Zarryon Fereti

[SBU STUD MUFFIN]

You guys all sound like " those parents", those parents that are going to tell their son or daughter they played great and to keep up the good work, even though they suck and will get cut in the future. Sugar coating things doesnt help anybody.

"Hey, Little Johnny. You played real well today. You went 0-11, missed some easy lay-ups, threw passes out of bounds, dribbled off your foot, and oh yeah, you picked your butt about 8 times."

This is the mentality of softies such as Solamon... and half the people on this board.

Schmidt doesnt stand for that crap. I can guarentee you he is all over his players to a point that would make anyone of us pee our pants. Nothing can be said on here that is worse then what schmidt tells them at practice. So suck it up, cause I know Z will.

[steveperry]

gopadres said:

I will probably regret jumping into this thread, but here goes:

In my humble opinion, the combination of Relph and Z is just not on par with the quality guards that have played for Bonas in the past. Think of the great Bona guard combinations in the last 25 years. Would you take Relph and Z over Jones and Clark, Vanderpool and Richards, Winn and Capers, Winn and Bremer, Bremer and Green or Green and Gansey? How do they rank with the likes of Houston, Burnett, Anderson or Singleton?

The greatest oddity of the Schmidt era thus far has been his ability to sign big men (Cook, Morgan, Carter, Simmons, Nicholson and Thomas are all 6'8" or taller) and not guards. He desperately needs to get Eleby and Matthews some help next year.

Kind of like how the Padre's juiced-up-corner infielders of their '98 pennant-winning squad weren't on par with those of the '84 pennant winners that came before them.



(Sorry no Padres pictures)

over:

[sneakers]

thesparkman said:

You guys all sound like " those parents", those parents that are going to tell their son or daughter they played great and to keep up the good work, even though they suck and will get cut in the future. Sugar coating things doesnt help anybody.

"Hey, Little Johnny. You played real well today. You went 0-11, missed some easy lay-ups, threw passes out of bounds, dribbled off your foot, and oh yeah, you picked your butt about 8 times."

This is the mentality of softies such as Solamon... and half the people on this board.

Schmidt doesnt stand for that crap. I can guarentee you he is all over his players to a point that would make anyone of us pee our pants. Nothing can be said on here that is worse then what schmidt tells them at practice. So suck it up, cause I know Z will.

OK Stud Muffin. We're weak because we don't want to throw anonymous verbal bombs at our players. Perhaps we should be more like you and compare him to someone who is suffering form Downs Syndrome. Grow up.

We all know that Z had a very sub-par game against Hampton. You are not saying anything new or anything that we all didn't notice. I'm in total agreement. Fine. Say that. Point out exactly what you think he did that was wrong and what he should have done better. That, again, is one of the main purposes of this board. I'm all in favor of honest assessments of performance. Let the criticisms fly if they are warranted and well thought out, not verbal abuse for the sake of abuse.

Criticism for what he has done is fine and should be encouraged, but the name calling and nastiness is over-the-top, unnecessary and cowardly.

I'm sure Schmidt is reading them the riot act, as he should. However, he is not doing it as a immature child in his parents' basement or his dorm room hacking away at the keyboard anonymously. He is telling them this stuff to their face, and I'm sure he is doing it in a constructive manner so that they can use the criticism to improve their game. I'm sure he is not calling them "worthless" the "worst player in America" or a "laughing stock".

That's all I'll have to say on this matter. Hopefully the majority of posters will remain reasonable and respectful.

[GoPadres]

steveperry said:

gopadres said:

Kind of like how the Padre's juiced-up-corner infielders of their '98 pennant-winning squad weren't on par with those of the '84 pennant winners that came before them.

You got it. That picture of Caminiti sums up (better than the Mitchell report) why steroids are bad for baseball.

[steveperry]

sneakers said:

Point out exactly what you think he did that was wrong and what he should have done better. That, again, is one of the main purposes of this board. I'm all in favor of honest assessments of performance. Let the criticisms fly if they are warranted and well thought out, not verbal abuse for the sake of abuse.

Sneakers perhaps you didn't read STUD's earlier post or many of the other posts that I'm sure he was basing his comments on:

"Hey, Little Johnny. You played real well today. You went 0-11, missed some easy lay-ups, threw passes out of bounds, dribbled off your foot, and oh yeah, you picked your butt about 8 times."
-SBU STUD MUFFIN

"Zarryon Fereti, for every postiive he brings to the basketball floor, brings five negatives. Almost single-handedly, this kid crushed the Bonnies' shot at extending a 2nd half lead. What a laughing stock."
-SirElton

"Z struggles from the field, struggles in transition and still doesn't bring much to the defensive end. I would like for him to take one shot inside the 3-point-line that he didn't try and lean into someone and draw a foul. Z is the most overrated, stats-don't-tell-the-whole-story-player in recent memory."
-Hamrucker

"For the record I still think Z is worthless, explain the value in 6 points, 2 assists, 3-16 (0-11 for 3) and 1 steal in 35 minutes??? It's not like he's a shutdown defender.

