Cragg and the SJU “Culture”

[quote="SJUFAN2" post=336448][quote="Beast of the East" post=336445][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336431][quote="Beast of the East" post=336401]

So you see, when we don't cast aspersions, most of us can be rational when discussing how well the staff did this year with what they had. My impression was that the players play and coaches coach. Players who stink it up can't always be corrected by coaching, but in every case make the coaches look bad, and the coaches definitely looked bad at season's end.[/quote]

So its not the X's and the O's... its the Jimmy's and the Joe's?

I agree that coaches can only prepare their players and put them in a position to succeed. Players do have to execute.
I also agree that if all things are equal, the team with the better talent usually wins.

But Calipari would be working on his 12th title in a row if it was only about getting the most talented players. Coaching matters. At this level it matters a LOT.

I'll absolve this staff of all blame for the state of the program if you can point out to me 1 time this season Mullin took one of the starters out for taking a bad shot. Just one will do.

It shouldn't be hard, since this team hoisted more horrifically bad shots than any team I've ever seen outside of a rec league.[/quote]

Read again, carefully this time. Coaches are not absolved, not by a long shot. But all in all just about every one of our starters took ill advised shots, failed to make wide open looks, and stood around and watched while other teams rebounded. Certainly on the coaches heavily for this lousy brand of basketball, but upper classmen, which all 5 starters were, all culpable as well.[/quote]

I got it the first time, thanks. "Players play and coaches coach" and the wins pile up. Brilliant and simple equation.

So when a bunch of 20 year old players take bad shot after bad shot how do you correct that problem? Let them figure it out on their own? Of course not. You coach/teach them by yanking their ass out of the game and explaining to them what they are doing wrong so they can learn, adjust and grow as a player.

If you don't, then you are allowing them to learn the wrong lesson...that there is no such thing as a bad shot.

The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot.

I'm not sure which I'd consider worse, but I know that both are signs of bad coaching.[/quote]

Nothing I haven't said before except don't expect every coach, even great ones to light into a player for taking a bad shot. I've said there appears to be no recourse for undisciplined play but I'm not at practice. When your options off the bench are such a steep dropoff, it isn't like putting in Trimble is going to help.

If you want to say the same thing and proclaim it s different be my guest.
 
[quote="Beast of the East" post=336449][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336448][quote="Beast of the East" post=336445][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336431][quote="Beast of the East" post=336401]

So you see, when we don't cast aspersions, most of us can be rational when discussing how well the staff did this year with what they had. My impression was that the players play and coaches coach. Players who stink it up can't always be corrected by coaching, but in every case make the coaches look bad, and the coaches definitely looked bad at season's end.[/quote]

So its not the X's and the O's... its the Jimmy's and the Joe's?

I agree that coaches can only prepare their players and put them in a position to succeed. Players do have to execute.
I also agree that if all things are equal, the team with the better talent usually wins.

But Calipari would be working on his 12th title in a row if it was only about getting the most talented players. Coaching matters. At this level it matters a LOT.

I'll absolve this staff of all blame for the state of the program if you can point out to me 1 time this season Mullin took one of the starters out for taking a bad shot. Just one will do.

It shouldn't be hard, since this team hoisted more horrifically bad shots than any team I've ever seen outside of a rec league.[/quote]

Read again, carefully this time. Coaches are not absolved, not by a long shot. But all in all just about every one of our starters took ill advised shots, failed to make wide open looks, and stood around and watched while other teams rebounded. Certainly on the coaches heavily for this lousy brand of basketball, but upper classmen, which all 5 starters were, all culpable as well.[/quote]

I got it the first time, thanks. "Players play and coaches coach" and the wins pile up. Brilliant and simple equation.

So when a bunch of 20 year old players take bad shot after bad shot how do you correct that problem? Let them figure it out on their own? Of course not. You coach/teach them by yanking their ass out of the game and explaining to them what they are doing wrong so they can learn, adjust and grow as a player.

If you don't, then you are allowing them to learn the wrong lesson...that there is no such thing as a bad shot.

The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot.

