Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

sneaky1
Waterboy
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by sneaky1 »

TribeManiac10 wrote:
hangman wrote:Anybody have stats from game.
Not sure on stats but I heard Blake and Jake played pretty well....havent heard specifics for anyone else yet.
Somebody lied to you then. Jake missed easy shot after easy shot (bunnies). Needs to get stronger or coaches should look into starting the Chamlin boy.


User avatar
TribeManiac10
SEOP
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:11 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by TribeManiac10 »

sneaky1 wrote:
TribeManiac10 wrote:
hangman wrote:Anybody have stats from game.
Not sure on stats but I heard Blake and Jake played pretty well....havent heard specifics for anyone else yet.
Somebody lied to you then. Jake missed easy shot after easy shot (bunnies). Needs to get stronger or coaches should look into starting the Chamlin boy.
:roll:
Last edited by TribeManiac10 on Wed Feb 02, 2011 11:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.


ticklethetwine
Waterboy
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by ticklethetwine »

I try not to quote to much on any posts, but I do have to agree with sneaky 1 on this one. Peebles does not really have a post threat. The Daniels boy is a decent player, and not saying that one day he won't be o.k., but not this year. He has a lot of talent, but really does not use it as effectively as he could. By no way did he come close to a triple double, but he did have a lot of his own shots put back of his. Chamblin probably should get a start at one of other three starters spot on the team, but not Countryman or Justice, without them we would definately be beaten more than we have.
sneaky1 wrote:
TribeManiac10 wrote:
hangman wrote:Anybody have stats from game.
Not sure on stats but I heard Blake and Jake played pretty well....havent heard specifics for anyone else yet.
Somebody lied to you then. Jake missed easy shot after easy shot (bunnies). Needs to get stronger or coaches should look into starting the Chamlin boy.


luvit
Freshman Team
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:57 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by luvit »

peebles needs to improve if they want to make a run in tournament. defense needs work, offense needs work, box out on both ends. free throws were good. in my opinion had whiteoak made free throws they would have won.


DukieFan1987
Waterboy
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:52 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by DukieFan1987 »

The best line up for Peebles is Arey, Countryman, Justice, Chamblin, and Daniels with Mcfarland and Chandler off the bench....Offense is fine but defense needs some work....They will be fine come tournment


independent2012
Freshman Team
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:49 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by independent2012 »

DukieFan1987 wrote:The best line up for Peebles is Arey, Countryman, Justice, Chamblin, and Daniels with Mcfarland and Chandler off the bench....Offense is fine but defense needs some work....They will be fine come tournment
Just curious DukieFan,what would you consider a successful tourney run for Peebles.


User avatar
TribeManiac10
SEOP
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:11 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by TribeManiac10 »

ticklethetwine wrote:I try not to quote to much on any posts, but I do have to agree with sneaky 1 on this one. Peebles does not really have a post threat. The Daniels boy is a decent player, and not saying that one day he won't be o.k., but not this year. He has a lot of talent, but really does not use it as effectively as he could. By no way did he come close to a triple double, but he did have a lot of his own shots put back of his. Chamblin probably should get a start at one of other three starters spot on the team, but not Countryman or Justice, without them we would definately be beaten more than we have.
Correction on my previous statement...Watched the tape of the game and Jake had 10pts, 9rebs, and 6-8blks...a few of the blocks were borderline so im not sure how many he will be credited with......... and obviously Andy and Blake are important. Any team without their two best players would struggle.
Last edited by TribeManiac10 on Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.


luvit
Freshman Team
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:57 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by luvit »

DukieFan1987 wrote:The best line up for Peebles is Arey, Countryman, Justice, Chamblin, and Daniels with Mcfarland and Chandler off the bench....Offense is fine but defense needs some work....They will be fine come tournment
chandler will be ok. not to sure he is ready yet :?:


sparky
All State
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:00 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by sparky »

is this mcfarland boy related to the former peebles coach? i am guessing it is his son. is coach mcfarland coaching anywhere? i always thought he got a raw deal at peebles.


User avatar
TribeManiac10
SEOP
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:11 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by TribeManiac10 »

sparky wrote:is this mcfarland boy related to the former peebles coach? i am guessing it is his son. is coach mcfarland coaching anywhere? i always thought he got a raw deal at peebles.
I think Tyler is distantly related to Doug....some type of cousin. Drew,who graduated last season, is Doug's son. Doug teaches at Western Latham but to my knowledge he is not currently coaching(could be wrong though).


haverightsto
Waterboy
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:07 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by haverightsto »

TribeManiac10 wrote:
sparky wrote:is this mcfarland boy related to the former peebles coach? i am guessing it is his son. is coach mcfarland coaching anywhere? i always thought he got a raw deal at peebles.
I think Tyler is distantly related to Doug....some type of cousin. Drew,who graduated last season, is Doug's son. Doug teaches at Western Latham but to my knowledge he is not currently coaching(could be wrong though).
Coach McFarland is currently the Asst. Coach for the Peebles Varsity Girls, does a GREAT job with them and I also think he got a raw deal with the boys team!! Once again tho John Lawhorn swooped in on his white horse, coached for 2 years of some of the best talent the Indians had had for awhile and then swooped right back out, just like he did in the 90's!!


heatfan
Waterboy
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:57 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by heatfan »

