Cooley versus Anderson

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really liked Lavin overall. I thought he was good for SJU. Unfortunately we caught him at a bad time in his life when he had an illness derail him for quite a while and then his father dying. I think from that point he was left a bit too fragile and I think unable to really devote himself the same way as when he took the job. Our recruiting took a hit after that and wasn’t the same.

I also thought that Lavin also made some staff choices that weren’t amazing and we could have used another recruiter or so, especially after he was out a year.

Overall his record was good. I just think he got derailed, distracted and didn’t have a strong enough recruiting staff overall to compensate for his derailment.

I think going back to broadcasting was the right move for him at this point in his career. He’s good at it and I’m not sure he was in the mental state at that time to continue the grind of college ball.

Overall though he was a good coach that did a nice job overall. He just got the SJU jinx.
 
[quote="Roamer" post=378779]I think we all need a dose of reality as fans. We are aiming for consistent sweet 16/final 4 teams when in reality we should really really be happy just to make the tourney each year and count that as a success.[/quote]

After the last 20 years.... NCAAs 3 out of every 5 years with 1 win....post season 4 out of every 5 years should be considered a success.
 
[quote="RedmanMike" post=378794]I think Lavin gets a bad rap on here by some people. He was a good recruiter (not great, but good) and a good face of the program with the media. And he pushed to upgrade the program in terms of travel, facilities, training etc. He clearly was a huge factor in getting Norm's players to maximize their collective abilities in his first season - and I still believe that could have been a special team that made a good run if DJ didn't get hurt.

That said, I think his fourth year was by far his most talented team - and that team under-performed terribly. The should have easily been a NCAA tournament team, not a team that gets blown out in the first round of the NIT.

I think what you saw with Lavin is what you would get every year had he remained - probably 20-22 wins a year, hanging around the bubble, make the Dance every couple of years with a mediocre seed and an early exit in the NCAAs. That's not awful, and it's better than we've done since he left, but I like to think we should hope for more.

I think the Mullin hiring was an attempt to shoot for the stars. Maybe the Crown Prince of the St. John's program could lead us to even greater heights, with his NBA pedigree and HoF credentials. It didn't work out that way, and those on this board who feel we should have stuck with Lavin aren't crazy.

Personally, I think that after all of this upheaval we actually now have the best coach we have had since Looie retired. Of course, CMA is now stuck with a full rebuild and all of us have to be patient yet again.[/quote]

It wasn't necessarily firing Lavin that was the mistake, but it was when we did it.

There were some on here, and in the media, that wanted Lavin gone after the Robert Morris loss. I wasn't one of those, but I could understand it. I also said at the time, that if you were going to bring him back for year 5, then they should have extended him right there. Make sure that he was back for year 6, and give him a chance to build a team, again.

If they would have fired him after year 4, the new coach would have had what he had, which is a nice club to win some games in year 1, and hopefully parlay that, into some recruiting victories. Firing him after year 5 made the job tough (100X more so for an inexperienced man like Mullin), because you have to go off the scrap heap just to get enough players for year 1. That was doomed to fail, IMO.

Anderson did not exactly have a full cupboard this year either, but Heron, LJ, Williams, and Roberts were all considered to be better then Balamou and Jones, who were the top returnees Mullin's first year.

So, my issue RE: Lavin is when the plug was pulled on him. IMO, we have never really recovered from that.
 
[quote="SJU61982" post=378798][quote="RedmanMike" post=378794]I think Lavin gets a bad rap on here by some people. He was a good recruiter (not great, but good) and a good face of the program with the media. And he pushed to upgrade the program in terms of travel, facilities, training etc. He clearly was a huge factor in getting Norm's players to maximize their collective abilities in his first season - and I still believe that could have been a special team that made a good run if DJ didn't get hurt.

That said, I think his fourth year was by far his most talented team - and that team under-performed terribly. The should have easily been a NCAA tournament team, not a team that gets blown out in the first round of the NIT.

I think what you saw with Lavin is what you would get every year had he remained - probably 20-22 wins a year, hanging around the bubble, make the Dance every couple of years with a mediocre seed and an early exit in the NCAAs. That's not awful, and it's better than we've done since he left, but I like to think we should hope for more.

I think the Mullin hiring was an attempt to shoot for the stars. Maybe the Crown Prince of the St. John's program could lead us to even greater heights, with his NBA pedigree and HoF credentials. It didn't work out that way, and those on this board who feel we should have stuck with Lavin aren't crazy.

