Back on topic of Anderson...
can anyone really describe what his offense is centered on?
can anyone really describe what his offense is centered on?
Anderson - is he really the guy ?
- Thread starter RedStormNC
- Start date
SJU Double Alumn
Member
Yes. His offensive system is fine. The problem is not enough good players who can make shots.RedStormNC post=457564 said:
beast of the east
Active member
IDRAFT post=457557 said:
Reggie and Rencher transferring to st John's to join super blue chip Wayne McKoy was gigantic news. That team got as high as #5 in the rankings I believe.
A system which gets you layups seems fine to me. Unless you have an entire team that can't hit a layup. I coached a team like that once - of course they were fourth grade girls. We lost a lot too, and I'm pretty sure all the parents thought it was my fault so there you go, I guess.Proud Alumn post=457565 said:
Last edited:
beast of the east
Active member
IDRAFT post=457571 said:
A few times we led smith and wusu to the hoop where they were swatted by uconn bigs
I'm not counting blocked shots, just misses. Let me put it this way. At the last media timeout, I ran to the mens room and on my way out I tossed my used paper towel in the garbage from an inch away. And I wondered - what's the chances any of the team could do that?Beast of the East post=457574 said:
Johnny Rapper
Well-known member
HOW MANY YEARS SHOULD A St. JOHN'S COACH BE GIVEN TO MAKE THE DANCE?
Since today's success in the college basketball world for Power Conference teams is predicated on getting a bid to the NCAA tourney, how many years should a St. John's coach be given to attain this goal? And no, this does not just apply to Coach Anderson but any coach the school would hire.
Consider that both coaches Lavin and Mullin had at least one invite in their tenure and Norm in a longer tenure had none. And while I realize there will always be extenuating circumstances claimed by the defenders of a particular coaching regime, should an invite not be a standard of accomplishment as part of the job?
I know I'm new here but I'm really curious how most of you feel about this?
Thanks
Since today's success in the college basketball world for Power Conference teams is predicated on getting a bid to the NCAA tourney, how many years should a St. John's coach be given to attain this goal? And no, this does not just apply to Coach Anderson but any coach the school would hire.
Consider that both coaches Lavin and Mullin had at least one invite in their tenure and Norm in a longer tenure had none. And while I realize there will always be extenuating circumstances claimed by the defenders of a particular coaching regime, should an invite not be a standard of accomplishment as part of the job?
I know I'm new here but I'm really curious how most of you feel about this?
Thanks
For SJU, given our mediocrity, 4 years.
For a more regularly winning program, 2-3 years.
For a more regularly winning program, 2-3 years.
Last edited:
Johnny Rapper
Well-known member
But if you read the post, I specifically said that this was not about Coach Anderson but a general question for any coach of hire. I don’t understand why it was put in this thread?Paultzman post=457606 said:If you comb through the Is Mike Anderson Right Guy thread you’ll get a sense. Hopefully we don’t have to go through an encoreJermane Attoil post=457602 said:
SJU Double Alumn
Member
Because it is the same conversation for all substantive purposes.Jermane Attoil post=457609 said:But if you read the post, I specifically said that this was not about Coach Anderson but a general question for any coach of hire. I don’t understand why it was put in this thread?Paultzman post=457606 said:If you comb through the Is Mike Anderson Right Guy thread you’ll get a sense. Hopefully we don’t have to go through an encoreJermane Attoil post=457602 said:
Every hire was different.Jermane Attoil post=457602 said:
To me, years without an NCAA Tournament bid are a factor, but not the be-all, end-all. Obviously, anyone would have do so eventually, but I don't put a set number in mind, usually.
I knew the pressure was never on Norm to win. Father Harrington wanted to restore integrity to the program, and he knew he had no trouble with Norm, in that department. Reportedly, Monasch had to push very hard to get Harrington to make a change, and wanted to do it the year before, but was overruled.
I thought Lavin did a good job, on the whole. I liked that he brought in assistants who covered up his weaknesses, not guys who were just extensions of what he wanted to do (Chiles was, but that's OK - Lavin's strength was recruiting, and you need more then one guy to do that). I don't think he did a great job the year that whole crop of recruits were juniors. There was no reason for that team not to make the NCAA Tournament. He actually did a better job the next year, but I didn't like letting him go after that season, when the whole team was about to be turned over. Now, you can fault him for the team being in that position (certainly justified), but to me, and I said this at the time, if you didn't fire him after they were all juniors (and I don't think I would have, but you could justify it, IMO), then he needed to be given a 2 year extension, to try to work through this. I think he would have had more effort and success recruiting, had that been done.
I was hoping that Mullin had forgotten more basketball then most people knew, but even if that was the case, you could tell by the second year that he wasn't prepared for the recruiting grind, and wasn't willing to learn about it. I also think that dispute between Slice and Matt A. looked bad on him. In actuality, both were right (Slice wanted to recruit freshman, Matt A. transfers - there should be room for both), but for that to get as public as it did was a bad look for all. Fortunately, most people on here were noticing this stuff pretty early on, so I didn't have to be as vocal about my disapproval of Mullin, as I have been of Anderson.
I will admit that Anderson is, for me, a victim of 20+ years without an NCAA Tournament win for this program, and also carrying a reputation for things he didn't do while at Arkansas (I tend to look extra closely at those types of things). Unfortunately, that reputation does not appear to be unwarranted.
The problem is, if we were to make a change after this year (and I'm still not sure where I stand on that, even though I think Anderson has done a terrible job this year), I admit, this would not be an attractive job. It's a good thing I wouldn't be in charge of any search, because my patience has worn thin. The new coach, whoever he is, would have to show solid results in year one, and not just squeaking out a .500 overall season, at that.
So, basically, you need somebody who's a little crazy (in a good way). Not a certifiable nut, but guys like Anderson may be too mentally sane for the job (and I do believe that Anderson is a good, honest man, in a cesspool of evil that is college recruiting - that doesn't help). Obviously, that would lead us to the man who's name has been mentioned here the most, but if not him, then who? Chris Mack and Sean Miller carry baggage (though it may be worth putting up a fight against the NCAA with them in charge, as it may be our only way), and if not them, that leads you with options like Mark Schmidt or King Rice. Good coaches, who may very well have success here, but are no sure thing.
Last edited:
Here's the bottom line imho. CMA's first year was at least a push. Last year he overachieved unless you are of the view that being voted BE coach of the year by his peers is meaningless which would be fairly laughable. This year, barring a miraculous finish, will be a clear disappointment. In no way, shape or form does that justify considering changing coaches at this time, especially in a program with our recent lack of stability.
What I don't understand is how fans of the program can think it is constructive to constantly be feeding threads like this and especially threads questioning why recruits would want to come to SJU. We all agree we need more talent and let's at least give coach a chance to see if he can do that. Posh & Wusu were actually pretty good recruits, last year so/so based on results to date. Next year is key but staff deserves our support unless and until it is clear it is not warranted imho.
What I don't understand is how fans of the program can think it is constructive to constantly be feeding threads like this and especially threads questioning why recruits would want to come to SJU. We all agree we need more talent and let's at least give coach a chance to see if he can do that. Posh & Wusu were actually pretty good recruits, last year so/so based on results to date. Next year is key but staff deserves our support unless and until it is clear it is not warranted imho.
Last edited:
My only issue with bringing the core back next year is, has the losing become so ingrained and habitual with this group, that it's going to carry over? Is it a good thing that players like AJ Storr are going to learn from these guys?NCJohnnie post=457637 said:
Usually though, when a team does bring back most of their players, they do get at least a little better. I just wonder how much, after all the losing.
SJU61982 wrote:
My only issue with bringing the core back next year is, has the losing become so ingrained and habitual with this group, that it's going to carry over? Is it a good thing that players like AJ Storr are going to learn from these guys?
Usually though, when a team does bring back most of their players, they do get at least a little better. I just wonder how much, after all the losing.
Fair point, but sometimes you learn by losing, especially a lot of close losses like this team has had. I'm always overly optimistic but really like returning core of Posh, Wusu, Wheeler, Soriano,.Stanley, hopefully Pinzon & Storr. Need two good transfers and we can be very good.
My only issue with bringing the core back next year is, has the losing become so ingrained and habitual with this group, that it's going to carry over? Is it a good thing that players like AJ Storr are going to learn from these guys?
Usually though, when a team does bring back most of their players, they do get at least a little better. I just wonder how much, after all the losing.
Fair point, but sometimes you learn by losing, especially a lot of close losses like this team has had. I'm always overly optimistic but really like returning core of Posh, Wusu, Wheeler, Soriano,.Stanley, hopefully Pinzon & Storr. Need two good transfers and we can be very good.
Pretty much all of these kids came from winning programs and this is their first taste of loosing consistently. It never feels good.SJU61982 post=457641 said:
I hope and expect that the returning kids will have a burning desire to get back to winning, maybe even have a chip on their shoulder that carries over to the newcomers.
If the core returns and there is little in the way of outgoing transfers we will be improved next season. You can count half a dozen games that we lost which could have been wins. The players will bond and improve and learn from their losses.
i am not at all worried about the loosing becoming ingrained. Rarely has the team given up and often we are in it in the last minute of the game. The players desperately want to win.