 16:56:37 GMT -8
Only 3 of our returning players are upperclassmen, so it sounds reasonable to me. So maybe he told Drew, Kone & Manuel to all leave, so he could still use that saying for this year.
I'm just sick of hearing that because it sounds like an excuse. There is rarely a team in the Pac-12 that is not young, because the ones that get the high level recruits are always having players declare early. The teams also have players transfer out their junior or senior years for numerous reasons. I'm not expecting any team in the league to ever have their top 7 or 8 players be juniors & seniors unless those players are all grad transfers.
It's his 4th year and we've had a "young" team every year according to him.
No team will have its top 7-8 as upperclassmen, but a bunch will have 4-5 of their top 8 as upperclassmen. 3 of Tinkle's first class finally reached junior status this year. Tinkle was left little by the previous coach. My hope is we have 4-5 juniors and seniors who have come up through Tinkle's system in our top 8 every year. This next year will be or first time. Arizona, USC, Utah, UCLA and Stanford, the top 5 teams in our league this last season all had 4-5 juniors or seniors in their top 8 (at least by scoring, it's tough to define top 8). |
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on May 10, 2018 21:07:32 GMT -8
Duke, Kentucky, etc., can RIGHTFULLY say that EVERY YEAR. Not an excuse with them. It IS with us. "If we suck, it's because we're young." Annually.
|
|
|
|
OSU vs ODU
May 10, 2018 21:10:35 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by baseba1111 on May 10, 2018 21:10:35 GMT -8
So maybe he told Drew, Kone & Manuel to all leave, so he could still use that saying for this year.
I'm just sick of hearing that because it sounds like an excuse. There is rarely a team in the Pac-12 that is not young, because the ones that get the high level recruits are always having players declare early. The teams also have players transfer out their junior or senior years for numerous reasons. I'm not expecting any team in the league to ever have their top 7 or 8 players be juniors & seniors unless those players are all grad transfers.
It's his 4th year and we've had a "young" team every year according to him.
No team will have its top 7-8 as upperclassmen, but a bunch will have 4-5 of their top 8 as upperclassmen. 3 of Tinkle's first class finally reached junior status this year. Tinkle was left little by the previous coach. My hope is we have 4-5 juniors and seniors who have come up through Tinkle's system in our top 8 every year. This next year will be or first time. Arizona, USC, Utah, UCLA and Stanford, the top 5 teams in our league this last season all had 4-5 juniors or seniors in their top 8 (at least by scoring, it's tough to define top 8). Wait... "left nothing"?? So, his best two seasons... 17-14 and 19-13 were with left over "nothings"? The "young card" was used with his: 1st team (7 Jrs/the "nothings") 2nd team (5 Sr and 4 Jr/"nothings" + transfers) This year was basically 2 Sr and 5 Jrs (Tres RS Soph)... 6 played in top 8. And, his first full recruiting class will be seniors... Tres a RS Jr... those left anyway. His teams may have looked/played young, but really weren't all that young. So... why is that? |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on May 11, 2018 6:08:48 GMT -8
No team will have its top 7-8 as upperclassmen, but a bunch will have 4-5 of their top 8 as upperclassmen. 3 of Tinkle's first class finally reached junior status this year. Tinkle was left little by the previous coach. My hope is we have 4-5 juniors and seniors who have come up through Tinkle's system in our top 8 every year. This next year will be or first time. Arizona, USC, Utah, UCLA and Stanford, the top 5 teams in our league this last season all had 4-5 juniors or seniors in their top 8 (at least by scoring, it's tough to define top 8). Wait... "left nothing"?? So, his best two seasons... 17-14 and 19-13 were with left over "nothings"? The "young card" was used with his: 1st team (7 Jrs/the "nothings") 2nd team (5 Sr and 4 Jr/"nothings" + transfers) This year was basically 2 Sr and 5 Jrs (Tres RS Soph)... 6 played in top 8. And, his first full recruiting class will be seniors... Tres a RS Jr... those left anyway. His teams may have looked/played young, but really weren't all that young. So... why is that? Tell me something. You jumped all over Tinkle's case for supposedly misusing Hollin’s, who only started the last half of his first season and managed 5.8 points a game..... how many kids that managed even 5 points a game as Beavers under Robinson did Tinkle inherit from Robinson.... zip. The top scoring Robinson player from 2013 or 2012 or 2011 that Tinkle inherited managed only 4.0 points a game as a sophomore under Robinson. You’ve complained that Tinkle is a failure as a recruiter because he hasn’t brought in kids who are statistical monsters either of the last two years... well, of