Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Dom weighed in at 185

Buffnik

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
Up 13 pounds this summer.

Collier still has more than three months to get ready for his sophomore season, and it's time he needs, he said, but so far, he likes the path he's on this offseason.

"I still need to work on my body more and my game more," he said. "That's what the rest of the summer and the fall is for in the next couple of months. I'm just taking this time and using it as much as I can to get better before the season starts."

So key to this season and the trajectory of the program. I agree with Tad on Dom's potential:

"Dom could be one of those guys with a three or four-to-one assist-to-turnover ratio," CU head coach Tad Boyle said. "I think he's that good and has that kind of potential.... When he plays with confidence and he plays with aggressiveness, he's as good as there is."

http://www.buffzone.com/ci_28538260/cu-mens-basketball-buffs-collier-bulks-up-sophomore
 
Good news. We don't need him and Fortune to be great, but if they can be an average PAC-12 Starting backcourt, we should be around the 4th-5th best team in the Conference.
 
rolandftw said:
Good news. We don't need him and Fortune to be great, but if they can be an average PAC-12 Starting backcourt, we should be around the 4th-5th best team in the Conference.
Click to expand...

You drastically underrate the top half of the conference. Not even sure we have an average Pac-12 front court without Johnson, yeah there's Scott but not sure Gordon and Fletcher are top half at their positions and we don't really have the depth down there that other teams do. We need Collier to show massive improvement and Fortune needs to make up for most of Booker's points or at least be a much more efficient 12 PPG, if we want to be a top half Pac-12 team.
 
Jeric said:
You drastically underrate the top half of the conference. Not even sure we have an average Pac-12 front court without Johnson, yeah there's Scott but not sure Gordon and Fletcher are top half at their positions and we don't really have the depth down there that other teams do. We need Collier to show massive improvement and Fortune needs to make up for most of Booker's points or at least be a much more efficient 12 PPG, if we want to be a top half Pac-12 team.
Click to expand...

I love Wes' D and I'm super high on Fletch's potential, but Wes still doesn't haev much of an offensive game and "potential" is a fancy word for "hasn't done **** yet", so I'm with you on this.

And guards win in college hoops. If we don't have a good to great backcourt, and we're in the CBI again.
 
Jeric said:
You drastically underrate the top half of the conference. Not even sure we have an average Pac-12 front court without Johnson, yeah there's Scott but not sure Gordon and Fletcher are top half at their positions and we don't really have the depth down there that other teams do. We need Collier to show massive improvement and Fortune needs to make up for most of Booker's points or at least be a much more efficient 12 PPG, if we want to be a top half Pac-12 team.
Click to expand...

Gordon finished 5th in offensive reb %, 6th in total reb %, & 5th in block % in the PAC12. He was good for 3 win shares. In terms of PAC12 front courts, Colorado is the only school returning two players who finished top 6 in O reb %, total reb %, & block %. But I'm sure you'll figure out a way to disagree with math.
 
Even though tory will only be a sophomore, he probably wont get a ton of minutes barring injury. his defense was a bit suspect last year, but he was at least aggressive on offense, something you couldnt really say for gordon most of the time.
 
BuffG said:
Gordon finished 5th in offensive reb %, 6th in total reb %, & 5th in block % in the PAC12. He was good for 3 win shares. In terms of PAC12 front courts, Colorado is the only school returning two players who finished top 6 in O reb %, total reb %, & block %. But I'm sure you'll figure out a way to disagree with math.
Click to expand...

And how exactly is this "math" supposed to tell me he's a top half player at his position in his conference? Does Wes being above Tarczewski in all those stats make him better than Tarczewski? No? So maybe that's not the best method for determining these sort of things. I'd especially like to see how those stats change when Scott was healthy. Also almost every team in the Pac-12 adds at least 1 4 or 5-star forward. I mean I said I wasn't sure, not trying to sound aggressive.
 
