[76lsjumb]

Indeed, it looks like the gloves are off regarding Dawkins' prospects.  Apparently, I'm not the only one whose "doubt benefits" have expired.

There is, of course, at least one explanation for our offensive woes that hasn't gotten much currency [yet, at least].  Perhaps we have a lot of athletically-gifted players...who can't shoot. Or, at least, can't shoot in that pure, consistent way that identifies someone as a "shooter."

I didn't play or coach [other than intramurals or my kids' grade school teams, respectively], so my "expertise" only comes from having watched [mostly] Stanford basketball for 50+ years. Over that time, we have had a number of players who, the very first few times you saw them shoot the ball, you could just tell they had a shot that was consistent and would more often than not have a chance of going in, especially in the clutch.  Conversely, we've also had a number of players who were just the opposite -- they might have an occasional "on" night, but, as a regular matter, when the ball left their hands, you really weren't convinced it was going to go in.  Very few players, it seems to me, have moved from the latter group to the former over the course of their college career. 

To my eyes, no one in this sophomore class is in the former group.  I hope one or more makes the transition, but I'm not optimistic.

[76lsjumb]

Indeed, it looks like the gloves are off regarding Dawkins' prospects.  Apparently, I'm not the only one whose "doubt benefits" have expired.

There is, of course, at least one explanation for our offensive woes that hasn't gotten much currency [yet, at least].  Perhaps we have a lot of athletically-gifted players...who can't shoot. Or, at least, can't shoot in that pure, consistent way that identifies someone as a "shooter."

I didn't play or coach [other than intramurals or my kids' grade school teams, respectively], so my "expertise" only comes from having watched [mostly] Stanford basketball for 50+ years. Over that time, we have had a number of players who, the very first few times you saw them shoot the ball, you could just tell they had a shot that was consistent and would more often than not have a chance of going in, especially in the clutch.  Conversely, we've also had a number of players who were just the opposite -- they might have an occasional "on" night, but, as a regular matter, when the ball left their hands, you really weren't convinced it was going to go in.  Very few players, it seems to me, have moved from the latter group to the former over the course of their college career. 

To my eyes, no one in this sophomore class is in the former group.  I hope one or more makes the transition, but I'm not optimistic.