I'm not sure which I'd consider worse, but I know that both are signs of bad coaching.[/quote]

Nothing I haven't said before except don't expect every coach, even great ones to light into a player for taking a bad shot. I've said there appears to be no recourse for undisciplined play but I'm not at practice. When your options off the bench are such a steep dropoff, it isn't like putting in Trimble is going to help.

If you want to say the same thing and proclaim it s different be my guest.[/quote]

Oh no. I definitely don't want to agree with that. Its all yours.

Your coaching philosophy is apparently very different from mine. For me, a program belongs to the HC. Players are just visiting. Nobody needs to be Bobby Knight when it comes to getting things their way, but there's a reason the same coaches have long term success. They run their program, it doesn't run them.

Put me in the group with Knight, Coach K, Izzo, etc etc etc. A coach should provide the team structure and direction. He should teach his players where the guardrails are early and as often as necessary so they don't have to explain it to them when it matters most. They'll already know. I think you yank your best player when he takes one too many bad shots early in the year and you replace him with anyone who won't take a bad shot, or a new guy who doesn't know that a bad shot is. This way you send the entire team a message about consequences for stupid decisions. I wouldn't care if it cost me a couple of W's early in the year. It will payoff in spades later on.

Plus side of teaching this lesson early on is threefold:
Star learns its not his team, its yours.
Rest of the regulars learn that there are consequences for playing selfish basketball (for everyone)
Your bench gets some valuable PT vs the cup cakes.

I look at it this way:
The coach is responsible for his staff.
The staff is responsible for teaching the style of play the coach wants to play, and developing players skill sets.
The players are responsible for playing within the structure provided.

In my book, if that breaks down anywhere, its ALL on the coaches. Either they can't coach, or they brought in kids who can't play as part of a team or in their system.

Since Mullin has been here I've seen zero structure to the offense and no consequences for playing bad basketball. That hasn't changed a lick in 4 years.

In my mind, there are only a few reasons that can be:
1) That's how the coach/staff wants to play.
2) The coach/staff doesn't have a clue and can't teach the game.
3) The players are running the asylum so they are free to do whatever they want without consequence.
4) The players have tuned out the staff and are freelancing.

You may want to apportion blame equally to players and coaches, or perhaps even more to the players for making the staff look so bad so often, but in my book every single reason I've listed is the coach/staffs responsibility to correct.

If they can't then they are either really bad at coaching, or they are really bad at talent evaluation/recruiting.

And regardless of which reason it is, they are in the wrong profession.
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=336456][quote="Beast of the East" post=336449][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336448][quote="Beast of the East" post=336445][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336431][quote="Beast of the East" post=336401]

So you see, when we don't cast aspersions, most of us can be rational when discussing how well the staff did this year with what they had. My impression was that the players play and coaches coach. Players who stink it up can't always be corrected by coaching, but in every case make the coaches look bad, and the coaches definitely looked bad at season's end.[/quote]

So its not the X's and the O's... its the Jimmy's and the Joe's?

I agree that coaches can only prepare their players and put them in a position to succeed. Players do have to execute.
I also agree that if all things are equal, the team with the better talent usually wins.

But Calipari would be working on his 12th title in a row if it was only about getting the most talented players. Coaching matters. At this level it matters a LOT.

I'll absolve this staff of all blame for the state of the program if you can point out to me 1 time this season Mullin took one of the starters out for taking a bad shot. Just one will do.

It shouldn't be hard, since this team hoisted more horrifically bad shots than any team I've ever seen outside of a rec league.[/quote]

Read again, carefully this time. Coaches are not absolved, not by a long shot. But all in all just about every one of our starters took ill advised shots, failed to make wide open looks, and stood around and watched while other teams rebounded. Certainly on the coaches heavily for this lousy brand of basketball, but upper classmen, which all 5 starters were, all culpable as well.[/quote]

I got it the first time, thanks. "Players play and coaches coach" and the wins pile up. Brilliant and simple equation.

So when a bunch of 20 year old players take bad shot after bad shot how do you correct that problem? Let them figure it out on their own? Of course not. You coach/teach them by yanking their ass out of the game and explaining to them what they are doing wrong so they can learn, adjust and grow as a player.

If you don't, then you are allowing them to learn the wrong lesson...that there is no such thing as a bad shot.

The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot.

