Leave it to Hogstats.com to come up with this stat. Jimmy’s 24 points are the most scored by a Razorback guard without a made three. The previous record was held by Corey Beck with 23 against Jackson State in 1993.
What a show he put on of the midrange game!
That can’t be…think of all the games Sidney, Boot and others had before there even was a 3 point line. Perhaps that’s true, in the 3 point era. But not “ever”.
Of course. That goes without saying.
He didn’t have a missed 3 either, as he didn’t take any as he’s done all season. Imagine that, all those mid-range shots and the opposition knows he’s not going to take a 3.
That midrange shot is unstoppable. If he is hot, there is nothing defense can do other than block it from behind him. Seems like he is launching that shot from three feet behind his own cylinder space.
Not really…it should have been properly qualified. Misleading as stated.
I will agree that most people probably realized the omission - IF they thought about that issue at all. But many will take it at face value and think that we never had a guard that scored that many points without having made a 3 to get there, and that’s incorrect.
Not trying to kill the messenger (you). But the media outlet that reported it is at fault. Just another example of sloppy journalism.
This was the tweet. It was qualified. Justin does a good job with that account. I went to J-school with him. There is nothing sloppy about his work.
Do you have anything to say Wiz?
I’m afraid it’s not the answer you’re going to want, mike in Mickey-land…but the obvious and truthful response is, as Matt’s link/post proved, that I was 100% correct.
Note that I was responding to what the OP (pjhawg) had posted .the report had said . . which was:
" Leave it to Hogstats.com to come up with this stat. Jimmy’s 24 points are the most scored by a Razorback guard without a made three. The previous record was held by Corey Beck with 23 against Jackson State in 1993."
(Note that there’'s nothing in there about it being in the 3-point era.)
I then posted, essentially, EXACTLY what was ACTUALLY posted, as it turns out. But based on what PJ had posted in this thread, I didn’t know that; So the REAL news item got it right; PJ got it wrong.
Matt…I said it was sloppy, IF posted as PJ reported. Since it wasn’t posted that way, then there’s no need for you to get huffy with ME about the fact I characterized it as sloppy. In fact, that you defend your friend’s actual post, which is exactly what I said needed to be reported, means that you agree with what I posted here.
Let’s not get the misinformation confused here.
Appreciate the clarification Wiz!
For cryin’ out loud…
There is some serious anal-retention in play here
We have a quick Whitt…