As a team we score around 1 point per possession. How can each player on the team do the same thing?
Matt Thomas predictions
- Thread starter JackCyclone
- Start date
I have seen posts in game threads that could be interpreted as "Thomas hating," but there isn't any of that here. This discussion has stuck pretty much to the facts and kept the emotion out of it, which is good. Those who say Thomas is being bashed are just as far off the mark as those who say he should transfer. Neither Thomas, CF, or the posters are well served by these knee jerk reactionary posts.
Thomas is going to work his **** out on his own. It's time a few of you realized it and just let it be. Noticing he hasn't played well is not an original observation anymore, and neither is rushing to his perceived defense by hammering on posters for mentioning it.
Thomas is going to work his **** out on his own. It's time a few of you realized it and just let it be. Noticing he hasn't played well is not an original observation anymore, and neither is rushing to his perceived defense by hammering on posters for mentioning it.
I think Matt and Bryce are kind of in the same boat, where they seem to be worse than they actually are. Matt misses a lot of threes and it looks pretty rough, but he still shoots better than Nader yet I don't see many people calling Nader out for his three point shooting. Bryce had the stigma of being a selfish, me-first player even though numbers showed that was inaccurate.
Matt definitely has work to do, but he's much closer to being a really good player than what most people seem to think.
The dip creates rhythm on the shot. It's a part of every shooter's technique. How many times has he been blocked in games? I'd be more concerned with his step into the shot. It's generally accepted by shooting coaches that a hop on two feet leads to more consistency.
To my eye, he looks like tries to aim the ball too often instead of letting it fly with some arc. Just needs to relax.
He would have to be a phenomenol shooter and offensive player by the end of his Iowa State career in order to play in the NBA. Like, insanely good offensively. He would be a historically bad guard defensively. His athleticism is nowhere near the average NBA guard, and he does not have exceptional size for his position to combat his lack of lateral quickness. I agree that he can be a fantastic college basketball player, however.
This hits the nail right on the head. Combination of high expectations, relatively unsuccessful freshman campaign (relative to other freshmen on the team and the expectations, I mean), and the fact that he really hasn't put it all together for a string of three or four games in a row. Also, I think it really hurts him that Naz has become much better than anyone envisioned. We don't need Matt to be on the court very often. We need guys like Monte, Georges and McKay though.
I may be to simplistic in my thought but I don't know where Matt fits. That's by no means to say that he's not worthy, I just think he gets lost in the mix. He's a good guard, not great. He's a good defender, not great. He's shown that he can be a good shooter, but can be streaky. When you don't consistently show a particular strength night in and night out, we all are quick to jump. Honestly, even if this is what he is, it's pretty cool to have a versatile piece to come in off the bench. He just needs more PT but that will be tough given the recent roster changes. I do hope he gets it turned around as he'll have more peers vying for PT next year.
Bryce leads the team in scoring per 40 minutes in conference play.... wouldn't know it from our fans.
Matt is a good player, and I really think he's going to be great by his senior season. He seems smart and willing to work hard to improve, which is pretty much all you need. He's not very good at defense, but he plays hard and seems to know what he's doing. It's mostly just physical limitations that hold him back there. As far as shooting goes, he still spreads the floor because people don't want to give him any space, no matter his percentages. He's still got a good reputation as a shooter, whether it's unwarranted or warranted is beside the point.
Thomas doesn't shoot better than Nader. Straight 3 pt% yes. Nader shoots 43.6% from the floor and Thomas shoots 34%. In conference games He's shooting 32% and 25%. Nader has an effective FG% of 48% and Thomas is at 43%. People don't kill Nader for his 3pt shooting because it's a very small part of the contribution he brings to the team.
I don't get the idea that I have to be frustrated to point this out about Thomas. I'm not frustrated by Thomas. He's not as good as I thought he would be but that doesn't frustrate me. He's a good guy off the bench, and any more than that at any point during his career is gravy. We'll be a good team with or without him playing well so I don't see why I'd be frustrated by that.
I guess I was wrong about what that scout told Fred. My bad.
John Paxon wasn't exactly a speed demon and he did quite well in the NBA. He was also 2" shorter than Matt. If you can shoot, they'll make room for you. If things clicks for Matt and he starts shooting as well as everyone says he can, he does have a shot at the NBA.
Probably true. Then again you would think a guy shooting 35% from three as a senior in HS would temper expectations of him coming in and lighting it up. I think he is a better all around player than most give him credit for. He may become a great shooter from 3 by the time he's done but I don't think he has to in order to be a good player.
I'm good with that...especially if the game gets a little breathing room. Would prefer a healthy Naz (obviously) as the next 10 days or so will be brutal...as will the 10 after that.
I think anything less than a Reggie Miller role in the NBA is a disappointment.
It was in reference to something an NBA scout told Chris Williams. It's been discussed in this thread already. Nobody on here has said Matt is going to be a lock to make the NBA. If he improves quite a bit, he'll have a good chance because he's 6'4 and has a good looking jumper.