Last edited:
BuffG said:
Gordon finished 5th in offensive reb %, 6th in total reb %, & 5th in block % in the PAC12. He was good for 3 win shares. In terms of PAC12 front courts, Colorado is the only school returning two players who finished top 6 in O reb %, total reb %, & block %. But I'm sure you'll figure out a way to disagree with math.
Click to expand...

This is maybe THE epitome of how analytics in basketball can be dangerous, especially in the wrong hands. I'm actually a fan of analytics, but seriously, this post perfectly demonstrates why so many basketball players hate it. Analytics is massaged arithmetic that can help scouts, coaches, and management evaluate value in players after all of the eye-tests have been completed.

I really like Wes and think he has potential. However...what in your opinion, when you watch him play with your own eye, makes him great. I like Wes...but I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say. Returning an average starter means...you now have a more experienced, average player. Hopefully he's improved, but like Goose said, he hasn't done a thing yet.

I'm wholeheartedly with Jeric on this one. His statement about our efficiency on offense, hopefully with Fortune, will be key to our team this year imo. I love how he rep'd CU, but to be honest, I was not a fan of Askia's game, because his offense was just inefficient and scattered. If Collier is improved, our backcourt could be solid. I really like Collier, and hope he progresses to be a star by his junior/senior season.
 
I absolutely think Wes is undervalued simply because he doesn't do it offensively, AND the frusturation is mainly because he appears to have offensive game when he's confident. He's not a total stiff on the O end, but he certainly can be. The kid is a talent on the boards and playing D.
 
buffaholic said:
I absolutely think Wes is undervalued simply because he doesn't do it offensively, AND the frusturation is mainly because he appears to have offensive game when he's confident. He's not a total stiff on the O end, but he certainly can be. The kid is a talent on the boards and playing D.
Click to expand...

I don't think Wes is engaged and interested nearly often enough. I don't undervalue his game. I'm frustrated with the frequency at which he plays his game.
 
Buffnik said:
I don't think Wes is engaged and interested nearly often enough. I don't undervalue his game. I'm frustrated with the frequency at which he plays his game.
Click to expand...
What do you know? The coach isn't getting the most out of the talent on the roster. There's a reason recruiting is faltering. It's pretty obvious if you take off the black and gold sunglasses.
 
Daaah said:
What do you know? The coach isn't getting the most out of the talent on the roster. There's a reason recruiting is faltering. It's pretty obvious if you take off the black and gold sunglasses.
Click to expand...

Really? Why don't you enlighten us lesser sorts there, Mr. Insider Legend-in-yer-own-mind, Genius?

What? You can't? Just makin' sh*t up again, eh?
 
WizzersGhost said:
Really? Why don't you enlighten us lesser sorts there, Mr. Insider Legend-in-yer-own-mind, Genius?

What? You can't? Just makin' sh*t up again, eh?
Click to expand...
I hardly claim to be an insider sitting here 1500 miles from boulder. But I do watch most of the basketball games and have done so since I was a student 15 years ago. Aside from an improbable run in the Pac 12 tournament with a loaded roster, Tad hasn't really shown me much. His offenses look really bad to me and I'm not sure that if I was a talented hs player with NBA aspirations I'd look at Tad and say "this guy is going to put me in a position to get drafted. " But that's just my opinion, man.
 
Jeric said:
You drastically underrate the top half of the conference. Not even sure we have an average Pac-12 front court without Johnson, yeah there's Scott but not sure Gordon and Fletcher are top half at their positions and we don't really have the depth down there that other teams do. We need Collier to show massive improvement and Fortune needs to make up for most of Booker's points or at least be a much more efficient 12 PPG, if we want to be a top half Pac-12 team.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I am not that high on the Pac-12 as a Conference. Cal, Utah and Arizona should be very, very good, but after that I'm not really afraid of anyone.
 
rolandftw said:
Perhaps. I am not that high on the Pac-12 as a Conference. Cal, Utah and Arizona should be very, very good, but after that I'm not really afraid of anyone.
Click to expand...

