Page 4 of 5
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:37 amby roundem6
Finally, roundem6 has back up!
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:03 pmby InsideMan
Joe is the best. Look at where he is going to go to college compared to where nik is going. College coaches bet their livelihood on who is going to be a better player.
Can we please leave Kilpinski out of this conversation. PLEASE!!?
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:04 pmby roundem6
senser wrote:If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a very merry christmas.
I can almost assure you one thing, Savageau on Dickinson would up the stats for all the players around him and they would still be a state calibur team.
I'm not taking anything away from Hanstad, the kid is a baller. It's just a shame that people don't recognize the same in Savageau.
This is what I've been tryin to say on the Savageau thread and now this thread for about a month now. Nik is the better high school player.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:04 pmby roundem6
InsideMan wrote:Joe is the best. Look at where he is going to go to college compared to where nik is going. College coaches bet their livelihood on who is going to be a better player.
Can we please leave Kilpinski out of this conversation. PLEASE!!?
Your gonna have to take that one up with balla45.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:06 pmby roundem6
senser wrote:Hanstad is a great talent. He's a legitimate D1 player and the best thing I've seen in ND since Boschee, although he isn't on Boschee's level at Valley City. I don't get a chance to see much class B so I can't comment on those kids.
I've seen them both play a few times this year. Hanstad is easily a better talent, but Nick is the better high school player in what he does for his team. You take Savageau out of the equation and North has a bunch of descent players at best. I don't care what the numbers say of the role players, the North supporting cast around Savageau isn't anything good by any means. You put him in and they are a legitimate championship contender, unarguably moreso than Dickinson. JMHO.
thank you
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:09 pmby balla45
InsideMan, I don't see why anyone is in this discussion other than Hanstad, as he is far and away the best player.
Roundem6, what makes Savageau a better high school player?
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:14 pmby roundem6
senser wrote:Hanstad is a great talent. He's a legitimate D1 player and the best thing I've seen in ND since Boschee, although he isn't on Boschee's level at Valley City. I don't get a chance to see much class B so I can't comment on those kids.
I've seen them both play a few times this year. Hanstad is easily a better talent, but Nick is the better high school player in what he does for his team. You take Savageau out of the equation and North has a bunch of descent players at best. I don't care what the numbers say of the role players, the North supporting cast around Savageau isn't anything good by any means. You put him in and they are a legitimate championship contender, unarguably moreso than Dickinson. JMHO.
senser said it best.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:15 pmby balla45
Savageau is a better high school player because his team did better this year? That is what Senser said.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:18 pmby roundem6
No he said North is good, and the role players are good, thanks to Savageau.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:19 pmby balla45
Which really doesn't make much sense. This logic is that Nik makes his teammates better, so he is a better high school player than Joe, because his teammates are marginal. Then Bryan Kielpinski is better than Nik Savageau, because his team is better with marginal teammates.
This logic is flawed.
Of all three teams, Nick Schulz is the best supporting player.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:21 pmby roundem6
And senser also said that the supporting cast isnt as good as you think, if you watched North all year you would understand why Schultz averages what he does.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:25 pmby balla45
roundem6 wrote:And senser also said that the supporting cast isnt as good as you think, if you watched North all year you would understand why Schultz averages what he does.
Is this accurate?
Nik is a better high school player because he makes his teammates better? It does not matter that Joe is actually better and has had more success playing with inferior players?
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:26 pmby roundem6
No it makes Joe the better "college talent" but like senser also said, I think Nik would make Dickinson better than Joe can since he runs the floor.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:28 pmby balla45
As as sophomore Nik had Jordan May, Sam Wehri, and Zac Akers.
As a freshman Joe had Taylor Bruhschwein and Jake Bauer. I will give the edge to Savageau in having better teammates.
As a junior Nik had Zac Akers and Sam Wehri, two unanimous all conference 6'5'' post players.
As a sophomore Joe had Joe Emmerich and Cole Baker. I will again give the edge to Savageau in having better teammates.
As a senior Nik has Nick Schultz and Brady Bergeron, two all conference players, one being 6'4''.
As a junior Joe has Jarl Abrahamson and Nate Moody. Who would you give the edge to in having better teammates?
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:29 pmby balla45
roundem6 wrote:No it makes Joe the better "college talent" but like senser also said, I think Nik would make Dickinson better than Joe can since he runs the floor.
I think Joe would make North better since Joe can legitly have a 30 or 40 point game against any team, in any game, playing against a double or triple team.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:32 pmby roundem6
Bergeron got an all-conference award, but I think most would feel he wasnt completely deserving, you would agree if you knew the East. I will also point out that maybe Akers and Wehri were all-EDC thanks to Sav. A high % of both their shots were assisted by Savageau.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:34 pmby balla45
roundem6 wrote:Bergeron got an all-conference award, but I think most would feel he wasnt completely deserving, you would agree if you knew the East. I will also point out that maybe Akers and Wehri were all-EDC thanks to Sav. A high % of both their shots were assisted by Savageau.
I do know the EDC very well, and I don't think he should have got it, especially over Austin Nelson, but the coaches are the peopole that vote.
Akers and Wehri were all conference because they were top 15 players in the EDC, not because of Nik.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:36 pmby roundem6
And why were they top 15 players in EDC? getting 5 lay-ups a game might help.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:38 pmby balla45
Using this logic, Nik would have averaged 10 assists a game last year, just to Akers and Wehri. Akers was a top 15 player in the EDC because he dominated the glass, was solid defensively, and had some nifty post moves. Wehri was a top 15 player in the EDC because he could shoot over everyone, and was incredibly difficult to defend, especially because many team's best post defender, or strongest post defender, would have to guard Akers.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:40 pmby roundem6
Im not taking anything away from those 2, they are solid players. Akers is one of the smartest basketball players you'll ever meet. Nik helped their cause is what I am trying to say.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:42 pmby balla45
roundem6 wrote:Im not taking anything away from those 2, they are solid players. Akers is one of the smartest basketball players you'll ever meet. Nik helped their cause is what I am trying to say.
I am aware of this. Having a great playmaker will definately help post players. That said, I don't see why this makes Nik a better high school player than Joe.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:44 pmby Indy5
Ok I can't believe Balla45 didn't catch this but sener, what is wrong with you? Dickinson is no where near the size of North.
9-12 enrollments:
Dickinson:845
North:1106
As you can see, North has almost 300 more students.
Savageau wouldn't make Dickinson any better because there is no way he could help his teammates more than Joe does. Joe does enough to were they should be able to give him some help. Maybe Nik is a better floor general, but because Joe gets triple teamed, his temmates still get good looks.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:18 pmby GFRR99
This is laughable. Hanstad's supporting cast isn't anywhere near what Nik's has been. Never has been. Not even close. Balla45 I may add you left out Zach Wehri from the list when Nik was a sophomore, who was better than both the 6' 5" posts IMO, they were a very deep team that year.
And roundem6, I cannot believe the disrespect you are giving Nick Schultz. He averages a double-double, and according to you, that is all because of Nik. Give me a break. Nick Schultz is a stud on both sides of the court. If Nick Schultz was on Dickinson, I would say they would be title contenders.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:39 pmby roundem6
In no way am I disrepecting Schultz he is a great player. Savy and him could pick n roll all game and no one would stop it. Schultz is a force and I didnt mean it as any disrespect towards him. The 10+/game rebound average is very impressive and a lot of the scoring comes off offensive putbacks. Schultz has a solid mid-range game, can step out on the perimeter, and obviously can finish down low.
Re: Hansted
Posted:
Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:57 pmby Raider Fan
Well if Joe had a better team around him they would make it to state and they would make a pretty good run like when he was a sophmore and still put up about 30 a game.