a lot of endlessly repetitive chatter

[quote="Boo Harvey" post=292747][quote="fun" post=292727][quote="Boo Harvey" post=292723]Witty retorts that sarcastically take issue with opinions expressed by others require little effort. It’s much easier to belittle somebody else’s thought than to express and ultimately support one of your own.[/quote]

Thanks Oprah, I'll keep that in mind moving forward.

Fun, if you’re suggesting that Mullin is a good coach then articulate that and provide some support.
Click to expand...

I didn't suggest anything. The other guy said that Mullin was deficient as an in game strategist. I asked him for examples. He said that the team was not crashing the boards and moving the ball. Those are not strategies and if they are strategies not doing them is probably not Mullin's strategies and if they are they're best addressed at practice. If you think saying "rebound" and "move the ball" is strategy we have a fundamental disagreement about what the word strategy means.

If you have some other opinion please express it.
Click to expand...

I did express it. You seem to have a problem with the method of delivery. Complain to the moderators about my use of irony, perhaps I'll be de platformed.

But these attempts at sarcasm add little value to the Board.
Click to expand...

Value to the board, quite, like your post telling me how to post, this gem right here. Priceless. Value to this 40 page thread about a rumor about an assistant coach where the same seven people say the same three things over and over again for weeks on end. And the stuff about lobster roles and Lost. I'd hate to detract from that.

You want my opinion? My opinion is that if my half a dozen posts a week are destroying your enjoyment of this forum, then you take me significantly more seriously that I take myself and substantially more seriously than I take you.

Good day.[/quote]

For some reason your posts are more annoying to me than the others. Perhaps it’s because you write them with a snarky self-satisfaction that you are the smartest guy on the Board, a fact which you yourself would and probably have conceded is no great accomplishment. Just seems to me there are better places to show off your wit that a SJU basketball chat board, but who am I to judge. Whatever floats your boat.[/quote] [attachment=329]George-Carlin-–-Never-argue-with-an-idiot.-They-will-only-bring-you-down...-660x330.jpg[/attachment] [attachment=329]
 
Last edited:
Fun write: "If SJ needs Mike Rice to formulate and implement a plan to achieve success they should fire Mullin and hire him".

If St. John's fired it's favorite son and moved on to it's 8th coaching search I'm not sure even Mike Rice would be interested in the job because at St. John's the "Fish Stinks from the Head Down".
First we had Father Harry and now we have Bobby Bean Counter. We haven't had a competent A.D. since Moses dropped 10 of the 20 commandments.
After Mullin we would be lucky to hire a Mike Rice.
 
[quote="fun" post=292727][quote="Boo Harvey" post=292723]Witty retorts that sarcastically take issue with opinions expressed by others require little effort. It’s much easier to belittle somebody else’s thought than to express and ultimately support one of your own.[/quote]

Thanks Oprah, I'll keep that in mind moving forward.

Fun, if you’re suggesting that Mullin is a good coach then articulate that and provide some support.
Click to expand...

I didn't suggest anything. The other guy said that Mullin was deficient as an in game strategist. I asked him for examples. He said that the team was not crashing the boards and moving the ball. Those are not strategies and if they are strategies not doing them is probably not Mullin's strategies and if they are they're best addressed at practice. If you think saying "rebound" and "move the ball" is strategy we have a fundamental disagreement about what the word strategy means.

If you have some other opinion please express it.
Click to expand...

I did express it. You seem to have a problem with the method of delivery. Complain to the moderators about my use of irony, perhaps I'll be de platformed.

But these attempts at sarcasm add little value to the Board.
Click to expand...

Value to the board, quite, like your post telling me how to post, this gem right here. Priceless. Value to this 40 page thread about a rumor about an assistant coach where the same seven people say the same three things over and over again for weeks on end. And the stuff about lobster roles and Lost. I'd hate to detract from that.

You want my opinion? My opinion is that if my half a dozen posts a week are destroying your enjoyment of this forum, then you take me significantly more seriously that I take myself and substantially more seriously than I take you.