Personally, I think that after all of this upheaval we actually now have the best coach we have had since Looie retired. Of course, CMA is now stuck with a full rebuild and all of us have to be patient yet again.[/quote]

It wasn't necessarily firing Lavin that was the mistake, but it was when we did it.

There were some on here, and in the media, that wanted Lavin gone after the Robert Morris loss. I wasn't one of those, but I could understand it. I also said at the time, that if you were going to bring him back for year 5, then they should have extended him right there. Make sure that he was back for year 6, and give him a chance to build a team, again.

If they would have fired him after year 4, the new coach would have had what he had, which is a nice club to win some games in year 1, and hopefully parlay that, into some recruiting victories. Firing him after year 5 made the job tough (100X more so for an inexperienced man like Mullin), because you have to go off the scrap heap just to get enough players for year 1. That was doomed to fail, IMO.

Anderson did not exactly have a full cupboard this year either, but Heron, LJ, Williams, and Roberts were all considered to be better then Balamou and Jones, who were the top returnees Mullin's first year.

So, my issue RE: Lavin is when the plug was pulled on him. IMO, we have never really recovered from that.[/quote]

We fired him at the right time, In my opinion. He was done
 
Much is made of how bare a cupboard is when a new coach takes over. But isn't it almost always bare? Usually when coaches are fired or leave, their key players transfer out. Seems like 2011 was an exception.
 
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=378800]San Diego and Dayton don’t play in the BE . Big difference .[/quote]

Yeah, as I doubt either team could hold their own in the Big East. :huh:
 
[quote="Redman#13" post=378696]Dayton and SDSU have one 4 star on the roster and are in the top 10. Stop with the you only need 4 and 5s to compete. Coaching up, game planning, culture, stability lead to success. See the attachment for the breakdown of recruits of teams in the top 10[/quote]

Texas Tech only had one top 100 player on their team a season ago in Brandone Francis (#31), and he was a redshirt Senior who transferred from Florida.

In 2017-2018, Michigan had two players, from their National Runner Up team, in the top 100 (sophomore Zavier Simpson #54 and frosh Jordan Poole #99), and Charles Matthews (#50) who transferred from Kentucky after one season.
 
It would be nice to consistently get 4 and 5 star players, but there are a number of things that make that difficult:
1. St. John's of now is no where near the SJU of old. Whatever cachet the university had ended near the end of Jarvis time here. When you hear every color commentator at every network game get nostalgic about 1984 and Chris Mullin, and has nothing good to say about SJU's recent history.you have a problem.
2. The competition for 5 star players can be dirty. Not every 5 star, but enough. I am glad SJU runs a clean program. I think you can still win that way, but it isn't easy.
3. There are a lot of incentives big programs can offer legally that give them an advantage
4. Our bread and butter of recruiting in our backyard is not what it used to be 30 years ago. Every game is televised, so friends and family can watch a NY kid play on TV even if he was at Wisconsin. A lot of 18 years old just want out of the city for awhile.

So how does the school compete? Get good quality young men that work hard on and off the court. Work to get the 5 star players, but understand that they will land here only if they have a huge connection to staying home or have been close to CMA or one of his assistants for years. Parents and guardians want to be certain their kids will be in a safe environment and treated like family.

In 1994, 2 of the top 5 high school players in the country signed with SJU. They played together for 4 years and played in 1 NCAA game, and lost. And both had very good college careers. The world is also littered with 5 star recruits that never panned out or caused disruption in the locker room. Sure we would all love to get the best, but it's no guarantee for success.

Last season, Ponds, Simon, and L.J. were 4 star recruits. So was Greg Williams. Heron was a 5 star. They got blown out in the play in game. Again, all were good to excellent college players.

I'm not as worried about the number of stars a player has in high school as much as how many stars you would give him as a junior in college. CMA knew the disadvantages when he signed his contract. I still think he will succeed.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Brian3" post=378797][quote="Roamer" post=378779]I think we all need a dose of reality as fans. We are aiming for consistent sweet 16/final 4 teams when in reality we should really really be happy just to make the tourney each year and count that as a success.[/quote]

After the last 20 years.... NCAAs 3 out of every 5 years with 1 win....post season 4 out of every 5 years should be considered a success.[/quote]

Hey, I'd be happy if we could avoid playing Wed. night, in the Big East Tournament. Right now, it is the Vincentian Invitational.
 
