Ryan Childress

#26
#26
roswellvol said:
All successful teams (even in the NBA)have these types of players. Everyone is not supposed to be a 20ppg scorer or athletic rebounder/defender that stops everyone and cleans glass all day. You have to have the overachiever that brings passion and intensity even if his skill doesn't match the effort.

Childress will be more mature next year and know when to reel it in. He IS Bradshaw's replacement. Final Four teams have at least one of these every year.

Next year's class will have zero bearing on his minutes as the only post player (right now) coming in will more than likely RS because he's 300 pounds.
Click to expand...

So, tell me who was the "Childress or Bradshaw" of Florida's final four team last year, Noah or Horford? Final Four team DO NOT have 6'2 starting power forwards. Childress is not an overachiever, he is what everyone thought he would be. A guy that can come off the bench grab some boards, make a field goal or two and eat some fouls in the post.
 
#27
#27
JZVOL said:
So, tell me who was the "Childress or Bradshaw" of Florida's final four team last year, Noah or Horford? Final Four team DO NOT have 6'2 starting power forwards. Childress is not an overachiever, he is what everyone thought he would be. A guy that can come off the bench grab some boards, make a field goal or two and eat some fouls in the post.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about the energy certain players bring on the floor with them. Noah was that guy last year in the Dance. Most journalists cited the fact that his intensity was the main catalyst for UF being as good as they were at the end of the year. The players that tend to be this type USUALLY (not always) are not one of the more talented players on the floor. UF got a great combination in Noah for being able to supply both.

Childress is an overahiever because I think most Vol fans would agree that he does not have SEC caliber talent, yet is getting solid minutes on what could be conceived as the second best team in the conference.
 
#28
#28
Oh God here we go with the political correctness. Never in America can someone mention anything about race without the"racist" card being thrown at them.

Yeah, my whole argument is based on th fact of race...

Actually it is based on the fact that those 3 things (white, not that good, and tries hard) are the only thing the two have in common. If you do look at Dane's first two years, you WILL see floor presence. To say otherwise is a complete fabrication made up to simply support your ridiculous argument. Dane was a good point guard his first two years, but the reason why he got moved was not because of his passing or decision making, it was because he wasn't quick enough to adequately guard the 1's of the league, and his shooting wasn't good enough to warrant him being a guard.

Bruce didn't move Dane in hopes that he would develop floor presence, it was because he ALREADY had it. Pearl said that he had to figure out a way to get Dane on the court. That doesn't sound like your argument to me.
 
#29
#29
roswellvol said:
I'm talking about the energy certain players bring on the floor with them. Noah was that guy last year in the Dance. Most journalists cited the fact that his intensity was the main catalyst for UF being as good as they were at the end of the year. The players that tend to be this type USUALLY (not always) are not one of the more talented players on the floor. UF got a great combination in Noah for being able to supply both.

Childress is an overahiever because I think most Vol fans would agree that he does not have SEC caliber talent, yet is getting solid minutes on what could be conceived as the second best team in the conference.
Click to expand...

I do see your point about the energy and over the next 2 years I think he can bring spurts of energy off the bench but I don't think he can sustain it for 25 mins. or be a starter, we won't need a Bradshaw type in the future becuase of the talent we will have.

Besides the leaders for next year's team will be lofton, J. Smith and R. Smith needs to be b/c he runs point. As far as enegry guys Crews has more energy more ability and fits that role better than Childress.
 
#30
#30
So, obviously you didn't see his first two years. The guy played scared. There was also a reason why CJ played 35+ minutes a game. He had no back up.

Dane had a little more floor presence at that point in his career simply by being a PG. However, the last two years has seen a huge jump in that category. Players evolve and progress. No reason to think that Ryan won't do the same.
 
#31
#31
JZVOL said:
I do see your point about the energy and over the next 2 years I think he can bring spurts of energy off the bench but I don't think he can sustain it for 25 mins. or be a starter, we won't need a Bradshaw type in the future becuase of the talent we will have.

Besides the leaders for next year's team will be lofton, J. Smith and R. Smith needs to be b/c he runs point. As far as enegry guys Crews has more energy more ability and fits that role better than Childress.
Click to expand...
I agree. I don't think he'll ever sniff the starting line up (barring injury) for the rest of his career. I do think he may get to a point where he can be effective at a 20 min. per game clip.

Crews does have the energy as well and better talent. However, I'm looking for Childress to be the more mature leader type. Crews scares the hell out of me in the way Ron Slay did. And that's not a bad thing (although it can be from an officiating point of view).
 
#32
#32
roswellvol said:
I agree. I don't think he'll ever sniff the starting line up (barring injury) for the rest of his career. I do think he may get to a point where he can be effective at a 20 min. per game clip.

Crews does have the energy as well and better talent. However, I'm looking for Childress to be the more mature leader type. Crews scares the hell out of me in the way Ron Slay did. And that's not a bad thing (although it can be from an officiating point of view).
Click to expand...

:eek:k: I'm with ya my man
 
#33
#33
roswellvol said:
So, obviously you didn't see his first two years. The guy played scared. There was also a reason why CJ played 35+ minutes a game. He had no back up.

Dane had a little more floor presence at that point in his career simply by being a PG. However, the last two years has seen a huge jump in that category. Players evolve and progress. No reason to think that Ryan won't do the same.
Click to expand...