Good day.[/quote] Just a matter of time before our spies catch you eating a lobster roll sans mayo

[attachment=330]18-lobster-hut-milford-connecticut-YELPLOBSTERROLL0517.jpg[/attachment]
 
[quote="fun" post=292745][quote="Chicago Days" post=292740]Not sure what you’re critiquing. Woeful 3-pt defense, lethargic offensive sets through a dismal 4-14 BEC 9th Place finish, and not adjusting to these deficiencies, would seem to qualify as tactics/strategies to work on during practices and hone during games for next season. The markedly improved roster will help, but also hiring an experienced AC would imo add great value to these efforts.[/quote]

I have no opinion about whether Mike Rice would be detrimental or beneficial to the over all trajectory of the SJU basketball program. And not being a college BB insider with moles and sources like so many of the well connected posters here I have no idea what Mitch Richmond does or doesn't do in practice or on the bench or recruiting wise
or relative to the aspirations of recruits who might want to study at the feet of a HOF BB player. I have no idea about it and furthermore no opinion. I don't care. As Norman Dale said: my team is on the court.

That said, here's what I'm critiquing.

You said: "we’ve been short-handed in in-game strategy."

I asked what those strategies were.

You cited

*improving D against the kick-back wide open 3

*improving ball movement

*not have 3 - 4 guys standing outside the arc ready to launch a 3

*[not] crashing the boards with intensity

One of those things - reliance on 3-point shooting - is a strategy. And it's one used to great effect by inter alia Villanova, Kansas and Dook. So anecdotal evidence suggests its not a bad strategy. The difference between them and us is execution: they make theirs and we don't.

Failing to close out on shooters is not a strategy, unless you think Mullin is telling his team "don't bother to close out on shooters." That would be bad strategy. Not bothering with rebounding is not a strategy, unless Mullin is saying - as dopey Steve Lavin once did: "Rebounding is over rated. Don't bother trying to rebound." That would be bad strategy, if that's what he's telling them. I doubt he is. I don't know whether Mullin will ever evolve into a quality college BB coach but I'm pretty sure he has a rudimentary understanding of the fundamentals of basketball, that he understands that rebounding and defense and ball movement are important.

What you're talking about - what you're calling strategy - is a failure of execution, which comprises a lack of talent and will and effort and experience on the part of the players and a failure on the part of the staff to impart to the players the importance of those things. It has nothing to do with strategy, a word that means "a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim." If SJ needs Mike Rice to formulate and implement a plan to achieve success they should fire Mullin and hire him.[/quote]


How isn't playing intense man-man & zone D not' strategy', or a 'plan'?
Doing that would greatly reduce those wide-open 3s that killed us last year.
(Many things did that to us last year, for sure.)
How isn't executing effective offensive sets, with crisp ball movement, not a 'plan' (practiced ad nauseam) that would lead to more wins?
How is a 'plan' to crash the boards, to teach the importance of that, not a 'plan' to improve our woeful rebounding differential last year--10th place in the BEC; how is that not a 'plan', not a tactic' to generate more success?
Sure, it's improving poor execution, but that's a 'tactical plan' to work on poor 'execution' and make 'adjustments during games.
Whether it's called strategy or tactics or plans, or improving play execution, it seems to role into a primary notion to me: honing a 'plan' to win by improving 'poor execution', and making in-game adjustments to that.
 
Chicago Days wrote: Fun wrote:
Chicago Days wrote: Not sure what you’re critiquing. Woeful 3-pt defense, lethargic offensive sets through a dismal 4-14 BEC 9th Place finish, and not adjusting to these deficiencies, would seem to qualify as tactics/strategies to work on during practices and hone during games for next season. The markedly improved roster will help, but also hiring an experienced AC would imo add great value to these efforts.

I have no opinion about whether Mike Rice would be detrimental or beneficial to the over all trajectory of the SJU basketball program. And not being a college BB insider with moles and sources like so many of the well connected posters here I have no idea what Mitch Richmond does or doesn't do in practice or on the bench or recruiting wise
or relative to the aspirations of recruits who might want to study at the feet of a HOF BB player. I have no idea about it and furthermore no opinion. I don't care. As Norman Dale said: my team is on the court.

That said, here's what I'm critiquing.

You said: "we’ve been short-handed in in-game strategy."

I asked what those strategies were.

You cited

*improving D against the kick-back wide open 3

*improving ball movement

*not have 3 - 4 guys standing outside the arc ready to launch a 3

*[not] crashing the boards with intensity

One of those things - reliance on 3-point shooting - is a strategy. And it's one used to great effect by inter alia Villanova, Kansas and Dook. So anecdotal evidence suggests its not a bad strategy. The difference between them and us is execution: they make theirs and we don't.

