Randy Foye by the month
Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks
Randy Foye by the month
- big3_8_19_21
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,113
- And1: 421
- Joined: Jan 17, 2005
Randy Foye by the month
January (2 games):
9.0 ppg
1.0 apg
1.5 rpg
0.5 spg
38.9% FG
33% 3FG
66.7% FT
19.5 mpg
February:
10.0 ppg
2.6 apg
3.0 rpg
0.8 spg
38.2% FG
41.9% 3FG
72.7% FT
28.9 mpg
March:
12.5 ppg
5.3 apg
3.9 rpg
1.0 spg
44.1% FG
40.4% 3FG
81.8% FT
34.1 mpg
April:
18.4 ppg
5.2 apg
3.0 rpg
1.1 spg
45.6% FG
42.3% 3FG
88.9% FT
36.1 mpg
scored in double figures every game but one in April
9.0 ppg
1.0 apg
1.5 rpg
0.5 spg
38.9% FG
33% 3FG
66.7% FT
19.5 mpg
February:
10.0 ppg
2.6 apg
3.0 rpg
0.8 spg
38.2% FG
41.9% 3FG
72.7% FT
28.9 mpg
March:
12.5 ppg
5.3 apg
3.9 rpg
1.0 spg
44.1% FG
40.4% 3FG
81.8% FT
34.1 mpg
April:
18.4 ppg
5.2 apg
3.0 rpg
1.1 spg
45.6% FG
42.3% 3FG
88.9% FT
36.1 mpg
scored in double figures every game but one in April
Thriving on mediocrity since '89.
- revprodeji
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 22,388
- And1: 8
- Joined: Dec 25, 2002
- Location: Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought
- Contact:
As we said in the other thread, yes. Probably Mayo because it would allow Foye to defend the 1 and Mayo defend the 2. Mayo is not a true pg, but he is a playmaker at 6'5 and has ice in his veins. His jumper is light years ahead of Rose as well. Mayo is only 11 months older than ROse also.
Rose is ahead of Mayo on our draft board, but either guy would be a positive for this team.
Rose is ahead of Mayo on our draft board, but either guy would be a positive for this team.
http://www.timetoshop.org
Weight management, Sports nutrition and more...
Weight management, Sports nutrition and more...
- deeney0
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,594
- And1: 9
- Joined: Jan 26, 2005
- Location: Cambridge, MA
No way. I like Mayo a ton, but Rose is still better. To me, this draft has a clear top two (Rose and Beasley), a clear next two (Mayo and Lopez), and then a huge group of people that could go anywhere from 5 to 15. If you end up in the top 2, it should take a lot to move down. Even at 3 or 4, it should take a lot to move down (like the Clippers trade, #3 and Marko for #6, Thomas, and the Wolves pick back... Trading out of the top 4 requires a big package like that). To move out of the top 2, even to 3? It'd take at least that much.
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 30,826
- And1: 8,857
- Joined: Nov 02, 2007
MN Die Hard wrote:ok, in both threads I've seen lots of love for Mayo. Let's put it to the test.
Let's say we draw the second pick and Beasley goes first. Do we trade down to #3 for Mayo if the price is right?
I'm not in school anymore so I don't have to take tests. You can't make me, so there.
To answer your question, though, I'd probably stick with Rose just because a franchise PG trumps a franchise SG (assuming they both are franchise players - which is a big assumption). If I have a chance at a top-tier PG or center, I jump at it.
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 68,662
- And1: 22,230
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Devilzsidewalk wrote:what did Mayo do exactly that makes everybody here pine for him, he put up a bunch of empty numbers on a mediocre team. Quite expected, no?
A 21 win team is mediocre? Being the second highest scorer in a conference which was arguably one of the best. Also being 10th in the league in assists from a guy some have tagged selfish.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,536
- And1: 57
- Joined: Jun 01, 2007
I think the key factor is win % since foye took over as PG after the game Bassy got injured March 7th? Which I think is ~10wins in 22 games? 45%?
Considering there were ~60 games before that and the team was likely to be something around 11 wins in 60 games? Is that even right? Were we 11-49 before March 7th?
Considering there were ~60 games before that and the team was likely to be something around 11 wins in 60 games? Is that even right? Were we 11-49 before March 7th?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 31,997
- And1: 6,012
- Joined: Oct 09, 2005
they underachieved. Two of the best prospects in Davon Jefferson and Mayo, Mayo the self-proclaimed best in the country. Then add Hackett and Gibson and you should in theory have an elite team.
They had 2 big wins, vs UCLA and Stanford, and bad losses against AZ st, Cal, and Mercer
3 to 2 ratio of disappointing losses vs big wins
They had 2 big wins, vs UCLA and Stanford, and bad losses against AZ st, Cal, and Mercer
3 to 2 ratio of disappointing losses vs big wins

- Krapinsky
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,712
- And1: 1,952
- Joined: May 13, 2007
- Location: Los Angeles
Devilzsidewalk wrote:they underachieved. Two of the best prospects in Davon Jefferson and Mayo, Mayo the self-proclaimed best in the country. Then add Hackett and Gibson and you should in theory have an elite team.
They had 2 big wins, vs UCLA and Stanford, and bad losses against AZ st, Cal, and Mercer
3 to 2 ratio of disappointing losses vs big wins
USC grad here. We did underachieve. I thought ti was because of three things.
After Taj, a complete lack of front court players.
No depth. Flloyd only trusted 6 players. That's the most he'd play most games. Once Taj or someone got in foul trouble they were screwed.
Flloyd's offense. I've never seen an offense struggle so much to get an open shot. They should have been an uptempo team and rarely did that occur. They woul dput three guards and pass aroud the three point line until they would have to jack up a three or until they through the ball away. At times it was hard to watch.
Hopefully when Derozan comes next year he'll let him and Jefferson push the ball more. Overall, next year I think we'll be better.
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 31,997
- And1: 6,012
- Joined: Oct 09, 2005
Return to Minnesota Timberwolves