Las Vegan wants to avoid playing Wed in the big east tournament. With Conn joining next year there will probably be three games Wed with only the top five teams getting byes making it even tougher to avoid playing Wed.
 
[quote="MJDinkins" post=378812][quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=378800]San Diego and Dayton don’t play in the BE . Big difference .[/quote]

Yeah, as I doubt either team could hold their own in the Big East. :huh:[/quote]

That's why we need to be in a conference we can dominate.
 
[quote="newsman13" post=378917]

That's why we need to be in a conference we can dominate.[/quote]

Recruiting doesn't stay at Big East level if you drop to MAAC level.

Attendance doesn't stay at Big East levels for MAAC games.

Cut of conference revenue doesn't stay at Big East levels for MAAC.

MAAC teams can't afford to play at MSG.
 
[quote="L J S A" post=378920][quote="newsman13" post=378917]

That's why we need to be in a conference we can dominate.[/quote]

Recruiting doesn't stay at Big East level if you drop to MAAC level.

Attendance doesn't stay at Big East levels for MAAC games.

Cut of conference revenue doesn't stay at Big East levels for MAAC.

MAAC teams can't afford to play at MSG.[/quote]

I wouldn't look to leave the Big East, but if I'm the Big East, I give serious consideration to kicking us out. The only thing we give them is an in with MSG, but if MSG ever decides to end that, we would have nothing (spare me the NYC market - we're a pro town, pure and simple). Take away MSG (which the Big East would probably still get to use for the Big East Tournament, although it would probably be more expensive, and maybe not every year), and we're not much different then where Temple football was, when the old Big East gave them the boot.

Ditto DePaul, except their new arena gave them a minimum 5 year window, IMO (this is year 3).
 
[quote="newsman13" post=378917][quote="MJDinkins" post=378812][quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=378800]San Diego and Dayton don’t play in the BE . Big difference .[/quote]

Yeah, as I doubt either team could hold their own in the Big East. :huh:[/quote]

That's why we need to be in a conference we can dominate.[/quote]

You're delusional.
 
[quote="Moose" post=378924]I didn’t think this site could get any weirder.

But here we go[/quote]

No kidding! From one person constantly having delusions of moving to the MAAC while the other, whom last week was on the cusp of a meltdown, has finally gone Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson's character in 'The Shining') as he sounds off about the Johnnies potentially needing to receive the boot from the Big East.

I think a few of y'all need to take time out from the forum.
 
Last edited:
[quote="newsman13" post=378917][quote="MJDinkins" post=378812][quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=378800]San Diego and Dayton don’t play in the BE . Big difference .[/quote]

Yeah, as I doubt either team could hold their own in the Big East. :huh:[/quote]

That's why we need to be in a conference we can dominate.[/quote]
Would have to be a conference of one.
 
[quote="MJDinkins" post=378931][quote="Moose" post=378924]I didn’t think this site could get any weirder.

But here we go[/quote]

No kidding! From one person constantly having delusions of moving to the MAAC while the other, whom last week was on the cusp of a meltdown, has finally gone Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson's character in 'The Shining') as he sounds off about the Johnnies potentially needing to receive the boot from the Big East.

I think a few of y'all need to take time out from the forum.[/quote]

To be clear: The Big East won't kick us out as long as we still have MSG. I have also said in the past, that it might not be in MSG's best interest to keep us around, or the fact that we have such an unfriendly deal with them, may not be in our best interests financially, either.

After that, we struggle to fill CA. Creighton sells out their 17,000 seat building every night (even in years where they haven't been nearly as great as this year). That makes it difficult to compete.

I don't want to leave the Big East, but the choice may get taken out of our hands one day, although I hope it does not.

I wouldn't say I was on the cusp of a meltdown last week. More like the meltdown full-on happened, at least in the fan sense. Regardless of preseason expectations, I only have so many losses in me before I crack. That's not healthy for a lot of people, but for me, it is. I can handle it in baseball, because I know we will play again the next day, but when you only play twice a week, losing almost every game gets tough, after awhile.
 
Last edited:
Lavin in a nutshell......

1.) Off the charts interpersonal skills

2.) Strong ability to recruit

3.) Below average coaching acumen

4.) For reasons that are unclear, just stopped working/recruiting
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top