Class of 2018 SF/PF Darius Bazley (OH)

[SU Dreaming]

def not

 

[orangefog]

different kid speaks french and he is on the board , not the athlete i am referring to

Not on our board, but would those of us that follow recruiting know who he is?

 

[Halfmooncuse]

Not on our board, but would those of us that follow recruiting know who he is?

Tease!

 

[iommi]

If we all goes according to plan, 3 players plus Buddy (assuming Buddy is coming to SU, not signed sealed and delivered yet) for 18, if Buddy is not coming I do not know if we add another kid, there are guys out there we all thought we were going for, still think we are going after and we are not, the recruit I refer to whom is not on our board is 2019, by end of Aug his name will be on the board.

Oh, a 2019 kid. That makes sense.

 

[AZOrange]

If we all goes according to plan, 3 players plus Buddy (assuming Buddy is coming to SU, not signed sealed and delivered yet) for 18, if Buddy is not coming I do not know if we add another kid, there are guys out there we all thought we were going for, still think we are going after and we are not, the recruit I refer to whom is not on our board is 2019, by end of Aug his name will be on the board.

The chances of Buddy not being here are less than zero.

 

[Halfmooncuse]

The chances of Buddy not being here are less than zero.

So you are saying there's a chance?

 

[cuseinseattle]

The good old mystery recruit. It's been a while since we did this. How fun. Is it Precious Achiuwa?

 

[SU Dreaming]

no

 

[Zelda Zonk]

We didn't recruit those guys in one year. Bazley and Carey would be in one year. And we could wait to see just how good they are before we compare them to anyone.

One year? I don't think that was part of the argument. And I didn't choose Bazley, Carey, and Battle for the argument. And Battle is from a different year. And we don't have Carey yet. Yet.

 

[JLine]

Not a thread at all about him? 27 threads for 2019. Was gonna say Akok Akok, but he has one. I'll go with Jordan Mitchell.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

One year? I don't think that was part of the argument. And I didn't choose Bazley, Carey, and Battle for the argument. And Battle is from a different year. And we don't have Carey yet. Yet.

Battle, Bazely are recent examples of highly ranked kids that didn't have a problem coming to Syracuse to play all zone. Clearly, Carey doesn't either or he would have eliminated Syracuse by now. From 2005 to 2015 we landed 8 McDonald's All Americans, in addition to near misses Dion Waiters and Tyler Ennis. Playing all zone didnt hurt then, right?

If anything, our Zone is a positive. How many other teams have a unique defense that shuts teams down, especially in March? Our zone is one of the best defenses in the nation on a regular basis, and generates a ton of positive press. Who else can say that?

 

[cuseinseattle]

Not a thread at all about him? 27 threads for 2019. Was gonna say Akok Akok, but he has one. I'll go with Jordan Mitchell.

Another Ohio kid. Good guess.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Battle, Bazely are recent examples of highly ranked kids that didn't have a problem coming to Syracuse to play all zone. Clearly, Carey doesn't either or he would have eliminated Syracuse by now. From 2005 to 2015 we landed 8 McDonald's All Americans, in addition to near misses Dion Waiters and Tyler Ennis. Playing all zone didnt hurt then, right?

If anything, our Zone is a positive. How many other teams have a unique defense that shuts teams down, especially in March? Our zone is one of the best defenses in the nation on a regular basis, and generates a ton of positive press. Who else can say that?

1) You're missing my point. That you do not know how many kids were alienated by the "zone-exclusiveness" of the Orange, and so they never put us on their lists.
2) Just because a kid came to us doesn't mean the zone was a positive factor. Haven't you ever made a decision to do/buy something where 9 out of 10 factors were positive and one was negative, and because you didn't have another option with 10/10, you chose the 9/10? Does that mean the zone was a positive? Saying it "didn't hurt" is reductive. Having that significant of a negative factor is going to lead to the teeter-totter leaning the other way a significant number of times. Even ONE time can be significant, if it's a program-changing player we don't get.
3) I'll take your word for it that we signed 8 McD players from 2005 to 2015. I responded to a post that named 3 players (Battle, Bazley, and the hoped-for Carey) as examples of how the zone hasn't hurt us. My response was meant to represent that those are three players in the 15-40+(?) range. And then i named three players in a similar time span when we were not a zone-exclusive team, that were ranked much higher. To disprove the assertion that we've recruited better players now that we're a zone team. We got Billy O, a No. 1 player in the country, when we weren't zone. What was Pearl ranked nationally? When was the last time we signed a—let's say "top 3"—player? When was the last time we were a serious consideration for a top 5 player? Seems like it was more often before we were zone-exclusive.