If he played so scared and had little floor presence, why would Pearl make sucha big deal to get him on the floor? CJ played so much because he was the best point guard in the SEC.

My biggest point is that Childress will not be the leader Dane ever was. Just because he plays wild doesn't mean his energy is necessarily beneficial. He would play bettter if he played under control and played to his role. Stop trying to compare him to Bradshaw, they are not the same player at all, not even close.
 
#36
#36
I don't think Childress will be the type of leader on the floor that Dane is. He can be the type of leader that makes the people around him a bit better though. He does quite a few of the little things well that can help our young guys. While he does need to learn how to put a body on someone when a shot goes up (they all do really) he steps in and takes a charge as well as anyone on the court and has become a "moderate" threat with his outside shot.

Obviously he does not have the talent of a Chism/Crews but we will need him to give us some minutes and get the other guys a rest. A solid bench can win many games for a good team.
 
#37
#37
I know everyone has a different meaning for LEADER. My meaning of leader isn't scoring 25 to 30 a game.

This past season Dane was the leader, and he didn't put up 30 points not once I think. Being a leader is motivating the team, playing with heart, playing hard for the short or long period of time that you are in, being vocal, showing emotion, and being ready to play 2 minutes a game or start to finish. Look how the guy changed his body from last year. That was determination. Improving your vertical 7" is crazy in its self.

TRUST me by saying this I'm NOT at all down playing any other player on this team. I wouldn't trade a single player on this team. Lofton has a great future but I wish he was more vocal. (Now he did get excited against UGA the other day!!!)

But anyway in my orange cystal ball I see:
· Ryan = Leader
· Floor general = Ramar
· Old faithful = Lofton!! aka Money
· The Pest = JuJuan
· As far as Crews and Chism they are the miniature twin towers :) at UT until we get a BIG man 6-10 or taller. Not a 6-9 guy weighing 300 lbs.
 
#38
#38
jordan howell will be more of a leader than childress next season
 
#39
#39
I know what you were saying about leaders in your first post. But I disagreeed with that from the start. I do not see Childress as a leader of this team.

In the huddle when things are going bad, a leader is someone who everyone looks to in the huddle to help them through the struggle. No one is looking at Childress to go make a play. Sorry. They're not. Childress can provide a spark and force a turnover or grab a rebound and keep the possesion alive, but he is not going to step up to JaJuan or Chris, or Ramar or Chism, and tell them if they are screwing up, or if they need to assert themselves more, or in the case of a technical, that they were wrong. That is what a leader is going to do on this team and Childress is not going to do that.
 
#40
#40
Smokey_Vol said:
I know everyone has a different meaning for LEADER. My meaning of leader isn't scoring 25 to 30 a game.

This past season Dane was the leader, and he didn't put up 30 points not once I think. Being a leader is motivating the team, playing with heart, playing hard for the short or long period of time that you are in, being vocal, showing emotion, and being ready to play 2 minutes a game or start to finish. Look how the guy changed his body from last year. That was determination. Improving your vertical 7" is crazy in its self.

TRUST me by saying this I'm NOT at all down playing any other player on this team. I wouldn't trade a single player on this team. Lofton has a great future but I wish he was more vocal. (Now he did get excited against UGA the other day!!!)

But anyway in my orange cystal ball I see:
· Ryan = Leader
· Floor general = Ramar
· Old faithful = Lofton!! aka Money
· The Pest = JuJuan
· As far as Crews and Chism they are the miniature twin towers :) at UT until we get a BIG man 6-10 or taller. Not a 6-9 guy weighing 300 lbs.
Click to expand...
Good post. I see things the same way. Now if eveyone else would realize I've been talking about next year then this may be a moot discussion.
 
#41
#41
UTLCA said:
I know what you were saying about leaders in your first post. But I disagreeed with that from the start. I do not see Childress as a leader of this team.

In the huddle when things are going bad, a leader is someone who everyone looks to in the huddle to help them through the struggle. No one is looking at Childress to go make a play. Sorry. They're not. Childress can provide a spark and force a turnover or grab a rebound and keep the possesion alive, but he is not going to step up to JaJuan or Chris, or Ramar or Chism, and tell them if they are screwing up, or if they need to assert themselves more, or in the case of a technical, that they were wrong. That is what a leader is going to do on this team and Childress is not going to do that.
Click to expand...


That's what I'm saying everyone has a different meaning.
 
#42
#42
UTLCA said:
I know what you were saying about leaders in your first post. But I disagreeed with that from the start. I do not see Childress as a leader of this team.

In the huddle when things are going bad, a leader is someone who everyone looks to in the huddle to help them through the struggle. No one is looking at Childress to go make a play. Sorry. They're not. Childress can provide a spark and force a turnover or grab a rebound and keep the possesion alive, but he is not going to step up to JaJuan or Chris, or Ramar or Chism, and tell them if they are screwing up, or if they need to assert themselves more, or in the case of a technical, that they were wrong. That is what a leader is going to do on this team and Childress is not going to do that.
Click to expand...
Proof's in the pudding. I just had an opinion that I am now fine with seeing if it plays out next year. Debate with ya then. Whether I'm right or wrong. The team for which we cheer will be better off if I'm closer to right than wrong. Later.:mf_surrender:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top