Jump to content

Michael Sturns


Cooley

Recommended Posts

Guest GrayEagleOne

Let's see, we're happy to get rid of what would have been our leading returning scorer, backcourt rebounder, and second in steals and assists (although he played about 400 minutes less than the leader), and free throw percentage shooter instead of someone who played a total of 28 minutes and contributed 7 points and 11 rebounds?

His only real fault was, that in playing out of countrol at times, he was prone to turnovers. But, he ignited the scoring and energy in far more games than he lost with his carelessness.

I do believe that we stand a good chance of being better without Sturns but that will be because of talent, experience and the fact that we've done it before, not because Michael is gone. We'll never know but I think that we would be even better with #11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he should have been a wing not guard and should have ben a starter. coaching error.

If he should have BEEN a starter, who would he have replace? KD? CWat? He sure as hell wasn't a starting point. How about a 4? No Q was there. The 5? Nope Wooden there.

I'm not the biggest JJ fan, but Sturns was not a starter for the defending SBC champs, nor should he have been!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he should have BEEN a starter, who would he have replace? KD? CWat? He sure as hell wasn't a starting point. How about a 4? No Q was there. The 5? Nope Wooden there.

I'm not the biggest JJ fan, but Sturns was not a starter for the defending SBC champs, nor should he have been!

avg. 13 points in 18 minutes you do the math. kd was out half of the season and cw could play guard. there was way to move sturns out of guard and start him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell me I didn't just read a Dirk to Sturns comparison...I was liking the idea that the people on here knew basketball and could formulate reasonable arguements...however the only person who would ever compare Michael Sturns to the NBA MVP would be Michael Sturns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see, we're happy to get rid of what would have been our leading returning scorer, backcourt rebounder, and second in steals and assists (although he played about 400 minutes less than the leader), and free throw percentage shooter instead of someone who played a total of 28 minutes and contributed 7 points and 11 rebounds?

No, we're happy to be rid of what was a cancer in the locker room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.