Mike ,Don't think poster who coach are Mike Cal Roy, or either of the Jims I started following SJU basketball when Frank McGuire that over 60 years ago and according to some we always have a coach whi is not a good game coach. Only exception I can recall were McGuire and Mike Jarvis. Both Lapchick and Louie were accused of being poor game coaches
ESPN's Top 50 College Coaches Right Now
- Thread starter jerseyshorejohnny
- Start date
IMO Louie was no better than a fair game coach. But his teams were always prepared, played within a system and played hard. Each player knew their roll. So what Louie lacked in game coaching skills, he made up for in the other coaching aspects. Plus he got good players. As for the others I've seen I would say that Fran and Jarvis were decent game coaches. Mahoney, Norm and Lavin poor game coaches.
![URL]](http://[URL]http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news_img/41132/bill_murray_41132.jpg[/URL])
You can say it's comical, but I'm not alone.
The analysts at ESPN don't think Lavin is one of the 50 best coaches in the NCAA.
UCLA fans had him for seven years and came to the conclusion he was full of hot air and lacked substance.
And now a good amount of St John's fans think he's not a smart basketball coach.
Why is this so routinely dismissed? At the very least you could acknowledge that what myself, Monte, and others point to is at the very least an arguable point. Like it or not, it is a very mainstream opinion that Steve Lavin is not a bright basketball coach.
If you get tired of the constant bashing, that is a separate issue entirely, and I can sympathize with that. Which is why I try to post about a variety of topics. But when the conversation comes around to our coach, I'm going to join the debate and voice my opinion. I won't apologize for that.
And one last thing, to those who find it unbelievable that fans could question a basketball coach, when we in fact are not professional coaches, let me ask you this; do you vote for president? Do you have an opinion about your mayor or president? And yet I'm willing to bet almost none of you have made strategic military decisions or designed a federal budget. I don't have to be a basketball coach to make observations about talent, skill, and management decisions. An informed and knowledgeable basketball fan can see that many of the decisions Steve Lavin makes before and during games are dubious at best, and sometimes just blatantly wrong.
Steve Lavin has been a head coach for 12 seasons now, he is not new to this industry, and he has a very firm reputation among the media, fellow coaches, and his former players: elite recruiter, treats his players great, can hold a team together during difficult times, but is a poor coach during practices and games.
I'll shut up when Lavin proves me wrong. But we had the most talented team in the Big East last season and we were 1-7 in our biggest games.
westchesterjoe
Active member
Not to mention the Nailbiter loss to R. Morris to wind up a poor season. 20 wins did not make it a success .
It's not a fact we had the "most talent" in the conference. Subjective. Another message conveyed, as such. I'm not surprised. Moving on....
You're certainly allowed to voice your opinion. But you're not allowed to spam, and that hasn't stopped you. Almost to a level of trolling. I digress.
I'm not gonna get into a back and forth about Lavin's coaching abilities, as that has been beaten to death by most of us on this board. IMO, your--and a few others--comments are generally caustic, and, in a way, to punish Lavin for anything from his character to what he ate for lunch (yeah, I know I'm exaggerating a bit on the latter one).
IMO, you and a few others come off, as it's something personal. Tone and delivery says, as much. There are several others who believes the same as I do. There are a couple folks who have shown their disdain, but it's not conveyed with malice. SJU1512 and Logen comes to mind. Contrary to what you believe to the "supporters" and "Kool-Aid drinkers...." Most fans are far from satisfied (myself, included).
Personally, you (and, a few others) sound like a miserable person from where I stand. Maybe, that's not the case, and my perception is off, but I can only go by what I see.... More like, what I've seen typed.
Appreciate the good words MJD. I would just want to clarify - and I know that you didn't intend it literally this way - that I do not disdain Steve Lavin as a person or basketball coach. To the contrary he seems like an outstanding person, and I really, really want to see him succeed here. We're getting more talent than we've gotten in almost 2 decades, and I think that one of the worst things that could happen to this program right now is to have to go through another coaching change. We are already on our 5th in 20 years, which only happens to programs that just can't figure it out. We have some momentum now - even if I don't think that momentum was fully capitalized upon last year -, Lavin has really elevated the visibility of the program on a number of fronts, and now we just need to win. I'd really dislike to have to start over right now, no matter how great the next coach might be, and you always have to be worried about "the grass is always greener" anytime you make a change and things are not a disaster (as they clearly are not for SJU).
What I have is frustration with is the way Lavin mismanages what I view as straightforward, A to B concepts in this game. You play your best players and you play a brand of basketball that fits your personnel (or, if unwilling to do that, you recruit players that fit the system you want to play). That's sky is blue type stuff. Yet we haven't done those two things. If we just did those two things at a higher level I'd be able to ignore a lot of the smaller, technical stuff I disagree with at times, mostly because I think we'd be winning more. There's always going to be debate about micro moves a coach makes, in any sport. But you have to get the macro stuff right, or you're going to hold your team back to some degree.
