Quote Originally Posted by Cloak View Post
X has taken 109 shots in the 211 minutes he has played, that's an average of .51 shots per minute played.
Comparing that to a much higher percentage shooter, such as Q who has played 478 minutes with 219 attempted shots, you can see Q actually averages less shots per minute at .45. Why would a much worse shooter be attempting proportionally more shots?


Even looking at some other teammates with much higher shooting percentages, he still attempts more shots per minute.
Q - .45
Holman - .44
Nick - .37
Ado - .17
Datcher - .19

Carter shoots more per minute but has a higher shooting percentage (.52).

Only Peters and Wright have worse shooting percentages (this shows another problem we have in Peters with the high shot rate). I still believe in Peters as we know the talent is there, he's just a head case and COULD get it together. X doesn't pass the eye test for me. Sure he plays hard, but he's just not that talented comparatively.
Peters - .60
Wright - .35


What do people see in X? I just don't understand.

Edit: Made picture bigger, also I only included players with at least 100 minutes played.
He has elite athleticism and he is 6-6. He plays hard. The question isn't is he All-SEC, but is he a better option than Carter, Wright, and Peters? I would have to say yes. He's 8th on the team in average minutes per game. This is wrong, imo. I agree that some of his stats are poor, but he also missed 3 games against some of the cupcakes. Also, he has dominated in practice at times. I just think if he got 30 minutes per game, we would see a lot more production and better quality play out of him.