I'm not sure which I'd consider worse, but I know that both are signs of bad coaching.[/quote]

Nothing I haven't said before except don't expect every coach, even great ones to light into a player for taking a bad shot. I've said there appears to be no recourse for undisciplined play but I'm not at practice. When your options off the bench are such a steep dropoff, it isn't like putting in Trimble is going to help.

If you want to say the same thing and proclaim it s different be my guest.[/quote]

Oh no. I definitely don't want to agree with that. Its all yours.

Your coaching philosophy is apparently very different from mine. For me, a program belongs to the HC. Players are just visiting. Nobody needs to be Bobby Knight when it comes to getting things their way, but there's a reason the same coaches have long term success. They run their program, it doesn't run them.

Put me in the group with Knight, Coach K, Izzo, etc etc etc. A coach should provide the team structure and direction. He should teach his players where the guardrails are early and as often as necessary so they don't have to explain it to them when it matters most. They'll already know. I think you yank your best player when he takes one too many bad shots early in the year and you replace him with anyone who won't take a bad shot, or a new guy who doesn't know that a bad shot is. This way you send the entire team a message about consequences for stupid decisions. I wouldn't care if it cost me a couple of W's early in the year. It will payoff in spades later on.

Plus side of teaching this lesson early on is threefold:
Star learns its not his team, its yours.
Rest of the regulars learn that there are consequences for playing selfish basketball (for everyone)
Your bench gets some valuable PT vs the cup cakes.

I look at it this way:
The coach is responsible for his staff.
The staff is responsible for teaching the style of play the coach wants to play, and developing players skill sets.
The players are responsible for playing within the structure provided.

In my book, if that breaks down anywhere, its ALL on the coaches. Either they can't coach, or they brought in kids who can't play as part of a team or in their system.

Since Mullin has been here I've seen zero structure to the offense and no consequences for playing bad basketball. That hasn't changed a lick in 4 years.

In my mind, there are only a few reasons that can be:
1) That's how the coach/staff wants to play.
2) The coach/staff doesn't have a clue and can't teach the game.
3) The players are running the asylum so they are free to do whatever they want without consequence.
4) The players have tuned out the staff and are freelancing.

You may want to apportion blame equally to players and coaches, or perhaps even more to the players for making the staff look so bad so often, but in my book every single reason I've listed is the coach/staffs responsibility to correct.

If they can't then they are either really bad at coaching, or they are really bad at talent evaluation/recruiting.

And regardless of which reason it is, they are in the wrong profession.[/quote]

As, I've said before..... Personnel has come and gone, but our way of playing has remained the same. I long noticed this style of play was being encouraged. I can't recall seeing any coaching moments, as I stated three seasons ago.

I find it hard four years of different personnel leads to identical play. The common denominator in all this is the staff.
 
[quote="MJDinkins" post=336463][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336456][quote="Beast of the East" post=336449][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336448][quote="Beast of the East" post=336445][quote="SJUFAN2" post=336431][quote="Beast of the East" post=336401]

So you see, when we don't cast aspersions, most of us can be rational when discussing how well the staff did this year with what they had. My impression was that the players play and coaches coach. Players who stink it up can't always be corrected by coaching, but in every case make the coaches look bad, and the coaches definitely looked bad at season's end.[/quote]

So its not the X's and the O's... its the Jimmy's and the Joe's?

I agree that coaches can only prepare their players and put them in a position to succeed. Players do have to execute.
I also agree that if all things are equal, the team with the better talent usually wins.

But Calipari would be working on his 12th title in a row if it was only about getting the most talented players. Coaching matters. At this level it matters a LOT.

I'll absolve this staff of all blame for the state of the program if you can point out to me 1 time this season Mullin took one of the starters out for taking a bad shot. Just one will do.

It shouldn't be hard, since this team hoisted more horrifically bad shots than any team I've ever seen outside of a rec league.[/quote]

Read again, carefully this time. Coaches are not absolved, not by a long shot. But all in all just about every one of our starters took ill advised shots, failed to make wide open looks, and stood around and watched while other teams rebounded. Certainly on the coaches heavily for this lousy brand of basketball, but upper classmen, which all 5 starters were, all culpable as well.[/quote]

I got it the first time, thanks. "Players play and coaches coach" and the wins pile up. Brilliant and simple equation.

