Admittedly, I have a little bit of a problem 
p) as for many years I have largely run a daily Google search on new materials/articles about the Johnnies. With that said, I only just saw this article -- even though it was published three days ago. I'm pasting below a link to the article, as well as my comments (to the author). In short, it strikes me as being fairly comprehensive with one very notable exception, and also unnecessarily cynical.
MBaldi Comments:
"While the tone strikes me as a little unnecessarily cynical, the article shows some nice research and analysis on stats and the chronology of last season.
In light of the above, however, I'm confused about the lack of any meaningful mention or analysis of Simeon Wilcher -- who has a real chance of starting, or, at the very least, being the 6th man and having a breakout season. The article's sole mention of him, without any background info or lead-in, is the following: "[t]hree returning rotation players, maybe four depending on how you feel about Simeon Wilcher. . . ." Please explain why you completely dismiss his role when his minutes and role were not much less than two of the other three returnees (Brady and Zuby)?
Also, a sentence or two on Rueben Prey is clearly warranted. While I understand that his skills are untested in the U.S. and that he was "late" in joining the team, he's a top-European prospect who many "experts" have noted has NBA-level potential.
Finally, it's obviously up to you as the author, but in the future, I would suggest doing your best to stay away from those stale cheap shots, e.g., "For all of [Pitino's] foibles and missteps away from the basketball court...." In my opinion, they don't do anything to add to the article and only undermine the merits of a largely otherwise well-informed analysis."
p) as for many years I have largely run a daily Google search on new materials/articles about the Johnnies. With that said, I only just saw this article -- even though it was published three days ago. I'm pasting below a link to the article, as well as my comments (to the author). In short, it strikes me as being fairly comprehensive with one very notable exception, and also unnecessarily cynical.
2024-25 Big East Men’s Basketball Summer Check-In: St. John’s Red Storm
It took until mid-February for Rick Pitino to figure out his team last year. What will be different with just three returning rotation players?
www.anonymouseagle.com
2024-25 Big East Men’s Basketball Summer Check-In: St. John’s Red Storm
It took until mid-February for Rick Pitino to figure out his team last year. What will be different with just three returning rotation players?
www.anonymouseagle.com
MBaldi Comments:
"While the tone strikes me as a little unnecessarily cynical, the article shows some nice research and analysis on stats and the chronology of last season.
In light of the above, however, I'm confused about the lack of any meaningful mention or analysis of Simeon Wilcher -- who has a real chance of starting, or, at the very least, being the 6th man and having a breakout season. The article's sole mention of him, without any background info or lead-in, is the following: "[t]hree returning rotation players, maybe four depending on how you feel about Simeon Wilcher. . . ." Please explain why you completely dismiss his role when his minutes and role were not much less than two of the other three returnees (Brady and Zuby)?
Also, a sentence or two on Rueben Prey is clearly warranted. While I understand that his skills are untested in the U.S. and that he was "late" in joining the team, he's a top-European prospect who many "experts" have noted has NBA-level potential.
Finally, it's obviously up to you as the author, but in the future, I would suggest doing your best to stay away from those stale cheap shots, e.g., "For all of [Pitino's] foibles and missteps away from the basketball court...." In my opinion, they don't do anything to add to the article and only undermine the merits of a largely otherwise well-informed analysis."