"Playing all zone didn't hurt then, right?" That's the statement i continue to see, and that cannot be substantiated. To make it simple: You're a 14-year old basketball player, and all indications are that you're going to be a really good high school player and so you start to pay attention to college programs. You see games on tv where one team plays a zone—a defense you don't ever play in pickup games, when you have the choice. A defense not played in the NBA... you do not see Lebron or KD sliding around playing a version of 'keep away' on the court. And you constantly hear the announcers talking about how that team's games are slow, and low-scoring. You see that team's games multiple times in a given year, and the announcers say the same things. You form an opinion. Cut to your junior year, and you're making your lists, and you're now a top 15 player. You don't have that team on your list. No one on that team's fan forum is discussing you because you aren't discussing them. They're talking about another kid, ranked #30 who does have them on their list, because he can get an offer... Cut to the McD game. The top 15 kid shines in the McD game. Kid 30 has an average game in the Regional Jordan Brand game. Kid 30 signs with the Zone Team, and the fans are happy and say, "See? That proves it. We signed a top 50 kid. The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 plays for the Zone Team for 2 years, and then unexpectedly jumps to the NBA. He's drafted at the end of the lottery, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 is a bench and D-League player and then bounces around getting small contracts, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? He's making more in a year than you naysayers will make in ten. The zone didn't hurt." But, no other recruits are paying attention to Kid 30's $500,000 contracts and his struggling to stay on an NBA bench. But, they do notice Kid 15, who was drafted #7 and starts in the NBA from Day 1. And they put his school on their lists. Rinse and repeat.

[A pre-emptive "Cool story, bro."]

"If anything, our Zone is a positive. How many other teams have a unique defense that shuts teams down, especially in March? Our zone is one of the best defenses in the nation on a regular basis, and generates a ton of positive press."
Again, the beginning of that is your supposition. It's a Unique Defense, sure. That shuts teams down in March? It has, sure. Just like a lot of M2M defenses have shut teams down in March. It has also lost us games in March. Depends on the game and the personnel and the year and... lots of things. How do you know we wouldn't have won those games anyway? How many of those March wins were over teams where the other team had better players? How many Man teams were also winning games in March, and announcers didn't make a big deal of it because there's nothing notable about playing Man?

A ton of positive press? Eh. I dunno. It generates press. Absolutely. Whether it's "positive" or not depends on whether you like it and want to play it. And i'll submit that only a very small percentage of players would actually choose to play zone over man. Do you disagree? I've seriously never been on a team where anyone wanted to play zone. I've never been in a pickup game where anyone suggested we play zone. So, where's the zone love coming from in the best high schoolers that you're projecting? Zone is like Cold. 'Syracuse plays in a 30k+ facility, it has rabid fans, it has a national presence, it makes the final four every now and then, it has a premier player in the NBA, and it has a coach who is in the hall of fame. But, it also plays in a cold, gray city, and it plays zone all the time.' That's, realistically, who we are. And when we get kids, it's because the first set of factors outweigh the second. It's not because the second set are positives. Bottom line, you can get good players despite...

"Battle, Bazely are recent examples of highly ranked kids that didn't have a problem coming to Syracuse to play all zone."
That is likely the more accurate characterization of things. And that's a far cry from it being an asset.