So when a bunch of 20 year old players take bad shot after bad shot how do you correct that problem? Let them figure it out on their own? Of course not. You coach/teach them by yanking their ass out of the game and explaining to them what they are doing wrong so they can learn, adjust and grow as a player.

If you don't, then you are allowing them to learn the wrong lesson...that there is no such thing as a bad shot.

The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot.

I'm not sure which I'd consider worse, but I know that both are signs of bad coaching.[/quote]

Nothing I haven't said before except don't expect every coach, even great ones to light into a player for taking a bad shot. I've said there appears to be no recourse for undisciplined play but I'm not at practice. When your options off the bench are such a steep dropoff, it isn't like putting in Trimble is going to help.

If you want to say the same thing and proclaim it s different be my guest.[/quote]

Oh no. I definitely don't want to agree with that. Its all yours.

Your coaching philosophy is apparently very different from mine. For me, a program belongs to the HC. Players are just visiting. Nobody needs to be Bobby Knight when it comes to getting things their way, but there's a reason the same coaches have long term success. They run their program, it doesn't run them.

Put me in the group with Knight, Coach K, Izzo, etc etc etc. A coach should provide the team structure and direction. He should teach his players where the guardrails are early and as often as necessary so they don't have to explain it to them when it matters most. They'll already know. I think you yank your best player when he takes one too many bad shots early in the year and you replace him with anyone who won't take a bad shot, or a new guy who doesn't know that a bad shot is. This way you send the entire team a message about consequences for stupid decisions. I wouldn't care if it cost me a couple of W's early in the year. It will payoff in spades later on.

Plus side of teaching this lesson early on is threefold:
Star learns its not his team, its yours.
Rest of the regulars learn that there are consequences for playing selfish basketball (for everyone)
Your bench gets some valuable PT vs the cup cakes.

I look at it this way:
The coach is responsible for his staff.
The staff is responsible for teaching the style of play the coach wants to play, and developing players skill sets.
The players are responsible for playing within the structure provided.

In my book, if that breaks down anywhere, its ALL on the coaches. Either they can't coach, or they brought in kids who can't play as part of a team or in their system.

Since Mullin has been here I've seen zero structure to the offense and no consequences for playing bad basketball. That hasn't changed a lick in 4 years.

In my mind, there are only a few reasons that can be:
1) That's how the coach/staff wants to play.
2) The coach/staff doesn't have a clue and can't teach the game.
3) The players are running the asylum so they are free to do whatever they want without consequence.
4) The players have tuned out the staff and are freelancing.

You may want to apportion blame equally to players and coaches, or perhaps even more to the players for making the staff look so bad so often, but in my book every single reason I've listed is the coach/staffs responsibility to correct.

If they can't then they are either really bad at coaching, or they are really bad at talent evaluation/recruiting.

And regardless of which reason it is, they are in the wrong profession.[/quote]

As, I've said before..... Personnel has come and gone, but our way of playing has remained the same. I long noticed this style of play was being encouraged. I can't recall seeing any coaching moments, as I stated three seasons ago.

I find it hard four years of different personnel leads to identical play. The common denominator in all this is the staff.[/quote]

Agree with you. Poor coaching + undisciplined(but somewhat talented) kids = mediocre results. Know we disagree here, but think Chris gets one more year to make adjustments to staff and to see what happens on the court. If no improvement then I’ll be in your camp.
 
Anything reported on Monday's meeting with CM?
 
[quote="Knight" post=336467]Anything reported on Monday's meeting with CM?[/quote]

Nope. I asked Zach B. and got the anticipated "when I have something i can report you'll know" response.
 
[quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=336468][quote="Knight" post=336467]Anything reported on Monday's meeting with CM?[/quote]

Nope. I asked Zach B. and got the anticipated "when I have something i can report you'll know" response.[/quote]

I’d ask Zags from now on ;)
 
[quote="Marillac" post=336471][quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=336468][quote="Knight" post=336467]Anything reported on Monday's meeting with CM?[/quote]

Nope. I asked Zach B. and got the anticipated "when I have something i can report you'll know" response.[/quote]

I’d ask Zags from now on ;)[/quote]

LOL - nah Zach's my guy, Zags always too busy retweeting his articles about Kentucky and Duke players in the NBA to respond
 
SJUFAN2 wrote:
"The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot."