I think the latter was the case this past season (can't really say so about previous seasons), and that it was a wasted year as a result in that the program is not at a more advanced stage in June 2014 than it was in June 2013...possibly a few steps back (we'll see). We had a lot of things going our way last year, with a loaded roster and the Eurotrip, which should have elevated expectations and help slot people into roles. But in the end it appeared as though we did not take advantage, as the rotation was in flux for almost the entire season, and Lavin actually seemed to be trying to soften expectations from what seemed like a very premature juncture. No matter what the expectations, we didn't meet them.
These things happen. Maybe it's easier to say that now almost 3 months removed from the end of the season, but it's onward and upward now. My hopes are that we learned from the mistakes made and opportunities wasted last year; that concrete expectations will be made and that people will be held accountable for their performance relative to those expectations (making the tournament would have been enough last year; it would not be, in my opinion, this year); and that for the love of all things good we play the 7-8 best guys and when 5 are going good together, don't sub! :cheer:
Hope you're doing well, man!
stjohnschris
Active member
I quickly read through the thread, and I don't think I saw anyone who was surprised or anyone who felt he should have been on the list. I'm critical of his coaching abilities because a division I BB coach should come with a certain level of craft skills. Smooth talk, kindness, and recruiting are not the measure of a solid coach. ESPN knows that, most on this board know that, and from an educated basketball fans' perspective, it's downright frustrating to watch a team full of possibilities underachieve. It happens in other jobs where people can talk their way into a position that they are not qualified for and eventually it shows (and they get fired). If they don't get fired, all of the people who work with and for this under-skilled are frustrated. I'm not interested or qualified to be a division I basketball coach, but I know the game very well from playing it and watching it for 35 years. I can identify a good coach, I can identify a great player and breakdown what makes them great. I think a lot of us are in this boat, and it's frustrating as a fan of this team and a fan of good basketball.
indyredmen97
Member
Oh, how I've missed all of you (work has been a bit hectic). We are the "most talented" team yet underachieved because those who create scouting reports tell us these kids have the skill sets required to accomplish more than the amount of wins thus far produced. Some of them can jump "out of the building", have a "sick" handle, or are 6'9 and can dribble down the court and can shoot "lights out". Now while even the best pro scouts miss badly on draft picks, we blindly assume that these rankings are gospel, and when you throw a few numbers like 25, 38, 45, 85 (or whatever they are) well then they must be great talents, and not even a moron can mess that up.
As for me, I've never personally seen these young men before they step on campus, but (fill in the blank media outlet, website, "adviser", and HS coach hoping to ride coattails) all swear to me that this guy is great. To prove it, i can watch a You Tube video of him shooting jumpers by himself of dunking over kids slightly taller than me (at least the songs are good). So me being me, I go check out what my friends here might say about the players, because I respect the fact that many of you have seen some of these kids and usually offer great insight (especially when you inform us that the player actually WON something other than nicest showcase award). Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're wrong. So are NBA scouts, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc.
Now ESPN, a business that has a vested interest in praising coaches and programs in the conferences they themselves benefit most from, has created an ranking for the coaches themselves. Of course, I need to read this before I come on here and rip our coach to shreds? Nah, who cares, I made up my opinion when I: a) didn't get the coach I wanted in the first place; b) didn't immediately get the players that I thought we deserved or don't get them when I feel like its the most optimal time; or c) haven't improved enough to show me that he's capable of accomplishing my lofty expectations. I'll keep repeating the same points because, well you know, that will finally change your mind. And if that doesn't work, well screw it, I'll just call you sheep and be done with it. After all, I deserve to win. And if he can't do it yesterday, well I've got a list of candidates who I'm sure could!
Have I missed anything else recently?
jumbo_peanuts
Active member
Back to the topic at hand.......Mike Jarvis didn't even make the list!! So how legit can this list really be?
I think that is the crux of the issue--how long should it take to effect a turnaround? And for that matter, what is the definition of a turnaround? I think most people (myself included) were thrilled with Lavin's performance in 2010 and I don't think anyone (at least not most people) expected the 2011 team to do much, given that they were all freshmen and of course, Lavin's illness. But now we are heading into year 5. At the very least, we need some semblance of stability and sustainable balance among the classes going forward. The best possible thing that could happen to this team right now, IMO, is for Jordan and Obekpa to stick around for the 2015 season. Then I think we'll have it. But if they don't, we are extremely exposed on that front and the lack of any top recruits coming in for 2014 is a key reason, I don't think you can argue that.
