Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
Don't mistake his sickness for being soft. When he was healthy he was a fucking beast. He fucked Big Baby up and talked massive shit.
box score:http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/article/Huskies-LSU-box-score-1223001.php
Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
This is fucktarded even by your standards
Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
This is fucktarded even by your standards
12-1 and buying into the Clippers... Okay man.
The Hawes' teams problem was two fold.
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The Hawes' teams problem was two fold.
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The problem with your first point is that you're completely missing the mark of the difference between talent and a good team. Yes, all those guys had talent. But if you go look at all the guys you talked about, you have freshman, sophomore, freshman, sophomore, and freshman. Even if Romar didn't suck, when you combine with how good the PAC was, even a good coach would probably struggle to get them past the first weekend of the NCAA. You are also forgetting that Pondexter was a shell of what he would be as a freshman and Dentmon really struggled as he had to shoulder more of the load.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby
Phil Nelson
Hans Gasser
Artem Wallace
Brandon Burmeister
Hawes was soft and overrated, but he didn't set the program back at all. Neither did any other one and done at UW.
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
The Hawes' teams problem was two fold.
1. Romar sucks. Hawes, Brock, Pondexter, and Dentmon all played in the NBA. Oliver averaged 20 a game at San Jose State. The team had talent although the guard play was lacking.
2. The PAC 10 was actually good. UCLA was making final 4's back then. The Lopez twins, Taj Gibson, Baynes... Don't be fooled by where he was drafted, Hawes wasn't better than any of those guys.
The problem with your first point is that you're completely missing the mark of the difference between talent and a good team. Yes, all those guys had talent. But if you go look at all the guys you talked about, you have freshman, sophomore, freshman, sophomore, and freshman. Even if Romar didn't suck, when you combine with how good the PAC was, even a good coach would probably struggle to get them past the first weekend of the NCAA. You are also forgetting that Pondexter was a shell of what he would be as a freshman and Dentmon really struggled as he had to shoulder more of the load.
But the biggest problem that you are missing the point on, which I'll go back to your original fucktarded comment, was that the problem with talented young players and one and dones isn't that they are inconsistent and can leave a hole in your program if you're putting all the eggs in their basket, but it's that you win with these kinds of players when you are supplementing them with other experienced players that can shoulder the load.
The remaining players on that roster:
Ryan Appleby
Phil Nelson
Hans Gasser
Artem Wallace
Brandon Burmeister
It silly to argue that one-and-dones didn't set back the UW program. The school and remaining team does not get the ROI from the player in years 2 through 4. That's an open roster spot, formerly occupied by the one-and-done, who was obviously valuable to the team and skilled enough to leave early. Some programs have the depth and talent remaining on the team or being recruited to absorb the loss without much impact. UW has none of that. Hawes was good, but not Welp or McCullough good, so was it worth having a 7 footer for one year that won't develop into a dominant player as he ages up with the team? For the UW, I'd say no.
For the Romar-haters, one-and-dones have been a shot of adrenaline to a dying patient. They may have prolonged Romar's career by masking the true weaknesses of those teams. How bad would the Hawes team have been without him? Enough for heads to roll?
The UW one-and-dones have also fostered the fast and loose, gym rat play from kids who can't hit their free throws, turn the ball over a lot (Wroten), don't defend well and can't beat mature teams. If you want to see a repeat of what we saw this year, by all means, recruit more one-and-dones who can dunk alley oops awesomely, but can't beat Utah.
And fuck all your down votes. I'm tired of this one-and-done shit. If you're not going to commit to the program, go lose your training wheels somewhere else.
Blaming one and done players for the faults in the program is king doog level fucking stupid.
4 and 5 year players don't dictate the culture of a program with the same HC for 14 years. A player that stays on campus for 8 months sure as fuck doesn't either.
But great slave master mentality.