8 Man Rotation

J

Johnny4Life

Member
I've noticed over the last few games that the team isn't shooting and playing as well later in the game. It appears most of them look tired. I've also noticed Mullin is basically playing a 6 to 7 man rotation the last few games.

I really think he needs to open it up more to a 8 man rotation with Keita / Trimble and Williams. They all have to get about 8 to 12 mins a game to keep the starters legs fresh.

Is anyone else in agreement with me?
 
Last edited:
[quote="Johnny4Life" post=314940]I've noticed over the last few games that the team isn't shooting and playing as well later in the game. It appears most of them look tired. I've also noticed Mullin is basically playing a 6 to 7 man rotation the last few games.

I really think he needs to open it up more to a 8 man rotation with Keita / Trimble and Williams. They all have to get about 8 mins a game to keep the starters legs fresh.

Is anyone else in agreement with me?[/quote]

The bench has been getting more than 24 minutes a game, albeit the time is not split as you suggested. I agree that Mullin should give more time to the bench to avoid tired legs, but I think 24 minutes in the aggregate is not nearly enough
 
Time to go all in on Greg Williams. The kid will make some mistakes, but I am willing to take the good with the bad.
 
I agree completely about more minutes for Williams. I love his explosiveness going to the basket. Part of the problem with the distribution of minutes is that Keita gives us nothing on offense, so he cannot play the minutes we might like. When he is on the floor we essentially go 4 on 5 on the offensive end, and you cannot afford to do that for very long. If Keita was better on offense (even a few putbacks once in a while) he could play more minutes and you wouldn't have to rely so much on the five guys in the "small" line-up (Ponds, Heron, Figgy, Clark, Simon) to play all the big minutes.
 
Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=315099]Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.[/quote]

I agree that we probably don't have 8 BE rotation caliber players.
I am obviously not an expert, but seems Williams has ability and can play. None of us see what goes on in practice but just on the little minutes he has gotten, not sure why Mullin doesn't play him. I know Louie tried not to play freshman but even Louie generally played at least 8 guys and played freshman when they absolutely deserved it or he had no choice.
Keita has not looked good but two different "major" programs thought enough of him to give him a scholarship. Again he has been bad but going into the season most would have though he would be at least a serviceable rotation player.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for a 6-man rotation -- play Williams 25 mpg at every position and the starters 34. Let Trimble and Keita fight over the remaining five minutes.
 
I'll go with what a HS coach once told me - that a coach will always play a kid he thinks can help. I'd just assume that at this point he's not ready to contribute regularly at the Big East level else he'd be seeing minutes.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=315099]Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.[/quote]

How many years should it take to get better players?
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=315118][quote="fordham96" post=315099]Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.[/quote]

How many years should it take to get better players?[/quote]

7 years
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=315118][quote="fordham96" post=315099]Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.[/quote]

How many years should it take to get better players?[/quote]

I'd say at least 20 years. Which ironically is the length of time since we won a tournament game.
 
I'm not sure a new AD who knows about basketball is giving any well-paid staff more than two years to sort out a talent/depth issue. Probably better for all parties involved for Ponds to come back healthy and Keita to develop some hands so we can go back to enjoying the hell out of this season.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=315118][quote="fordham96" post=315099]Do people really think Coach is not playing these guys more because he is being negligent?

Or is it they just aren't that good...

He doesn't trust them even early in the games and clearly at the end of the games unless his starters foul out. Don't kid yourself into thinking playing these guys in the 1st half or second half more will help the starters. Not if they fall behind further because the starters are out and then you have to put them right back in. And that is what he fears. There is a cost/benefit factor to playing this bench. He doesn't trust these guys even with a lead and forget it if they are behind or it is close.

The solution is to get better players.[/quote]

How many years should it take to get better players?[/quote]

For some people on this board it depends on who the coach is? If it is someone you don't like just a couple, if it is someone you like then as many as they need....
 