P.S. I'd also like to note that while Z took 16 shots he managed to get to the line exactly 0 times. I guess J.J. Re******lean-approach that Ham mentioned earlier isn't working out for him."
-Myself

"When he is off, like last nite, he absolutely kills us. When he is on twice a year, he contributes, no doubt. 3-16 from the field, and 0-11 from three. Really? He shot us out of the d**n game, plain and simple. Hate to choose like you said, but Ill take Tyler Relph and his consistancy any day."
-mh05

Well there's five responses from the only five guys on the entire Bandwagon with the guts to tell it like it is. If you read carefully sneakers you'll find legitimate arguments in each one of these quotes explaining why he's a "laughing stock" and "worthless." Maybe you should stop acting so afraid to say anything derogatory about any of our players. Hey man, here's a piece of advice stop acting like:


and more like this:


P.S. Relph has been ripped on this board countless times and no one ever seems to care.

[LumsdnA10Academc98]

sneakers said:

I'm not sure what would motivate a poster to attack any Bonas players that are trying their best. Did you all have a bad day and feel better by posting anonymous attacks on a message board? Do you realize that these Boards are sometimes read by players, the families of players, potential recruits and the families of potential recruits. How do you think posts like these look to those folks?

Do you think it is a positive draw to SBU that several immature posters rip on players that may not meet their expectations? IS this what a player is buying into if they accept an offer to play at St. Bonaventure?

It's one thing to criticize a specific thing that has happened. That is one of the purposes of Board like this. However, it is unacceptable to call a player "totally worthless" or "the worst player in America" or "a laughing stock". It's doubly cowardly to do so while hiding behind a made up anonymous screen name.

I'll not even get into what I think of a person who puts down another by saying that they are worth less than a person with down syndrome. That is totally unacceptable and only points to the extreme ignorance of the poster. A person that would post such a thing should be banned from this Board as it is a waste our time to read the posts and they reflect poorly on the school and the program.

Great post. I agree with everything you said, but I'd like to add one thing. It's bad enough to singlehandedly pile on a player on a college basketball forum read by players, recruits and their families. There are probably a hundred message boards where that's happening, though that still doesn't make it right.

But how hypocritical must we be, as St. Bonaventure fans, students, and alumni, to do so? Singling out one game from one player and going so far as to call him names over it is the antithesis of the family community and brotherhood St. Bonaventure represents. The posts on this thread are exactly what we're not about and go against the spirit of family and brotherhood unique to our university. It's what we try to sell students and recruits and what we've already promised our current student-athletes. We don't act like that at St. Bonaventure.

As for the game, Fereti was bad, but to say he didn't contribute in any other way is untrue and is where others show their bias. He grabbed eight boards and two steals, one of which was followed by a dunk that gave us our last lead. For what it's worth, Vinny praised his defense, and he was there and we weren't. Doesn't sound too useless to me. Also, any time a guy is 0-11 from the arc, there are issues beyond his shot not falling. Somewhere in there, Schmidt must take blame for allowing such an poor performance to continue, especially if the same player is a useless calamity, as others on here claim.

[Chuck]

Great post Lumsdn! Put everything in the proper perspective without attacking others.

[clubhouse]

Lums, I was there. I made the 3 hour drive to VA. It seemed as if Z was trying to shoot his way out of a slump. Good shooters can do that but I wouldn't consider him a good shooter. At times it was as if he was putting himself ahead of the team by forcing shots hoping to make one and potentially get hot. Instead he should have passed the ball. I remember several times Z hoisted one up when HH or somebody else was open for a mid-range jumper.

You praise him for having 8 boards, take a look at the shooting percentages, there were plenty of boards to be had. Oh, he managed to actually make a shot (dunk) that gave us the lead, so all is right with the world? BTW, I'm glad you took my advice for the sunshine and rainbows.

If Schmidt yanks him, his confidence is shot, so you can't blame Schmidt for leaving him in the game. Plus they have a short enough bench as it is. I'm not saying Z shouldn't have shot at all but he's gotta realize that on nights when he doesn't have it, he's gotta try to contribute in other ways, like passing to a player who might actually make a shot. Especially in a close game like that. Z missed a lot of open chances because Hampton was clearly focused on stopping Lee. Unfortunately this team isn't deep enough where they can afford to have Z on the bench even though he's missing everything he shoots. Realistically what other alternative did Schmidt have? Hampton left him wide open because they knew he'd keep shooting. A D-1 player has to realize when it's not his night and pass up the shot even if he's wide open. I would hope Z realized he was left wide open for a reason.