those 7 juniors Tinkle had his first season, 4.0 points a game was the most any of those 7 had averaged at OSU in their careers to that point. Payton was recruited by both Robinson and Tinkle and can’t be counted as just a kid inherited from Robinson. He, a Tinkle recruit and the only member of what should have been a 3-5 kid Robinson recruiting class, was our top player in Tinkle’s first season. The following season 4 of our top 5 players statistically were Tinkle recruits, 3 of those being true freshmen. As far as last year’s team goes, the 2 seniors were transfers and neither were statistical monsters at their previous schools, they were brought in because of Robinson’s last recruiting class or two, N’Diaye was the only one that still was potentially here this year. You also counted a walk-on junior in this year’s numbers as far as I can tell. Where were the big time Robinson recruited seniors the last two seasons? If he left Tinkle in such good shape there should have been some. Like I said earlier, I would hope we have 4-5 juniors AND seniors in our top 8, preferably who have been in Tinkle’s system their entire college careers. Next season will be the first time we’ve had that. Next season I don’t think they can play the “young” card, unless there are defections or injuries that come into play beyond the loss of Eubanks before next season, but up until now there certainly is a case that can be made for that. |
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on May 11, 2018 9:08:29 GMT -8
Just play the game dammit - GO Beavs!
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on May 11, 2018 10:49:36 GMT -8
Wait... "left nothing"?? So, his best two seasons... 17-14 and 19-13 were with left over "nothings"? The "young card" was used with his: 1st team (7 Jrs/the "nothings") 2nd team (5 Sr and 4 Jr/"nothings" + transfers) This year was basically 2 Sr and 5 Jrs (Tres RS Soph)... 6 played in top 8. And, his first full recruiting class will be seniors... Tres a RS Jr... those left anyway. His teams may have looked/played young, but really weren't all that young. So... why is that? Tell me something. You jumped all over Tinkle's case for supposedly misusing Hollin’s, who only started the last half of his first season and managed 5.8 points a game..... how many kids that managed even 5 points a game as Beavers under Robinson did Tinkle inherit from Robinson.... zip. The top scoring Robinson player from 2013 or 2012 or 2011 that Tinkle inherited managed only 4.0 points a game as a sophomore under Robinson. You’ve complained that Tinkle is a failure as a recruiter because he hasn’t brought in kids who are statistical monsters either of the last two years... well, of those 7 juniors Tinkle had his first season, 4.0 points a game was the most any of those 7 had averaged at OSU in their careers to that point. Payton was recruited by both Robinson and Tinkle and can’t be counted as just a kid inherited from Robinson. He, a Tinkle recruit and the only member of what should have been a 3-5 kid Robinson recruiting class, was our top player in Tinkle’s first season. The following season 4 of our top 5 players statistically were Tinkle recruits, 3 of those being true freshmen. As far as last year’s team goes, the 2 seniors were transfers and neither were statistical monsters at their previous schools, they were brought in because of Robinson’s last recruiting class or two, N’Diaye was the only one that still was potentially here this year. You also counted a walk-on junior in this year’s numbers as far as I can tell. Where were the big time Robinson recruited seniors the last two seasons? If he left Tinkle in such good shape there should have been some. Like I said earlier, I would hope we have 4-5 juniors AND seniors in our top 8, preferably who have been in Tinkle’s system their entire college careers. Next season will be the first time we’ve had that. Next season I don’t think they can play the “young” card, unless there are defections or injuries that come into play beyond the loss of Eubanks before next season, but up until now there certainly is a case that can be made for that. You know the 'leftover nothings" had other players who played in CR's last year. But, what they averaged in CR's tenure has nothing to do with it. They proved they were more than 'nothing'. Again WT's best seasons were with those players included and not with his own recruiting classes. How the Hollins comment relates is a mystery?  ?? Because he should play a frosh more minutes to develop him faster has zero to do with the ongoing 'young' excuse. The main contributors over WT's tenure have been as 'young' as the rest of the Pac12. Time for a new canned response, but better than the blaming the kids for being "uncoachable / not listening in public! |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on May 11, 2018 13:30:25 GMT -8