Failing to close out on shooters is not a strategy, unless you think Mullin is telling his team "don't bother to close out on shooters." That would be bad strategy. Not bothering with rebounding is not a strategy, unless Mullin is saying - as dopey Steve Lavin once did: "Rebounding is over rated. Don't bother trying to rebound." That would be bad strategy, if that's what he's telling them. I doubt he is. I don't know whether Mullin will ever evolve into a quality college BB coach but I'm pretty sure he has a rudimentary understanding of the fundamentals of basketball, that he understands that rebounding and defense and ball movement are important.

What you're talking about - what you're calling strategy - is a failure of execution, which comprises a lack of talent and will and effort and experience on the part of the players and a failure on the part of the staff to impart to the players the importance of those things. It has nothing to do with strategy, a word that means "a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim." If SJ needs Mike Rice to formulate and implement a plan to achieve success they should fire Mullin and hire him.



How isn't playing intense man-man & zone D not' strategy', or a 'plan'?
Doing that would greatly reduce those wide-open 3s that killed us last year.
(Many things did that to us last year, for sure.)
How isn't executing effective offensive sets, with crisp ball movement, not a 'plan' (practiced ad nauseam) that would lead to more wins?
How is a 'plan' to crash the boards, to teach the importance of that, not a 'plan' to improve our woeful rebounding differential last year--10th place in the BEC; how is that not a 'plan', not a tactic' to generate more success?
Sure, it's improving poor execution, but that's a 'tactical plan' to work on poor 'execution' and make 'adjustments during games.
Whether it's called strategy or tactics or plans, or improving play execution, it seems to role into a primary notion to me: honing a 'plan' to win by improving 'poor execution', and making in-game adjustments to that.

This whole argument of "strategy" vs. "execution" reminds me of that old Frank McGuire saying to the effect give me players versus coaches every time. We didn't have enough players last year. Hopefully we do this year. Regarding staff composition, if we can make a change that gets us better players, I am all for it.
 
Last edited:
Chris mullin and mitch richmond are doing a great job. All this talk about rice is annoying and insulting. All this frenetic blah blah blah is not something we would like to teach our student athletes. Our staff (including mitch) have set a great example for our athletes. Screaming and second guessing is not what we want from our players. Go St. Johns!
 
[quote="NCJohnnie" post=292758]Chicago Days wrote: Fun wrote:
Chicago Days wrote: Not sure what you’re critiquing. Woeful 3-pt defense, lethargic offensive sets through a dismal 4-14 BEC 9th Place finish, and not adjusting to these deficiencies, would seem to qualify as tactics/strategies to work on during practices and hone during games for next season. The markedly improved roster will help, but also hiring an experienced AC would imo add great value to these efforts.

I have no opinion about whether Mike Rice would be detrimental or beneficial to the over all trajectory of the SJU basketball program. And not being a college BB insider with moles and sources like so many of the well connected posters here I have no idea what Mitch Richmond does or doesn't do in practice or on the bench or recruiting wise
or relative to the aspirations of recruits who might want to study at the feet of a HOF BB player. I have no idea about it and furthermore no opinion. I don't care. As Norman Dale said: my team is on the court.

That said, here's what I'm critiquing.

You said: "we’ve been short-handed in in-game strategy."

I asked what those strategies were.

You cited

*improving D against the kick-back wide open 3

*improving ball movement

*not have 3 - 4 guys standing outside the arc ready to launch a 3

*[not] crashing the boards with intensity

One of those things - reliance on 3-point shooting - is a strategy. And it's one used to great effect by inter alia Villanova, Kansas and Dook. So anecdotal evidence suggests its not a bad strategy. The difference between them and us is execution: they make theirs and we don't.

Failing to close out on shooters is not a strategy, unless you think Mullin is telling his team "don't bother to close out on shooters." That would be bad strategy. Not bothering with rebounding is not a strategy, unless Mullin is saying - as dopey Steve Lavin once did: "Rebounding is over rated. Don't bother trying to rebound." That would be bad strategy, if that's what he's telling them. I doubt he is. I don't know whether Mullin will ever evolve into a quality college BB coach but I'm pretty sure he has a rudimentary understanding of the fundamentals of basketball, that he understands that rebounding and defense and ball movement are important.