 

[SoBeCuse]

1) You're missing my point. That you do not know how many kids were alienated by the "zone-exclusiveness" of the Orange, and so they never put us on their lists.
2) Just because a kid came to us doesn't mean the zone was a positive factor. Haven't you ever made a decision to do/buy something where 9 out of 10 factors were positive and one was negative, and because you didn't have another option with 10/10, you chose the 9/10? Does that mean the zone was a positive? Saying it "didn't hurt" is reductive. Having that significant of a negative factor is going to lead to the teeter-totter leaning the other way a significant number of times. Even ONE time can be significant, if it's a program-changing player we don't get.
3) I'll take your word for it that we signed 8 McD players from 2005 to 2015. I responded to a post that named 3 players (Battle, Bazley, and the hoped-for Carey) as examples of how the zone hasn't hurt us. My response was meant to represent that those are three players in the 15-40+(?) range. And then i named three players in a similar time span when we were not a zone-exclusive team, that were ranked much higher. To disprove the assertion that we've recruited better players now that we're a zone team. We got Billy O, a No. 1 player in the country, when we weren't zone. What was Pearl ranked nationally? When was the last time we signed a—let's say "top 3"—player? When was the last time we were a serious consideration for a top 5 player? Seems like it was more often before we were zone-exclusive.

"Playing all zone didn't hurt then, right?" That's the statement i continue to see, and that cannot be substantiated. To make it simple: You're a 14-year old basketball player, and all indications are that you're going to be a really good high school player and so you start to pay attention to college programs. You see games on tv where one team plays a zone—a defense you don't ever play in pickup games, when you have the choice. A defense not played in the NBA... you do not see Lebron or KD sliding around playing a version of 'keep away' on the court. And you constantly hear the announcers talking about how that team's games are slow, and low-scoring. You see that team's games multiple times in a given year, and the announcers say the same things. You form an opinion. Cut to your junior year, and you're making your lists, and you're now a top 15 player. You don't have that team on your list. No one on that team's fan forum is discussing you because you aren't discussing them. They're talking about another kid, ranked #30 who does have them on their list, because he can get an offer... Cut to the McD game. The top 15 kid shines in the McD game. Kid 30 has an average game in the Regional Jordan Brand game. Kid 30 signs with the Zone Team, and the fans are happy and say, "See? That proves it. We signed a top 50 kid. The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 plays for the Zone Team for 2 years, and then unexpectedly jumps to the NBA. He's drafted at the end of the lottery, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 is a bench and D-League player and then bounces around getting small contracts, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? He's making more in a year than you naysayers will make in ten. The zone didn't hurt." But, no other recruits are paying attention to Kid 30's $500,000 contracts and his struggling to stay on an NBA bench. But, they do notice Kid 15, who was drafted #7 and starts in the NBA from Day 1. And they put his school on their lists. Rinse and repeat.

[A pre-emptive "Cool story, bro."]

"If anything, our Zone is a positive. How many other teams have a unique defense that shuts teams down, especially in March? Our zone is one of the best defenses in the nation on a regular basis, and generates a ton of positive press."
Again, the beginning of that is your supposition. It's a Unique Defense, sure. That shuts teams down in March? It has, sure. Just like a lot of M2M defenses have shut teams down in March. It has also lost us games in March. Depends on the game and the personnel and the year and... lots of things. How do you know we wouldn't have won those games anyway? How many of those March wins were over teams where the other team had better players? How many Man teams were also winning games in March, and announcers didn't make a big deal of it because there's nothing notable about playing Man?

A ton of positive press? Eh. I dunno. It generates press. Absolutely. Whether it's "positive" or not depends on whether you like it and want to play it. And i'll submit that only a very small percentage of players would actually choose to play zone over man. Do you disagree? I've seriously never been on a team where anyone wanted to play zone. I've never been in a pickup game where anyone suggested we play zone. So, where's the zone love coming from in the best high schoolers that you're projecting? Zone is like Cold. 'Syracuse plays in a 30k+ facility, it has rabid fans, it has a national presence, it makes the final four every now and then, it has a premier player in the NBA, and it has a coach who is in the hall of fame. But, it also plays in a cold, gray city, and it plays zone all the time.' That's, realistically, who we are. And when we get kids, it's because the first set of factors outweigh the second. It's not because the second set are positives. Bottom line, you can get good players despite...

"Battle, Bazely are recent examples of highly ranked kids that didn't have a problem coming to Syracuse to play all zone."
That is likely the more accurate characterization of things. And that's a far cry from it being an asset.

I sincerely applaud you for taking the time to try to enlighten him but it's a waste of time. He has his agenda and won't budge.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

1) You're missing my point. That you do not know how many kids were alienated by the "zone-exclusiveness" of the Orange, and so they never put us on their lists.