Oregon's going to be a fun team to watch this year. (If you can get past the fact that you're watching Oregon.) UCLA has a lot of talent, too. Both should make the Dance.
 
Buffnik said:
Gonna be awfully young. I see a very dangerous NIT squad.
Click to expand...

Youth is a concern, but coaching plus that freshman class makes them dangerous. I see them as Utah two years ago - a team that could sneak in to the tourney but will mostly just scare the hell out of teams the end of the year.
 
Goose said:
Youth is a concern, but coaching plus that freshman class makes them dangerous. I see them as Utah two years ago - a team that could sneak in to the tourney but will mostly just scare the hell out of teams the end of the year.
Click to expand...

It really depends what they get out of Payton as a leader and a player, if he plays above the level he did last year and developed as a leader they will real trouble at home (.800 or better) and sneak up on teams having an off night on the road.
 
OSU really tailed off at the end of the year. I need to see another year by Tinkle to really believe he is an elite coach. Lucky timing in recruiting as well so we will see what he does after that class.
 
onealcd said:
OSU really tailed off at the end of the year. I need to see another year by Tinkle to really believe he is an elite coach. Lucky timing in recruiting as well so we will see what he does after that class.
Click to expand...

Of course they did! How many schollie players did they finish with? 7? 8? I think with a full complement of players they will be dangerous.
 
We are going to need George to be the King or we will be in doo doo.- only half serious here. I am not worried about replacing Askia's points given the inefficiency. I'm worried about getting back to team toughness and defense and rebounding and....
 
Last edited:
Buffnik said:
Gonna be awfully young. I see a very dangerous NIT squad.
Click to expand...
I understand that they will be awfully young, but what's the difference between them and Cal. Cal is going to be incredibly young and talented. I get that they are more talented than Oregon State, but I don't think the difference is substantial.
 
FightCu1414 said:
I understand that they will be awfully young, but what's the difference between them and Cal. Cal is going to be incredibly young and talented. I get that they are more talented than Oregon State, but I don't think the difference is substantial.
Click to expand...

Oregon State has MUCH better coaching too.
 
Jeric said:
And how exactly is this "math" supposed to tell me he's a top half player at his position in his conference? Does Wes being above Tarczewski in all those stats make him better than Tarczewski? No? So maybe that's not the best method for determining these sort of things. I'd especially like to see how those stats change when Scott was healthy. Also almost every team in the Pac-12 adds at least 1 4 or 5-star forward. I mean I said I wasn't sure, not trying to sound aggressive.
Click to expand...

Tarczewski finished with 4.5 win shares--better than Gordon. No one said Gordon is the king of PAC12 bigs but your claim was that we don't even have an average P12 front court. You haven't provided evidence of 6-7 teams with better front courts. You just cited the best team's most visible big & covered your eyes over the stats. But I knew you'd do that.
 
dyemeduke said:
I really like Wes and think he has potential. However...what in your opinion, when you watch him play with your own eye, makes him great. I like Wes...but I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say. Returning an average starter means...you now have a more experienced, average player. Hopefully he's improved, but like Goose said, he hasn't done a thing yet.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the dissertation. No one said Wes is great. What was said was that he's a below average big by P12 standards. This is false. He's proven himself to be 1 of the 5-6 best bigs in rim protection & rebounding that's *returning* to the P12. Offensively, he needs to be more assertive as a shot-taker but he's one of the better post passers if not the best post passer in the P12.
 
BuffG said:
Thanks for the dissertation. No one said Wes is great. What was said was that he's a below average big by P12 standards. This is false. He's proven himself to be 1 of the 5-6 best bigs in rim protection & rebounding that's *returning* to the P12. Offensively, he needs to be more assertive as a shot-taker but he's one of the better post passers if not the best post passer in the P12.
Click to expand...

Stop.

You are basically saying if you ignore what he's bad at and only look at the good and ignore the frosh coming in - he's a top big in the league. Even if that is true we already have one tini on this board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top