What you're talking about - what you're calling strategy - is a failure of execution, which comprises a lack of talent and will and effort and experience on the part of the players and a failure on the part of the staff to impart to the players the importance of those things. It has nothing to do with strategy, a word that means "a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim." If SJ needs Mike Rice to formulate and implement a plan to achieve success they should fire Mullin and hire him.



How isn't playing intense man-man & zone D not' strategy', or a 'plan'?
Doing that would greatly reduce those wide-open 3s that killed us last year.
(Many things did that to us last year, for sure.)
How isn't executing effective offensive sets, with crisp ball movement, not a 'plan' (practiced ad nauseam) that would lead to more wins?
How is a 'plan' to crash the boards, to teach the importance of that, not a 'plan' to improve our woeful rebounding differential last year--10th place in the BEC; how is that not a 'plan', not a tactic' to generate more success?
Sure, it's improving poor execution, but that's a 'tactical plan' to work on poor 'execution' and make 'adjustments during games.
Whether it's called strategy or tactics or plans, or improving play execution, it seems to role into a primary notion to me: honing a 'plan' to win by improving 'poor execution', and making in-game adjustments to that.

This whole argument of "strategy" vs. "execution" reminds me of that old Frank McGuire saying to the effect give me players versus coaches every time. We didn't have enough players last year. Hopefully we do this year. Regarding staff composition, if we can make a change that gets us better players, I am all for it.[/quote]

Yes NCJohnnie, better players solves most issues. And the current roster is much stronger...and deeper...than it was last year, particularly if Heron plays.
Let the games begin!
 
[quote="johnny redman" post=292759]Chris mullin and mitch richmond are doing a great job. All this talk about rice is annoying and insulting. All this frenetic blah blah blah is not something we would like to teach our student athletes. Our staff (including mitch) have set a great example for our athletes. Screaming and second guessing is not what we want from our players. Go St. Johns![/quote]
Think we have finally located Mitch. :)
 
[quote="bamafan" post=292761][quote="johnny redman" post=292759]Chris mullin and mitch richmond are doing a great job. All this talk about rice is annoying and insulting. All this frenetic blah blah blah is not something we would like to teach our student athletes. Our staff (including mitch) have set a great example for our athletes. Screaming and second guessing is not what we want from our players. Go St. Johns![/quote]
Think we have finally located Mitch. :)[/quote] funniest thing I’ve read all summer !!!!!!
 
[quote="AlBovino" post=292769]They will continue to find something to be negative about, because that's who they are.[/quote]

Seems to me...
We are not a perfect program for sure.
There have been disappointments.
There has also been progress since April 2015.
We are set for a good year maybe even very good!
W have exciting players returning and a few talented ones coming on board.
Things in Red Srorm ville are not perfect. One can be optimistic AND realistic.
Focus on the “problems” and bitch and moan is an option as some posters show and perhaps relish in.
Focus on what’s positive and pleasant a better option for me.
I choose to enjoy 2018-19 and allow the season to unfold.
I also choose to cut back time here - too caustic and toxic at times.
I prefer our team to constitute a fun diversion not added drudgery from a simple college game.
If I seek added stress I can spend more time obsessing on my family, financial, health, aging parents, kids leaving the nest.
Let’s go St. John’s!!!
A shout out to the young players on our team!
Let’s dream of smiles, beer (or the beverage of your choice), lobster rolls lol
Blessings.
 
[quote="Chicago Days" post=292756]How isn't playing intense man-man & zone D not' strategy', or a 'plan'?
Doing that would greatly reduce those wide-open 3s that killed us last year.
(Many things did that to us last year, for sure.)
How isn't executing effective offensive sets, with crisp ball movement, not a 'plan' (practiced ad nauseam) that would lead to more wins?
How is a 'plan' to crash the boards, to teach the importance of that, not a 'plan' to improve our woeful rebounding differential last year--10th place in the BEC; how is that not a 'plan', not a tactic' to generate more success?
Sure, it's improving poor execution, but that's a 'tactical plan' to work on poor 'execution' and make 'adjustments during games.
Whether it's called strategy or tactics or plans, or improving play execution, it seems to role into a primary notion to me: honing a 'plan' to win by improving 'poor execution', and making in-game adjustments to that.[/quote]

I'm not going to argue with you about the meaning of common words. I'll content myself with noting how you're had to twist yourself into a rhetorical pretzel to defend your original assertion: "we’ve been short-handed in in-game strategy." I disagree with that statement. I find absurd the idea that SJ does not win games because of decisions Chris Mullin makes "in game."