Tell me something. You jumped all over Tinkle's case for supposedly misusing Hollin’s, who only started the last half of his first season and managed 5.8 points a game..... how many kids that managed even 5 points a game as Beavers under Robinson did Tinkle inherit from Robinson.... zip. The top scoring Robinson player from 2013 or 2012 or 2011 that Tinkle inherited managed only 4.0 points a game as a sophomore under Robinson. You’ve complained that Tinkle is a failure as a recruiter because he hasn’t brought in kids who are statistical monsters either of the last two years... well, of those 7 juniors Tinkle had his first season, 4.0 points a game was the most any of those 7 had averaged at OSU in their careers to that point. Payton was recruited by both Robinson and Tinkle and can’t be counted as just a kid inherited from Robinson. He, a Tinkle recruit and the only member of what should have been a 3-5 kid Robinson recruiting class, was our top player in Tinkle’s first season. The following season 4 of our top 5 players statistically were Tinkle recruits, 3 of those being true freshmen. As far as last year’s team goes, the 2 seniors were transfers and neither were statistical monsters at their previous schools, they were brought in because of Robinson’s last recruiting class or two, N’Diaye was the only one that still was potentially here this year. You also counted a walk-on junior in this year’s numbers as far as I can tell. Where were the big time Robinson recruited seniors the last two seasons? If he left Tinkle in such good shape there should have been some. Like I said earlier, I would hope we have 4-5 juniors AND seniors in our top 8, preferably who have been in Tinkle’s system their entire college careers. Next season will be the first time we’ve had that. Next season I don’t think they can play the “young” card, unless there are defections or injuries that come into play beyond the loss of Eubanks before next season, but up until now there certainly is a case that can be made for that. You know the 'leftover nothings" had other players who played in CR's last year. But, what they averaged in CR's tenure has nothing to do with it. They proved they were more than 'nothing'. Again WT's best seasons were with those players included and not with his own recruiting classes. How the Hollins comment relates is a mystery? ?? Because he should play a frosh more minutes to develop him faster has zero to do with the ongoing 'young' excuse. The main contributors over WT's tenure have been as 'young' as the rest of the Pac12. Time for a new canned response, but better than the blaming the kids for being "uncoachable / not listening in public! A point of order... you have quoted derivations of the word "nothing", which no poster had used. You have called Tinkle out in the past for both poor recruiting and for poor development of talent. So which is it? His first team did much better than everyone expected... was that the result of him coaching down talent which did little under Robinson? His NCAA team the next year, 4 of the top 5 players and 5 of the top 8 were Tinkle recruits that beat previous Robinson recruited players. Tinkle inherited a team that lost it's top 5, and 6 of it's top 8 scorers (partly because 4 of those 5 were upperclassmen... it truly was a team that had upperclassmen in important positions, yet did no better than all but one of Tinkle's "young" teams) and retained nobody that was a starter. Tinkle had inherited just 6 scholarship players, none of which had averaged over 4.0 points, 2.5 rebounds or .8 assists in their year or two under Robinson. You say his best seasons were with "those" Robinson recruits, but his NCAA trip season was statistically led by 4 players that he recriuted. Hollins was just an expample of another young player, and I'd argue the younger of the Thompson brothers certainly proved himself as well, that Tinkle has brought in recently that have shown more in thier first year here than any of the players Robinson had left Tinkle had shown in thier first or second years here under Robinson. Tinkle had inherited little experience from the previous coaching staff. His first team was "young", and a good argument CAN be made that his subsequent teams were also "younger" than any of last year's top group (I only looked at the top 5, wouldn't surprise me if most others might qualify for that description as well) of Pac 12 teams. This year's team was certainly younger than Robinson's last team, yet did no worse in record or position in the league. |
|
|
|
OSU vs ODU
May 11, 2018 16:21:15 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by baseba1111 on May 11, 2018 16:21:15 GMT -8
Lol... "he was left nothing"... look it up. See who used it! 🤣
|
|
?? Because he should play a frosh more minutes to develop him faster has zero to do with the ongoing 'young' excuse. The main contributors over WT's tenure have been as 'young' as the rest of the Pac12. Time for a new canned response, but better than the blaming the kids for being "uncoachable / not listening in public!