[quote="L J S A" post=315140]I'm not sure a new AD who knows about basketball is giving any well-paid staff more than two years to sort out a talent/depth issue. Probably better for all parties involved for Ponds to come back healthy and Keita to develop some hands so we can go back to enjoying the hell out of this season.[/quote]

The new AD is about accountability. That is the key.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=315145][quote="L J S A" post=315140]I'm not sure a new AD who knows about basketball is giving any well-paid staff more than two years to sort out a talent/depth issue. Probably better for all parties involved for Ponds to come back healthy and Keita to develop some hands so we can go back to enjoying the hell out of this season.[/quote]

The new AD is about accountability. That is the key.[/quote]

Let's not be foolish enough to think that the AD operates in complete autonomy. One thing I like about Mike is that he understands what it's like to have an iconic coach. An AD of Duke has little control over firing Coach K because of his track record as a coach.

At SJU, there has never been a player who accomplished more playing for the school or in the NBA. There are powers at SJU who hired Mike, and their opinion of Chris is as important or more than what Mike thinks and he knows that.

With Lavin, he had a pretty good run but those powers became frustrated because Lavin seemed comfortable at being merely good. I don't know if it was Steve's California personality, or he was as complacent as some here suggest.

With Chris, I don't sense any of that among administration just yet. It may grow to that if this season falls apart but I don't get any of that right now.

Mahoney had the program fall apart, fran annoyed the AD Manetta from day 1, Jarvis became arrogant, and norm was over his head.

Right now with Chris I don't think the feeling is that he is on the ropes at all as some here suggest. The people in control are a little more patient than many are here.

Some of us are reasonably impatient for a winner, so much so that 14-3 is feeling like a pending nightmare. Others are incredibly negative people who use any failure, even within a single game, to vent frustrations. Others still, have grown to dislike Mullin, and will use any failure of the roster or game situation as evidence that he and staff are unfit. On the other side, many of us are more patient with Chris because he is Chris. In the end, it is about perspective, somewhat related to Panthers call for balance.
We've had two great crowds at CA for Big East games and it's not gone unnoticed. The city is getting excited about st John's again, but winning is a big part of that.

Let's just hope we can complete a run to the dance successfully and put this talk behind us.
 
[quote="Beast of the East" post=315153]Let's not be foolish enough to think that the AD operates in complete autonomy. One thing I like about Mike is that he understands what it's like to have an iconic coach. An AD of Duke has little control over firing Coach K because of his track record as a coach.[/quote]

Coach K is an iconic coach for his coaching. Mullin is an iconic player who took up coaching. There's a big difference.

It doesn't really matter that the Duke AD has little control over K being fired because K hasn't given the school a reason to fire him in 36 years.

Do you really think Cragg would take this job if he wasn't the ultimate decision maker? If he tries to fire someone and some fanboys in the administration or board try to veto it, we're looking for a new AD . . . again. And given our track record, the next one won't be as good as Cragg.

If Ponds comes back and we continue winning, all is well. But what if he doesn't, and we slump and somehow miss tournament? That would be four years of no success and a fifth one on the horizon. Mullin wouldn't be long for the coaching world if that were to happen.

I certainly don't anticipate that happening, but the way we are constructed makes us the most precarious 14-3 team in the nation.

I'd been predicting 27 wins headed into the Big Dance for a while now, but it wouldn't take much for it to all come crashing down.
 
Last edited:
[quote="L J S A" post=315157][quote="Beast of the East" post=315153]Let's not be foolish enough to think that the AD operates in complete autonomy. One thing I like about Mike is that he understands what it's like to have an iconic coach. An AD of Duke has little control over firing Coach K because of his track record as a coach.[/quote]

Coach K is an iconic coach for his coaching. Mullin is an iconic player who took up coaching. There's a big difference.

It doesn't really matter that the Duke AD has little control over K being fired because K hasn't given the school a reason to fire him in 36 years.

Do you really think Cragg would take this job if he wasn't the ultimate decision maker? If he tries to fire someone and some fanboys in the administration or board try to veto it, we're looking for a new AD . . . again. And given our track record, the next one won't be as good as Cragg.

If Ponds comes back and we continue winning, all is well. But what if he doesn't, and we slump and somehow miss tournament? That would be four years of no success and a fifth one on the horizon. Mullin wouldn't be long for the coaching world if that were to happen.