Because in common parlance "in game strategy" relative to basketball means coaching decisions related to events occurring during the 40 minutes of game play: what defense to play when and when and if to switch defenses, which offensive sets to run when, use of time outs, player rotation and substitution, end of half and game situations - to foul or not to foul, subbing offense for defense - when and how to work the referees. And most critically whether to sit on the scorer's table. In game strategy is not "crisp ball movement ... practiced ad nauseam" because you can't and shouldn't practice during the game. During the game the team should be attempting to win by scoring more points than the team they're playing, they shouldn't be "practicing" so they can beat some other team they'll be playing in the future. I'd think that was self-evident. And if Mullin waits until during the game "to teach the importance" of rebounding, or to stress "improving poor execution," that's not going to be terribly effective, in the same way that teaching someone to swim while the boat is sinking is likely to lead to both parties drowning. What you're talking about is system and practice. It might well be that Mullin's system stinks and he has no idea how to run a practice - I have know way of knowing and suspect you don't either - and it may be that Mike Rice and his career .29 BE winning percentage is just the guy to take SJ to the next level by addressing those deficiencies. Personally I'd rather have more skilled, experienced players than a new assistant coach. As usual, YMMV.
 
I like the composition of the Team that we will put on the Court this Season . It’s a significant upgrade than what we finished with last Season . Heron and Figueroa are players that could have gone nearly anywhere they wanted . Hopefully Heron will play this season . I wonder if either of them were worried whether or not Mike Rice would be part of the Staff here ? I seriously doubt it . And , despite the drum beating campaign for his coming here as the salvation to future recruiting , maybe it was his 44-51 Rutgers BE Record that energized his supporters . I realize mentioning Rice’s Record at Rutgers will no doubt invoke Mullin’s Coaching Record , which those unfaithful will run up the flag pole instantly .. Consensus among those who try and post positively has been that Mullin gets a pass for year 1 . Year 2 was 14-19 and Year 3 was16-17 with Wins over National Champion Villanova and Number 4 , Duke . Figueroa and Heron are big upgrades from Owens and Yakwe , nice players but, flawed in many important aspects . And , B.B. recruiting being what it is , I have doubts that Rice has the goods to influence any of his 4-5 AAU players to follow him anywhere . I may be wrong but, so may be those who have nearly guaranteed his being able to do so . Time will tell ... Whether many want to accept it or not, the Top of the pyramid of this Program is Chris Mullin . Mike Rice , here or there isn’t going to change that ...
 
When CM was a player, no one outworked him.
As a head coach, the perception is that that work effort is not present. It seems as though we have one recruiter, one x and o's guy, and a head coach and assistant head coach that are lazy or absent on the recruiting circuit. Recruiting is key in college basketball. CM and MR need to step up or step out. Mike Rice can help fill the void when and if MR exits. Need to see that CM really wants to continue as our HC.
 
[quote="AlBovino" post=292769]They will continue to find something to be negative about, because that's who they are.[/quote]

Again, I mean we haven't won a tournament game in nearly 2 decades and the staff and admin are tripping over themselves on a daily basis at this point. Not sure why negativity from fans makes them bad people. How would you expect them to act based on our results? This is a sports team that never wins - if you are expecting kumbaya on here you're completely delusional.
 
Maybe posters have been negative because there are reasons to be. When was the last time we won an NCAA tourney game? Where has Mitch been this summer? We whiffed on a grad big 2 years in a row. And although we got Keita , we lost Owens. HS recruiting has been sub par. The schedule stinks. Staff make up is flawed. I think Mitch should be replaced or start working harder. W an eligible Heron, we can be very good, but let’s not make it like there is nothing to criticize, we are not Villanova.This is a message board ,we talk about the positives , negatives and vent. .Ironically Windy City and I posted the same thing simultaneously.
 
Last edited:
There continues to be a lot of old chatter, on a thread about a lot of chatter, with nothing new to chatter about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top