And you do? What makes you think ANY kids were alienated by "zone exclusiveness"? I'm still waiting for someone to explain how they know this is even a real thing.


2) Just because a kid came to us doesn't mean the zone was a positive factor. Haven't you ever made a decision to do/buy something where 9 out of 10 factors were positive and one was negative, and because you didn't have another option with 10/10, you chose the 9/10? Does that mean the zone was a positive? Saying it "didn't hurt" is reductive. Having that significant of a negative factor is going to lead to the teeter-totter leaning the other way a significant number of times. Even ONE time can be significant, if it's a program-changing player we don't get.

Again, what makes you think the zone in NOT a positive factor? If the kid committed to Syracuse, obviously playing zone didn't cause us to lose the kid, right? And our zone might have been one of the reasons they picked Syracuse.

3) I'll take your word for it that we signed 8 McD players from 2005 to 2015. I responded to a post that named 3 players (Battle, Bazley, and the hoped-for Carey) as examples of how the zone hasn't hurt us. My response was meant to represent that those are three players in the 15-40+(?) range. And then i named three players in a similar time span when we were not a zone-exclusive team, that were ranked much higher. To disprove the assertion that we've recruited better players now that we're a zone team. We got Billy O, a No. 1 player in the country, when we weren't zone. What was Pearl ranked nationally? When was the last time we signed a—let's say "top 3"—player? When was the last time we were a serious consideration for a top 5 player? Seems like it was more often before we were zone-exclusive.

If we are getting kids in the 15-40 range, recruiting is excellent. You named 3 players from 30 years ago. The game has changed since the 1980's. We picked up Carmelo Anthony in 2002. We were a finalist for Anthony Davis, so I think he was the last top 5 kid. Donte Green and Paul Harris were Top 10 or close. Why didn't we pick up another Top 5 after Billy Owens? It was another 14 years before we picked up another one. All that man to man and no other Top 5's until we went all zone? Hmmm...I seem to recall a lot of Richard Mannings, Mike Edwards, and Allen Griffin's. Good thing we went all zone!

"Playing all zone didn't hurt then, right?" That's the statement i continue to see, and that cannot be substantiated. To make it simple: You're a 14-year old basketball player, and all indications are that you're going to be a really good high school player and so you start to pay attention to college programs. You see games on tv where one team plays a zone—a defense you don't ever play in pickup games, when you have the choice. A defense not played in the NBA... you do not see Lebron or KD sliding around playing a version of 'keep away' on the court. And you constantly hear the announcers talking about how that team's games are slow, and low-scoring. You see that team's games multiple times in a given year, and the announcers say the same things. You form an opinion. Cut to your junior year, and you're making your lists, and you're now a top 15 player. You don't have that team on your list. No one on that team's fan forum is discussing you because you aren't discussing them. They're talking about another kid, ranked #30 who does have them on their list, because he can get an offer... Cut to the McD game. The top 15 kid shines in the McD game. Kid 30 has an average game in the Regional Jordan Brand game. Kid 30 signs with the Zone Team, and the fans are happy and say, "See? That proves it. We signed a top 50 kid. The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 plays for the Zone Team for 2 years, and then unexpectedly jumps to the NBA. He's drafted at the end of the lottery, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? The zone didn't hurt." Kid 30 is a bench and D-League player and then bounces around getting small contracts, and the Zone Team's fans say, "See? He's making more in a year than you naysayers will make in ten. The zone didn't hurt." But, no other recruits are paying attention to Kid 30's $500,000 contracts and his struggling to stay on an NBA bench. But, they do notice Kid 15, who was drafted #7 and starts in the NBA from Day 1. And they put his school on their lists. Rinse and repeat.