I certainly don't anticipate that happening, but the way we are constructed makes us the most precarious 14-3 team in the nation.

I'd been predicting 27 wins headed into the Big Dance for a while now, but it wouldn't take much for it to all come crashing down.[/quote]

It's funny, but you project that the next AD won't be as good as Cragg, but Cragg has never been an AD before, and while the initial vibe is positive, no one can point to a single accomplishment at Duke that is attributed to Mike or an accomplishment here that is proving to be transformative.

I believe Cragg will prove to be a very good hire, but he's never been in this position before so we will have to see, right?

If a coaching change is necessitated it will involve more than Mike, that's for certain and he knows that. It would be made in concert with Gempeshaw and sekect BOT members and probably Oliva. As it should be.

27 wins is not happening. You do realize we play 31 games, and already have 3 losses. I think at the top end 12-6, losing to Duke away, and a 12-0 OOC start would put us at 24 wins. I haven't wavered from 22 or 23 since preseason and if Ponds is healthy, is attainable
 
Last edited:
I am as eager, frustrated and hopeful as any fellow poster to garner Ws - at least 20+ and to win something in the BE Tournanent and to not only make but to win something in the NCAAs.
Putting all the hopes and speculation aside, we can only wait and see the actual outcome.
I do like Chris Muliin’s take on Ws and especially Ls. Just get on with the next game. Loses (of games and of Shamorie) are part of the season package so deal with and get over them.
Hope for 20+ AND a few tournament Ws!!!
All the best.
 
There was a time when programs could afford to risk some early season losses by playing talented but mistake prone freshman. The theory being that your team would be stronger for the conference season, and stronger still for the conference tournament. Plus, teams that finished the season on a run would fare better on selection Sunday. Seems like the weaker conference schedule required a clean sweep, which means go with your most consistent. With Trimble, you know what you are getting. So that seemed to be the thinking of the staff. The upside for Williams seems far greater, but you take the good with the bad. For a team so starving for size, I wonder if other staffs would have found Roberts minutes in the OOC schedule, and try to build some foundation to use him for some minutes during the conference season.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Beast of the East" post=315158][quote="L J S A" post=315157][quote="Beast of the East" post=315153]Let's not be foolish enough to think that the AD operates in complete autonomy. One thing I like about Mike is that he understands what it's like to have an iconic coach. An AD of Duke has little control over firing Coach K because of his track record as a coach.[/quote]

Coach K is an iconic coach for his coaching. Mullin is an iconic player who took up coaching. There's a big difference.

It doesn't really matter that the Duke AD has little control over K being fired because K hasn't given the school a reason to fire him in 36 years.

Do you really think Cragg would take this job if he wasn't the ultimate decision maker? If he tries to fire someone and some fanboys in the administration or board try to veto it, we're looking for a new AD . . . again. And given our track record, the next one won't be as good as Cragg.

If Ponds comes back and we continue winning, all is well. But what if he doesn't, and we slump and somehow miss tournament? That would be four years of no success and a fifth one on the horizon. Mullin wouldn't be long for the coaching world if that were to happen.

I certainly don't anticipate that happening, but the way we are constructed makes us the most precarious 14-3 team in the nation.

I'd been predicting 27 wins headed into the Big Dance for a while now, but it wouldn't take much for it to all come crashing down.[/quote]

It's funny, but you project that the next AD won't be as good as Cragg, but Cragg has never been an AD before, and while the initial vibe is positive, no one can point to a single accomplishment at Duke that is attributed to Mike or an accomplishment here that is proving to be transformative.

I believe Cragg will prove to be a very good hire, but he's never been in this position before so we will have to see, right?

If a coaching change is necessitated it will involve more than Mike, that's for certain and he knows that. It would be made in concert with Gempeshaw and sekect BOT members and probably Oliva. As it should be.

27 wins is not happening. You do realize we play 31 games, and already have 3 losses. I think at the top end 12-6, losing to Duke away, and a 12-0 OOC start would put us at 24 wins. I haven't wavered from 22 or 23 since preseason and if Ponds is healthy, is attainable[/quote]

I agree Beast, I thought 23-8 before the season started and it's still attainable as long as Ponds in healthy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top