[wgt]

Make a few of the 25 shots missed by Mike & Z & the Hampton outcome could have been different. All the more reason for some frustrated posts on Z’s misses. He is not a great trey shooter but the level of criticism by a few posters is uncalled for. He is a good shooter from beyond the arc, his #s demonstrate it, & can create his own shot unlike Relph & Benson. Prior to his horrendous 0-11 there were only twelve A10 players shooting the trey better with Relph being one of them. Mainly due to his foot injury Relph started the season hitting on only 2-13 treys over the course of the first 4 games. I’m sure glad he continued to put them up because he has converted on an amazing .566 since then. We all know Z has a quick trigger but I’m sure glad he is back on the team & look forward to his hitting key shots in the future. As pointed out he has contributed in other ways. We need Relph & Z as a productive tandem to have any chance at double digit wins.

[LumsdnA10Academc98]

clubhouse said:

Lums, I was there. I made the 3 hour drive to VA. It seemed as if Z was trying to shoot his way out of a slump. Good shooters can do that but I wouldn't consider him a good shooter. At times it was as if he was putting himself ahead of the team by forcing shots hoping to make one and potentially get hot. Instead he should have passed the ball. I remember several times Z hoisted one up when HH or somebody else was open for a mid-range jumper.

You praise him for having 8 boards, take a look at the shooting percentages, there were plenty of boards to be had. Oh, he managed to actually make a shot (dunk) that gave us the lead, so all is right with the world? BTW, I'm glad you took my advice for the sunshine and rainbows.

If Schmidt yanks him, his confidence is shot, so you can't blame Schmidt for leaving him in the game. Plus they have a short enough bench as it is. I'm not saying Z shouldn't have shot at all but he's gotta realize that on nights when he doesn't have it, he's gotta try to contribute in other ways, like passing to a player who might actually make a shot. Especially in a close game like that. Z missed a lot of open chances because Hampton was clearly focused on stopping Lee. Unfortunately this team isn't deep enough where they can afford to have Z on the bench even though he's missing everything he shoots. Realistically what other alternative did Schmidt have? Hampton left him wide open because they knew he'd keep shooting. A D-1 player has to realize when it's not his night and pass up the shot even if he's wide open. I would hope Z realized he was left wide open for a reason.

Thanks for the first-hand account. Without many alternatives, I suppose the logical thing to do would have been keep him in the game with the understanding that he should fire fewer threes, look to create off the dribble and get to the line while looking to get his teammates involved. Fereti and Schmidt chose the "shoot your way out of the slump" alternative, and it went bust.

However, anytime any 6-3 guard grabs eight boards, it's noteworthy, regardless of how his team is shooting. Would we have been better off if he went 0-11 with three rebounds? The point is, no matter how miserable he shot the ball, he found other ways to contribute.

In the nine games coming into Hampton, Z shot a robust 41 percent from the arc. That stretch included 3-5, 4-5 and 4-7 games, as well as 0-5 and 2-7 efforts. He's a streaky shooter, which shouldn't be such a shock to anyone on here, and coming off a 22-53 stretch, he was due for a bad night. Unfortunately, it was bad to the tune of 0-11. Making matters worse, our only other scorer went 2-14, which is almost impossible to overcome. Accept the fact a streaky scorer had the bad night he had coming, regret it was so God-awful, and let's move forward.

[mh05]

Z better have a short memory, because we need the kid to snap out of it and hit some shots for us tonite. He's got a chance now to show that Saturday was nothing more than a horrendous night at the gym. If he practices shot selection, people (myself included) will have nothing to get frustrated over.

As was said above, we have no other options at this point. Z needs to step up, pick his spots and help this squad to a big road win. Penetrate and kick, get to the foul line, hit a couple mid range shots, and people will forget his nightmarish evening in VA.

[SBU STUD MUFFIN]

How can anyone honestly defend him after WATCHING tonights game.

[hamrucker]

Lumsdn, I guess the "brotherhood of St. Bonaventure" doesn't apply when you pile on Relph for struggling, whether it's on this board or not. Let's not start talking about being a hypocrite.

The attiude on here is stunning. I guess if a player goes out and doesn't produce, we should just tell him there's always tomorrow. Unless of course, his name is Tyler Relph. Because he is always held accountable. And it was his fault he won the Mr. Basketball, too. What a double standard there is on this board.