Peebles faithful,
Just wondering about this lawhorn coach that "came in on a white horse". How well did he do in the 90's with the teams he coached, and did any of his teams make it to a regional game? Should we expect him back at peebles in the next yr or 2 with there jr. high program now comming into highschool?


sneaky1
Waterboy
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:34 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by sneaky1 »

TribeManiac10 wrote:
ticklethetwine wrote:I try not to quote to much on any posts, but I do have to agree with sneaky 1 on this one. Peebles does not really have a post threat. The Daniels boy is a decent player, and not saying that one day he won't be o.k., but not this year. He has a lot of talent, but really does not use it as effectively as he could. By no way did he come close to a triple double, but he did have a lot of his own shots put back of his. Chamblin probably should get a start at one of other three starters spot on the team, but not Countryman or Justice, without them we would definately be beaten more than we have.
Correction on my previous statement...Watched the tape of the game and Jake had 10pts, 9rebs, and 6-8blks...a few of the blocks were borderline so im not sure how many he will be credited with......... and obviously Andy and Blake are important. Any team without their two best players would struggle.
He was blocked as much or more than he blocked. Had he made the easy, and I do mean e a s y, shots that he missed at point blank range he would have and should have had another 12 or so. Correct me if I am wrong, but was he not benched for his soft play and inability to finish?

No need to answer that question, cause anyone at the game knows the answer. Box scores do not show the whole picture and I understand standing up for a relative and all but no amount of stats will convince attendees otherwise.....sorry.


User avatar
TribeManiac10
SEOP
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:11 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by TribeManiac10 »

sneaky1 wrote:
TribeManiac10 wrote:
ticklethetwine wrote:I try not to quote to much on any posts, but I do have to agree with sneaky 1 on this one. Peebles does not really have a post threat. The Daniels boy is a decent player, and not saying that one day he won't be o.k., but not this year. He has a lot of talent, but really does not use it as effectively as he could. By no way did he come close to a triple double, but he did have a lot of his own shots put back of his. Chamblin probably should get a start at one of other three starters spot on the team, but not Countryman or Justice, without them we would definately be beaten more than we have.
Correction on my previous statement...Watched the tape of the game and Jake had 10pts, 9rebs, and 6-8blks...a few of the blocks were borderline so im not sure how many he will be credited with......... and obviously Andy and Blake are important. Any team without their two best players would struggle.
He was blocked as much or more than he blocked. Had he made the easy, and I do mean e a s y, shots that he missed at point blank range he would have and should have had another 12 or so. Correct me if I am wrong, but was he not benched for his soft play and inability to finish?

No need to answer that question, cause anyone at the game knows the answer. Box scores do not show the whole picture and I understand standing up for a relative and all but no amount of stats will convince attendees otherwise.....sorry.
Your right....facts, oh like lets say he leads the team in FG% on the season, have no bearing on how well he plays. Sounds like we need to get someone sitting in the stands a uniform and see how many of those "easy" shots they can put in against Joe Micheal in the post while getting mugged. Its kinda pathetic to get on here and trash talk a 16 year old.......sorry. I'll be more than happy to send you the game tape with commentary if you would like to re-evaluate your stance on the subject. :roll:


theuglytruth
Varsity
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by theuglytruth »

no offense to Doug McFarland, but John Lawhorn has forgot more about the game than McFarland knows....He would be much better suited to handle talent, but I understand what you mean about only coming around when the talent is up !


Jayhawks
Freshman Team
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:16 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by Jayhawks »

I know Coach Mcfarland well and his knowledge of the game is alot better than you think.As for you theuglytruth i question your knowledge.You are probably one of them fans that coaches from the stands.


numberonefan
Riding the Bench
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:17 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by numberonefan »

Of course knowing the game and coaching it are 2 different things....just saying.


heatfan
Waterboy
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:57 am

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by heatfan »

Your right....facts, oh like lets say he leads the team in FG% on the season, have no bearing on how well he plays. Sounds like we need to get someone sitting in the stands a uniform and see how many of those "easy" shots they can put in against Joe Micheal in the post while getting mugged. Its kinda pathetic to get on here and trash talk a 16 year old.......sorry. I'll be more than happy to send you the game tape with commentary if you would like to re-evaluate your stance on the subject. :roll:

Tribe,
I'm glad to see you sticking up for your teams' players. If Jake was getting mugged while missing shots, then he has a good excuse for missing shots. I'm sure that HE was the only player (both teams) who missed shots and was fouled.

From what people posted on here during the game, it seemed like it was a physical game. Why are all the peebles faithful always talking about how the games are "rough" or "like a football game". Here's a hint, toughen up, or it will be a short tournament run.


UCC14
Waterboy
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:39 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by UCC14 »

everyone misses easy shots and if whiteoak made foul shots they would of won by 10+.. what do you mean by mugged by Joe Michael?


numberonefan
Riding the Bench
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:17 pm

Re: Whiteoak VS Peebles 2/1

Post by numberonefan »

I think he just meant getting hung onto and pushed and shoved. Heat fan while I agree that yes players need to "toughen up" I'm not sure that means getting shoved with 2 hands, pushed down, tripped, those types of things. I think good hard physical play should be expected; cheap dirty play should not be tolerated. Some of the Whiteoak players put on enough of a show by dropping the f bomb several times which made the dirty play looke even worse.


Post Reply

Return to “Boys Basketball”