Well, the top kids are going to go to Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Kansas. That's the way it is, always was and always will be. First of all, Syracuse doesn't recruit every kid, so not every Top 25 kids in on our board. We're not recruiting West coast kids or kids from the deep South much, if at all. And I'm not sure why you think these kids care about defense anyways. Syracuse puts kids in the NBA, and that's what these kids care about, in addition to exposure and winning. Syracuse checks those boxes. How many other programs put as many kids in the NBA as Syracuse? Look at kids like Wayne Selden, Isaiah Briscoe and Kobi Simmons. None of those kids got drafted, right? Going to a blue blood program is no guarantee of being drafted. Meanwhile, Syracuse is putting kids like Jerami Grant and Tyler Lydon in the NBA. Dude...we're not getting the Top 10 kids. We got 4 in 4o years. That's not our recruit, and you need to realize that. But why in the world would you ASSUME that playing all zone is the reason? It's absurd. Clearly, playing ALL ZONE did not prevent us from landing 10 Top 25 kids and 8 McDonald's AA's in 1o years. That's an absolute fact and so are the 4 Final Fours, 2 TITLE GAMES and 1 TITLE since going all zone.


"If anything, our Zone is a positive. How many other teams have a unique defense that shuts teams down, especially in March? Our zone is one of the best defenses in the nation on a regular basis, and generates a ton of positive press."
Again, the beginning of that is your supposition. It's a Unique Defense, sure. That shuts teams down in March? It has, sure. Just like a lot of M2M defenses have shut teams down in March. It has also lost us games in March. Depends on the game and the personnel and the year and... lots of things. How do you know we wouldn't have won those games anyway? How many of those March wins were over teams where the other team had better players? How many Man teams were also winning games in March, and announcers didn't make a big deal of it because there's nothing notable about playing Man?

Where was all that NCAA tournament success playing man to man? I seem to recall our zone shutting down #1 seed Kansas in 1996. Do you? I seem to recall our zone shutting down #1 seed Oklahoma and #1 seed Kansas in 2003. Won the title. Remember? 2012? 1 seed Indiana? What was Virginia seeded in 2015? #2? I seem to recall some underachieving prior to 1996. Especially with all that talent.


A ton of positive press? Eh. I dunno. It generates press. Absolutely. Whether it's "positive" or not depends on whether you like it and want to play it. And i'll submit that only a very small percentage of players would actually choose to play zone over man. Do you disagree? I've seriously never been on a team where

Sure does, especially when we make deep runs and knock off higher seeded teams. I don't think kids care about what defense they are playing. Why would you? Not a serious factor.

I'd say this is positive press, wouldn't you?

Syracuse’s Zone Defense Is Perpetual Riddle for Foes

Syracuse's zone defence shuts down Marquette - Sportsnet.ca

Syracuse shuts down Indiana to reach Elite Eight

Why the Syracuse 2-3 zone keeps reaching the Final Four


I've seriously never been on a team where anyone wanted to play zone. I've never been in a pickup game where anyone suggested we play zone.

What?!? Who cares about pickup games? laughable.

So, where's the zone love coming from in the best high schoolers that you're projecting? Zone is like Cold. 'Syracuse plays in a 30k+ facility, it has rabid fans, it has a national presence, it makes the final four every now and then, it has a premier player in the NBA, and it has a coach who is in the hall of fame. But, it also plays in a cold, gray city, and it plays zone all the time.' That's, realistically, who we are. And when we get kids, it's because the first set of factors outweigh the second. It's not because the second set are positives. Bottom line, you can get good players despite...

Again...why is playing zone all the time a negative? Said who? Syracuse plays great defense and wins. That's a positive. And if I hear you right, you're saying Syracuse is at a natural disadvantage because we play in a cold, gray city? Thank you for making my point. THAT's probably why we never get Top 5 kids over Duke, UNC, Kansas and Kentucky. ZONE has nothing to do with it. If it did, we wouldn't have recruited so well the last 20 years.

"Battle, Bazely are recent examples of highly ranked kids that didn't have a problem coming to Syracuse to play all zone."
That is likely the more accurate characterization of things. And that's a far cry from it being an asset.

Sounds like an asset based on this article:

How many times have Syracuse players been asked about zone? 'Like a million times'

"The Syracuse zone is so famous in college basketball … ," a reporter inside the United Center offered as prelude to his questions about the Orange defense.

For two weeks, The Zone has been the subject of endless fascination. People keep asking questions about it. They want to Understand How It Works. They want to Spill Its Secrets."

Show me anything that says playing all zone is a negative. Oh yeah...nobody says it. I forgot.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

I sincerely applaud you for taking the time to try to enlighten him but it's a waste of time. He has his agenda and won't budge.

What's my agenda?

UConn plays man to man and used to be well known for their defense. They won a title in 2014. How come they can't recruit these days?

 

[Jake]

I can say without a doubt there have been players that did not come to Syracuse because of the zone and others who specifically chose Syracuse because of it.

It works both ways.

 

[Cheriehoop]

I can say without a doubt there have been players that did not come to Syracuse because of the zone and others who specifically chose Syracuse because of it.

It works both ways.

I agree but I bet more kids commit or not based on the chance for offensive opportunities and freedom before even thinking of defense.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

I agree but I bet more kids commit or not based on the chance for offensive opportunities and freedom before even thinking of defense.

Which begs the million dollar question of why a top point guard wouldn't want the ball in his hands at tbe Cuse. Of course the answer to that question might actually be a million dollars.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Which begs the million dollar question of why a top point guard wouldn't want the ball in his hands at tbe Cuse. Of course the answer to that question might actually be a million dollars.

Wouldn't it depend who the competing programs were? Then decisions may come down to personally evaluating multiple factors that might be considered pluses or minuses to the recruit. Don't understate the effect of the opinions or interests of others besides the recruit himself, but people close to a recruit.

 

[sufandu]

Wouldn't it depend who the competing programs were? Then decisions may come down to personally evaluating multiple factors that might be considered pluses or minuses to the recruit. Don't understate the effect of the opinions or interests of others besides the recruit himself, but people close to a recruit.

It probably would. For the sake of this discussion it seems that people are talking about guys that are top 5 or 10, so the usual suspects would often be in play: Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, etc.

 

[Digger]

True or False - Is the program headed in the right direction? True

True or False - Those who responded to the post really know what they are talking about. False

True or False - The program turned for the better on March 19th 2017. True

True or False - Today, August 11th 2017, Syracuse University would be better off having Hopkins as the HC instead of JB. False

True or False - Today, August 11th 2017, Syracuse University new Athletic Director now has the opportunity & time to plan for the post JB era without noise? True

True or False - The future is bright for Mike Hopkins, but he needs experience and IF things did not go well year 1 and/or 2 it would have been bad for everyone including MH. True

True or False - After a thorough employee review by his superiors, considering all areas of performance, it is ABSOLUTE that JB deserves to retire on his own terms (so long as he continues to perform his duties as he has since 1976 as HC). True

True or False - A large % of SU fans like, love and appreciate everything Mike did for Syracuse University since the fall of 1989. True

True or False - The future was looking dandy especially regarding future recruit engagements as of March 18th 2017. False

True or False - If we had to start a head coach search today, SU would require the new HC have some head coaching experience. True

True or False - Between March 18th 2015 and March 19th 2017 our path for the future, let alone future success was crystal clear. False

True or False - Mike's win loss % as a head coach is below 500. True

True or False - Mike has been a head coach for more than 10 games in his career? False

True or False - I do not care what ya all have to say, this post is based on the facts, not your bs. True

Hey Uncle Leo - ya all are wrong, you think you know it all and you don't, but enjoy your ratings on the Syracuse Basketball Board. Make us proud!

In HOF JB WE TRUST - Thank you JB

True or False - You seem to have a shaky understanding of the difference between facts and opinions. True

 

[reedny]

I agree but I bet more kids commit or not based on the chance for offensive opportunities and freedom before even thinking of defense.

But even defensively, the zone isn't that far removed from what they do in the pros. They might not call it "zone" per se ... but NBA teams double players and have to close out on shooters. They also slide (rotate) defenders off the PNR just like we do in the zone. Not to mention that, within a players' area, he has to guard a guy (M2M) anyway. So I can't speak to the perception out there. But I don't think we're putting guys into the league every year b/c GM's have doubts about SU players' ability to play NBA D.

 

[AZOrange]

So you are saying there's a chance?

Slight chance. I mean JB even blew his moment...

 

[Dave85]

True or False - You seem to have a shaky understanding of the difference between facts and opinions. True

I totally agree with your post. It just floors me that practically everyone in this country has no distinction between what is a fact and what is an opinion. Opinions cannot be false. Opinions cannot be lies. It's just amazing that so many people think their own opinions are facts.