I agree with most of what you say SJU. We've been saying it for 3 years after year one. However, it's not Mully's style to rip into players. Refs, yes, players no.
He has taken players, including Shamorie, out when they needed a mental break from their mistakes. He took Mikey Dixon out so often he quit. He basically gave up on Keita. The bottom line is he didn't have enough good players to take out or put in games. Of course that is on the entire staff. Nothing short of a complete shakeup can make a difference and I think that is coming with some surprises, including players.
 
What coach “rips into” guys for bad shots? Ripping into players is almost exclusively reserved for lack of effort and poor sportsmanship.
 
Last edited:
[quote="RedStormNC" post=336477][quote="Marillac" post=336476]What coach “rips into” guys for bad shots? Ripping into players is almost exclusively reserved for lack of effort and poor sportsmanship.[/quote]

This was a classic from Ewing two seasons ago...
https://deadspin.com/video/3538843?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Deadspin&jwsource=cl[/quote]

That’s funny. I don’t think yelling at a kid is the proper tool to use to deter bad shots. Last thing kids need is to be thinking about being reprimanded when they are shooting.
 
[quote="Mike Zaun" post=336483]Rumors of Borman and Hsu coming and Mitch either leaving or demoted to his old position. Who knows if it has legs.[/quote]

If true, love the Borman move. Coach K's nephew and ties to the NY Rens.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=336475]SJUFAN2 wrote:
"The fact that nobody can point to one instance where Mullin lit into, or pulled a major player for a horrible shot choice is an indictment that this staff either doesn't have a clue what its doing, or that they don't believe there is such a thing as a bad shot."

I agree with most of what you say SJU. We've been saying it for 3 years after year one. However, it's not Mully's style to rip into players. Refs, yes, players no.
He has taken players, including Shamorie, out when they needed a mental break from their mistakes. He took Mikey Dixon out so often he quit. He basically gave up on Keita. The bottom line is he didn't have enough good players to take out or put in games. Of course that is on the entire staff. Nothing short of a complete shakeup can make a difference and I think that is coming with some surprises, including players.[/quote]

Good post and except for the last sentence age completely. I'd like to see his Mullin would do with a front line and a 9 man rotation but we may never see that here.
 
[quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=336468][quote="Knight" post=336467]Anything reported on Monday's meeting with CM?[/quote]

Nope. I asked Zach B. and got the anticipated "when I have something i can report you'll know" response.[/quote]

Zach would have less enemies if he wasn't such a dbag in his twitter responses.
 
[quote="Mean Gene" post=336484][quote="Mike Zaun" post=336483]Rumors of Borman and Hsu coming and Mitch either leaving or demoted to his old position. Who knows if it has legs.[/quote]

If true, love the Borman move. Coach K's nephew and ties to the NY Rens.[/quote]
Andy Borman’s name has been out there a lot in last week. Heron, Tabor, Kuminga affiliation a potential plus one would assume.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote="RedStormNC" post=336477][quote="Marillac" post=336476]What coach “rips into” guys for bad shots? Ripping into players is almost exclusively reserved for lack of effort and poor sportsmanship.[/quote]

This was a classic from Ewing two seasons ago...
https://deadspin.com/video/3538843?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=Deadspin&jwsource=cl[/quote]

I love this.....thanks for posting. Regardless of whether you agree with his delivery, Ewing's message is one our team needed. You take the shots you practice. No fancy improvised circus shots on game day. He's teaching disciplined basketball.
 
[quote="Andrew" post=336486]Hsu was a coach at Binghamton the only year we made the NCAA tournament. A lot of shady stuff went on to get there.
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/sports/ncaabasketball/19binghamton.html[/URL][/quote]

That bed was made before he arrived. Under a magnifying glass they could only link him to giving someone gas money once and helping to re-word a paper. The fact the player didn’t have it entirely written for him almost qualifies Binghamton and Hsu for an award.

These issues have kept him from a head coaching gig. He’s literally better than all three assistants we had last year by himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top