Sometimes do these annually if I remember. Will post on the Trove too. I think about what I was right about, what I was wrong about, etc, after a season concludes. On an opinion site I find it to be a fun exercise to discuss and debate.
What I was wrong about:
1. Bediako. At best I thought he would be a mediocre big, but he held his own more often than not. Certainly not at the top of the group in the league, but he wildly exceeded my expectations and was critical to success.
2. Davis. I thought Davis would be good. I didn't think he would raise his game to be in the conversation for an all league honorable mention.
3. Dawes. His statistics were up across the board, and while this may be the "eye test" lying to me, I thought he was more consistent in conference than I ever thought he'd be. Again, this might be bias, but I thought we had the good Dawes much more than the bad Dawes, and I didn't think that would happen in conference play.
4. Wusu. I was as bullish as Dan and the small group of others who thought Wusu would be better consistently than he was during the season. Didn't think his 3-point shooting would drop so dramatically, especially given the open looks he'd be getting with folks focusing on stopping the other 3 scorers.
4. Injuries. We were much healthier than I thought we'd be given how much the 5 starters were leaned on.
5. Depth. See #4. I don't think I was wrong about our lack of depth being an issue. It limited our ceiling for sure. But we avoided the consequences of that because we were fortunate on the injury front. So it wasn't the "death knell" I thought it might be.
6. Overall performance. I thought we were a NIT team. So in that sense I was right. But never did I think 13 conference wins and 4th in the league regular season was a possibility. Nor did I think we were going to be a bubble team with a credible argument to be in the dance. So while I thought we were an "NIT team", I didn't think we would be THIS type of NIT team.
What I was right about:
1. Bench. I didn't think we'd have a bench that helped much in league play, and that was the case.
2. Sanders. I didn't see him being the type of bench presence others projected, and that was true.
3. Coleman. Because of the pedigree and available PT, I thought he could at least contribute some, and he did.
4. Richmond. Thought he would be an all league player from the moment we got home from Cuse, and he disappointed the two prior years. Was never afraid to admit that reality, which is why I always brought it up when folks talked about him as such. But I bought into him elevating his play to be a first team all league player this year, and he was despite still having some of the consistency stuff can be puzzling at times.
5. NIT was where I thought we'd land and we did. But see above, because we still wildly outperformed my expectations. If we made the dance and won a game, it would have been 2022 Giants for me.
These are just some that come to mind.
What I was wrong about:
1. Bediako. At best I thought he would be a mediocre big, but he held his own more often than not. Certainly not at the top of the group in the league, but he wildly exceeded my expectations and was critical to success.
2. Davis. I thought Davis would be good. I didn't think he would raise his game to be in the conversation for an all league honorable mention.
3. Dawes. His statistics were up across the board, and while this may be the "eye test" lying to me, I thought he was more consistent in conference than I ever thought he'd be. Again, this might be bias, but I thought we had the good Dawes much more than the bad Dawes, and I didn't think that would happen in conference play.
4. Wusu. I was as bullish as Dan and the small group of others who thought Wusu would be better consistently than he was during the season. Didn't think his 3-point shooting would drop so dramatically, especially given the open looks he'd be getting with folks focusing on stopping the other 3 scorers.
4. Injuries. We were much healthier than I thought we'd be given how much the 5 starters were leaned on.
5. Depth. See #4. I don't think I was wrong about our lack of depth being an issue. It limited our ceiling for sure. But we avoided the consequences of that because we were fortunate on the injury front. So it wasn't the "death knell" I thought it might be.
6. Overall performance. I thought we were a NIT team. So in that sense I was right. But never did I think 13 conference wins and 4th in the league regular season was a possibility. Nor did I think we were going to be a bubble team with a credible argument to be in the dance. So while I thought we were an "NIT team", I didn't think we would be THIS type of NIT team.
What I was right about:
1. Bench. I didn't think we'd have a bench that helped much in league play, and that was the case.
2. Sanders. I didn't see him being the type of bench presence others projected, and that was true.
3. Coleman. Because of the pedigree and available PT, I thought he could at least contribute some, and he did.
4. Richmond. Thought he would be an all league player from the moment we got home from Cuse, and he disappointed the two prior years. Was never afraid to admit that reality, which is why I always brought it up when folks talked about him as such. But I bought into him elevating his play to be a first team all league player this year, and he was despite still having some of the consistency stuff can be puzzling at times.
5. NIT was where I thought we'd land and we did. But see above, because we still wildly outperformed my expectations. If we made the dance and won a game, it would have been 2022 Giants for me.
These are just some that come to mind.
Last edited:
