Europe Trip Details

[Class of 72]

Spent the week looking into either taking a vacation next year to India and Nepal or China and Tibet.

I think Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos is calling your name.

I have clients that went from importing a lot of textiles from china who now are putting factories over in Vietnam and Cambodia due to lower labor costs and they especially have raved about Vietnam when they visited

Have you been over there ?

Have a client doing 3 week africa right now. And a friend in Kenya on business-vacation. I'm freaking jealous

I spent three weeks in Vietnam in 2005. Stayed in Ho Chi Minh, Hanoi, Hue, and Hoi An, and took day trips from each. Wife didn't want to do Cambodia because a co-worker who had been all over the world told her it was the poorest place she'd ever seen, and wife didn't want to be depressed. That pissed me off. And we could have taken a bus from Vietnam to Vientiane, Laos, for something like $6 and we didn't do it for some stupid reason. But Vietnam was awesome and Halong Bay was probably the most amazing place I've ever seen.

You should have visited when it was a really exciting place to visit around 1973. You could pick up a wife for six dollars.

Luckily I was 2 at the time. The people of Hue were remarkably friendly given that we literally couldn't go more than a couple blocks without encountering someone missing a limb.

The Vietnamese people have always been warm and friendly to foriegners. Since the city was virtually destroyed during the Tet offensive I would imagine that it is a fairly modern city now. Like so many places around the world, it stands as an example of both man's inhumanity to their fellow human beings and the ability of humans to rebuild from ashes.

 

[L J S A]

Is this a forum and thread about Stj hoops? These posts are ridiculous

The season hasn't started and all is quiet on the recruiting front. Are people's panties really in that much of a twist when a topic goes off on a tangent for one page? Jeez.

 

[beast of the east]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4. [/quote]

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.

 

[simplyred]

Spent the week looking into either taking a vacation next year to India and Nepal or China and Tibet.

I think Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos is calling your name.

I have clients that went from importing a lot of textiles from china who now are putting factories over in Vietnam and Cambodia due to lower labor costs and they especially have raved about Vietnam when they visited

Have you been over there ?

Have a client doing 3 week africa right now. And a friend in Kenya on business-vacation. I'm freaking jealous

I spent three weeks in Vietnam in 2005. Stayed in Ho Chi Minh, Hanoi, Hue, and Hoi An, and took day trips from each. Wife didn't want to do Cambodia because a co-worker who had been all over the world told her it was the poorest place she'd ever seen, and wife didn't want to be depressed. That pissed me off. And we could have taken a bus from Vietnam to Vientiane, Laos, for something like $6 and we didn't do it for some stupid reason. But Vietnam was awesome and Halong Bay was probably the most amazing place I've ever seen.

You should have visited when it was a really exciting place to visit around 1973. You could pick up a wife for six dollars.

Luckily I was 2 at the time. The people of Hue were remarkably friendly given that we literally couldn't go more than a couple blocks without encountering someone missing a limb.

The Vietnamese people have always been warm and friendly to foriegners. Since the city was virtually destroyed during the Tet offensive I would imagine that it is a fairly modern city now. Like so many places around the world, it stands as an example of both man's inhumanity to their fellow human beings and the ability of humans to rebuild from ashes.

My ex-wife has a crazy uncle that still wants to shoot them (claims to have killed 64)---although we recently found out that the closest he got to Vietnam was San Antonio. I didn't know you could get PTSD from latrine duty.

 

[Redfaced]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.[/quote]

I remember that one point win. We had to hold on and won by the skin of our arces. My memory of that final four game vs. GTown was that I showed up to a friends house with a cake that said "F GTown, Go St Johns" needless to say the cake was thrown out early as our team was poorly prepared for that encounter. Then after hearing Looie proclaim that GTown team to be one of the greatest of all time, the Hoyas lost in the final to an undermanned but well prepared Nova bunch.

 

[bk8664]

I know it's almost a week ago now but just read through the D'Angelo FG% debate. Enjoyed it and wanted to chime in.

Dee is career 38.4% from the field, 34.2% from 3, 78.8% from the line. Hardly the type of efficiency you want from a 2, but far from team-crippling either. We'd all like to see those percentages go up, but that can be said for most everybody on this team last year save Jakarr, Dom, and CJ (all of whom do a lot of their work close to the rim).

The key analysis is the percentages relative to the role. It's not an apples to apples comparison, but Russell Westbrook is a volume shooter with an average FG% for his career (43%) and an atrocious 3P% (30%). Much gets made of how much he shoots at those percentages, especially with one of the best and most efficient scorers in the NBA on the same team.

The only person you never hear complain? Durant, who seems to genuinely enjoy playing with him to boot. He knows better than anybody that all the pressure Westbrook puts on the opposing defense with his hyper-attack style only makes his life easier. In many ways Westbrook's style of play - which comes with some inherent inefficiency - helps Durant's efficiency. You can't look at a player (and his percentages) in a vaccum and instead have to consider the overall team impact.

I know Westbrook does a lot of things D'Angelo doesn't or at least hasn't, which is why it's far from a perfect comparison. But D'Angelo plays a similar role for this team in that he has an incredible ability to put pressure on the defense with his style of play. Last year he was really the only guy that could do that for us from the perimeter, which resulted in (sometimes way) more bad shots than you'd like. With Jordan and a healthy Branch and Greene we should have more with that capability, which should take some of the burden off of Dee and help him become a more efficient scorer (by the @Georgetown game last year, it was beyond clear that every coach in the conference knew if you cut off Harrison SJU could not win, and our record after his suspension proved that a valid strategy).

But even with the increased options we need Harrison to play his game. Absolutely, I'd like to see him get up in the low 40%s overall and be more consistently in the mid 30%s from 3. But really that's nickel diming; we're talking about 3-5 made shots out of every 100. While that can make a difference, I believe it's worth the tradeoff to have a player who draws a lot of attention from opposing defenses and in doing so opens things up for others (not to mention getting near 20 or more himself most nights, which is no small bonus). We haven't had the personnel to fully take advantage of that, which has created a circular issue in that Harrison forces more. Now that we do I think it should result in a more controlled attack from Harrison (even if it still involves higher shot totals at average-ish percentages) and a more balanced attack from the team.

Sorry for the length, but I think the % issue gets overplayed when it's close. The difference between a PF shooting 35% and 50% can hurt you. A 2 going high 38% when you'd like him at 42-43% is less statistically significant in a 30 game college season. More important is the style of play, if that player is causing defenses to react, and if the shots are in-offense. I think that will be the important piece to watch with Dee this year, and if executed effectively could be a huge element in making this team go offensively this year (something clearly lacking last year).

SJU,
I appreciate your comments and much of what you says makes sense, but I disagree on some points. You make the argument that a 38% shooter as a two-guard isn't as important a PF having a poor shooting percentage. I would argue it a different way. I think D'Lo's 39% shooting - as a volume shooter, while it does take pressure off other guys, is still too painful for the team to bear, because he is a volume shooter. It doesn't matter if you are a PF, C or Guard - if you shoot a ton, you have to be efficient for your position. D'Lo, unfortunately was not.

It's one thing if D'Lo were a two-guard taking pressure off a team, not being a volume shooter, but the fact of the matter is that he is a volume shooter - a big one. He is shooting a ton. Otto Porter - a high NBA draft pick - only took 11 shots per game last year; McLemore on Kansas - only 11 shots a game. Curry on Duke - only 12 shots a game.... but D'lo took almost 15 shots a games. How does that makes sense with his shooting percentage? It doesn't make sense. (that's the coaches' fault, not D'Los)

Seth Curry shot 48%, McLemore shot 50% last year. They were shooters/guards on winning teams. If D'Lo shoots 39% vs. that 48% to 49%, that is a 10% difference on 14.6 shots per game = 1.46 more made baskets x 2.4 pts per shot for D'Lo = 2.7 points per game. That is a difference of 3 points per game. If our team team has 3 more points per game, we beat #15 Marquette last year, we beat Villanova and we take Providence to overtime last year. And we feel A LOT better about our overall year. That's a big difference from only one guy - yet, you say it is manageable (for lack of a better term). Well, I disagree - I argue it's REALLY important that our volume shooter be more efficient.

Mark my words, if D'lo is shooting is 39% this season, on 14.6 shots per game, we're toast. You can mail it in. No way we win as many games as we want.

Frankly, D'Lo is our best player, and I don't blame him for his lower shooting percentage. His low shooting percentage is not on him at all. It's on the coaches. I blame the coaches for not installing a better offense where he's not forced to take bad shots. It absolutely drove me nuts last year, when we passed the ball along the perimeter and did nothing with it and we had to force a shot up at the end of the clock. Do you think it was any surprise that Porter, McLemore and Curry all took four less shots a game than D'lo? They have better players / better systems surrounding those shooters. We seemingly did not have a offensive system at all (at least one that our kids could run). D'Lo has natural scoring ability - ala Dwight Hardy or Marcus Hatten, but the coaches have to make him more efficient.

This season, with our point guard play, + Sanchez and hopefully more efficient Sampson and Pointer and throw in a Hooper, it's all on the coaches to make the offense run be better. D'Lo's # of shots taken should come down by about four shots a game to the 11 per range - and he should be able to score around 15 to 16 pts a game with a higher FG%. The scoring efficiency must go way up from our volume shooter. There is no way around it. Again, it's not D'Lo's fault - it's on the coaches.

 

[ras]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.[/q
I remember that one point win. We had to hold on and won by the skin of our arces. My memory of that final four game vs. GTown was that I showed up to a friends house with a cake that said "F GTown, Go St Johns" needless to say the cake was thrown out early as our team was poorly prepared for that encounter. Then after hearing Looie proclaim that GTown team to be one of the greatest of all time, the Hoyas lost in the final to an undermanned but well prepared Nova bunch.

A Villanova team we beat 3 times that season.

 

[Marillac]

My final chime in on the D'lo shooting % debate. First, no reasonable person could compare the shooting %s of a combo forward and up to a combo guard. The easy dunks and high % putbacks and layins will always skew the stats in favor of the bigs.

Second, people need to realize that D'Lo is the designated chucker of this team. That means if there are five seconds on the clock and there is absolutely nothing happening on offense, everyone and their mother is going to try and find a way to get the ball to D'Lo to hoist up a shot with the best chance of falling. Not fair to the kid's %s, and this is something that needs to be factored in.

Third, there is no question that D'Lo forced too many shots last year. The problem, I thought, was that he got frustrated because he went too long without a look or even a touch. I know I was frustrated as a fan. Last year, the ball should have touched his hands on literally every half court possession. At the very least it stresses the defense and allows others to get space and make stuff happen. He really is a triple threat.

Fourth, Harrison was the guy that every opposing coach knew they had to stop. He's too good and, frankly, everyone else was too bad to simply let him score. If you stopped Harrison, you won. Make somebody else beat you was the mentality of nearly every coach that faced SJU.

Fifth, you can't always get an easy basket or even a quality look every trip down the floor. You always look for transition and secondary transition baskets whenever possible. After that you hope that good ball movement, screens, and hard cuts to the basket can open something up. A lot of times it just comes down to a 10 seconds or less and a guy going one-on-one or one-on-two to create a decent look. Harrison and Greene shouldered that for us. Nobody else could consistently get off a good look. Those are hard freaking shots.

In summary, I thought Harrison was too predictable last year. He had that stupid baseline shot he went to that every opposing player knew he'd blindly go to if he pump-faked or couldn't get his shot off form the perimeter. He was a step too slow. He forced too many shots after he was ignored and especially at the end of the games when we were getting crushed--can't really blame him, though. As I've said before, the only player on his level that he had chemistry with was Branch for about a month. He's a smart player and he is loaded with skill. Hopefully Jordan, a healthy Branch, and Sanchez give him a core he can trust and develop chemistry with.

We can win if Harrison shoots 40% form the field as long as we get enough easy baskets along the way. I'd rather him be aggressive (but intelligent) and shoot 40% than be passive and shoot 48%. If he is only shooting 10-12 shots a game, I don't think we can be anywhere near as good.

 

[oldfan61]

You must have driven to Lexington in '85 to be able to get out before the finals. We all wanted to get out of town but commercial transportation was totally unavailable, so we stayed.
Fortunately, the team we beat 3 times that year reached out to us an invited us to support them in what was promised to be the most lopsided game in NCAA history. I don't remember if there was a line on the game but G'Town must have been favored by 25.
Villanova let us use their buses to and from the game. ( when you lose on Saturday in the NCAA'S you become no one, your decorations are torn down, buses stop passing your hotel, you can't get a cab at your hotel and you are dead for anyone who is concerned). Many of us took the Villanova buses both to an from the game and many of us participated at the Villanova hotel in their after party which was unbelievable .One very lasting memory for me was that empty 12 packs flooded the street outside their hotel up to your knees. Coach Massimino made and appearance at the bar at 1AM, and by that time the bar was out of beer and the first three rows of liquor.behind the bar were almost out. By the end of the evening even all the bottles with green and red stuff were gone. Guys were drinking cordials at 4 in the morning! Big, big night for the hotel
Villanova's hospitality made our unexpected trouncing by G'town more than a total loss. I will always honor the respect and helping hand they offered to us. I will also remember the second best party in my life just behind the one at the end of WWII. "V for Villanova"!

 

[Pleasedontbanmeagain]

And to think some of you complained in the past about my inability to keep it pithy!

 

[bamafan]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.[/quote]
Sorry to have to correct you again but G'town never went up anything like 35-4 you are confusing the sweater game of 85 with the game Ewing and Mullin freshmen year of 81-82 when G'town was up 41-9 at halftime. What a nightmare in the Garden and I remember arriving to my seat a little late because of the SOR crowd and Ewing was doing reverse alley oop dunks on our heads.

 

[beast of the east]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.

Sorry to have to correct you again but G'town never went up anything like 35-4 you are confusing the sweater game of 85 with the game Ewing and Mullin freshmen year of 81-82 when G'town was up 41-9 at halftime. What a nightmare in the Garden and I remember arriving to my seat a little late because of the SOR crowd and Ewing was doing reverse alley oop dunks on our heads.[/quote]

Re: The Landover game - you are correct that SJU held on. we were up by 18 with 10 minutes to go, and Georgetown poured it on.

Re: The sweater game. Again you are correct. We were "only" down by 11 at the half. Can anyone find a link to the running score? I remember it being much worse early in the game.

 

[beast of the east]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.[/q
I remember that one point win. We had to hold on and won by the skin of our arces. My memory of that final four game vs. GTown was that I showed up to a friends house with a cake that said "F GTown, Go St Johns" needless to say the cake was thrown out early as our team was poorly prepared for that encounter. Then after hearing Looie proclaim that GTown team to be one of the greatest of all time, the Hoyas lost in the final to an undermanned but well prepared Nova bunch.

A Villanova team we beat 3 times that season.

From the SI Vault:
On the Saturday of final four weekend Villanova's befuddling array of defenses humbled Memphis State, and the Wildcats advanced to the title game with a 52-45 win. "I'll bet [Tigers point guard] Andre Turner is still confused," says McClain. "We were very confident they would have trouble." The Villanova players then sat in the stands to watch what many observers viewed as the de facto national championship game; the Wildcats silently rooted like hell for Georgetown to defeat St. John's. "We could not beat St. John's," says Pinckney. "Bad matchups, bad history, everything." Villanova got its wish: The Hoyas prevailed 75-59.

 

[Amaseinyourface]

My final chime in on the D'lo shooting % debate. First, no reasonable person could compare the shooting %s of a combo forward and up to a combo guard. The easy dunks and high % putbacks and layins will always skew the stats in favor of the bigs.

Second, people need to realize that D'Lo is the designated chucker of this team. That means if there are five seconds on the clock and there is absolutely nothing happening on offense, everyone and their mother is going to try and find a way to get the ball to D'Lo to hoist up a shot with the best chance of falling. Not fair to the kid's %s, and this is something that needs to be factored in.

Third, there is no question that D'Lo forced too many shots last year. The problem, I thought, was that he got frustrated because he went too long without a look or even a touch. I know I was frustrated as a fan. Last year, the ball should have touched his hands on literally every half court possession. At the very least it stresses the defense and allows others to get space and make stuff happen. He really is a triple threat.

Fourth, Harrison was the guy that every opposing coach knew they had to stop. He's too good and, frankly, everyone else was too bad to simply let him score. If you stopped Harrison, you won. Make somebody else beat you was the mentality of nearly every coach that faced SJU.

Fifth, you can't always get an easy basket or even a quality look every trip down the floor. You always look for transition and secondary transition baskets whenever possible. After that you hope that good ball movement, screens, and hard cuts to the basket can open something up. A lot of times it just comes down to a 10 seconds or less and a guy going one-on-one or one-on-two to create a decent look. Harrison and Greene shouldered that for us. Nobody else could consistently get off a good look. Those are hard freaking shots.

In summary, I thought Harrison was too predictable last year. He had that stupid baseline shot he went to that every opposing player knew he'd blindly go to if he pump-faked or couldn't get his shot off form the perimeter. He was a step too slow. He forced too many shots after he was ignored and especially at the end of the games when we were getting crushed--can't really blame him, though. As I've said before, the only player on his level that he had chemistry with was Branch for about a month. He's a smart player and he is loaded with skill. Hopefully Jordan, a healthy Branch, and Sanchez give him a core he can trust and develop chemistry with.

We can win if Harrison shoots 40% form the field as long as we get enough easy baskets along the way. I'd rather him be aggressive (but intelligent) and shoot 40% than be passive and shoot 48%. If he is only shooting 10-12 shots a game, I don't think we can be anywhere near as good.

Agree with everything you said except your last point. With the new additions we have plus a healthy branch, I think 12 shots a game is a perfect number.

 

[SJU85]

Re: the Niagara game on 12/15/1984...................I missed it, thank god. Living upstate NY for many years, sometimes the only games I could get to see live were the Niagara and the Syracuse game so I looked forward to them. On 12/15 of that year we had a snowfall of epic proportions and I gave up trying to drive in it about 40 miles short of the Falls in Batavia NY.
I got a motel room but found that the game was not televised!
I woke up at midnight and , feeling certain that StJ had been victorious, I call the sports desk at the NY Times to get a score .I had the guy check it twice before I began the sleepless portion of the rest of my evening.
They still celebrate that night in the Falls and anyone who has a button marked "62/59 Dec.15,'84" wears it proudly to their gym.
In retrospect for a position almost 40 years later, I almost understand it better today. Basketball was different then. You could get a good game out of any team in the eastern USA. Earlier that year we had lucked out wins by ONE point against Fordham and St, Bonny's. Guys who seem like pigeons today were threats then. As great a group of talent we had then, we played half a dozen or so 1 and 2 point games against Providence, BC, Syr., etc. It wasn't until March, after our first loss to the Hoyas, the "greatest college team of the second half of the century", that we got hot and really took charge from the tip off. Much of the early part of the season was trailing at the half or sometime with 10 to go,and hanging in in the last three minutes to snag a win
That season aged a lot of us prematurely. As great as the season was, the kids didn't make it easy for Looie and the fans for the first 20 games save for the 1 point win over G'town in the Garden on January 26, 1985. That was all of our most memorable moments of the Garden, of StJ and of that wonderful team.

One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

Attended all MSG games. Had to leave early from one of the G'town games which started at 9pm, went on to catch last LIRR train to Ronkonkoma. That made our lost even worse.

Ronkonkoma line pre electrification, ouch.

 

[SJU85]

[quote="bamafan" post=72923One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

One point win doesn't define the game. We had them by double digits late in the game and they mounted a rally where believe it or not the outcome wasn't much in jeopardy. If I remember, Berry played a great game in Landover. Thankfully, after Georgetown went on a tear in the sweater game at MSG, going up something like 35-4 in the first half, I scarcely remember the rest of the season. All I remember about being in Lexington was that we were never in the game, were horribly depressed, and despite holding tickets to the finals, sold them and went home (missing perhaps the greatest final in history) Even in our finest season in 50 years, the net emotion was painful failure.

I remember that one point win. We had to hold on and won by the skin of our arces. My memory of that final four game vs. GTown was that I showed up to a friends house with a cake that said "F GTown, Go St Johns" needless to say the cake was thrown out early as our team was poorly prepared for that encounter. Then after hearing Looie proclaim that GTown team to be one of the greatest of all time, the Hoyas lost in the final to an undermanned but well prepared Nova bunch.[/quote]

Down by a point after making a basket, Gtwon quickly handed the ball to Chris, who calmly walked towards the baseline to inbound the ball and watched the last five seconds of the game tick off the clock.

 

[ccnobz]

Is this a forum and thread about Stj hoops? These posts are ridiculous

The season hasn't started and all is quiet on the recruiting front. Are people's panties really in that much of a twist when a topic goes off on a tangent for one page? Jeez.

We have to read, from some tool who knows nothing about everything, how ppl will get raped and stabbed in E NY? I guess that has a lot to do with the teams trip to Eurpoe.

 

[SJU1512]

I know it's almost a week ago now but just read through the D'Angelo FG% debate. Enjoyed it and wanted to chime in.

Dee is career 38.4% from the field, 34.2% from 3, 78.8% from the line. Hardly the type of efficiency you want from a 2, but far from team-crippling either. We'd all like to see those percentages go up, but that can be said for most everybody on this team last year save Jakarr, Dom, and CJ (all of whom do a lot of their work close to the rim).

The key analysis is the percentages relative to the role. It's not an apples to apples comparison, but Russell Westbrook is a volume shooter with an average FG% for his career (43%) and an atrocious 3P% (30%). Much gets made of how much he shoots at those percentages, especially with one of the best and most efficient scorers in the NBA on the same team.

The only person you never hear complain? Durant, who seems to genuinely enjoy playing with him to boot. He knows better than anybody that all the pressure Westbrook puts on the opposing defense with his hyper-attack style only makes his life easier. In many ways Westbrook's style of play - which comes with some inherent inefficiency - helps Durant's efficiency. You can't look at a player (and his percentages) in a vaccum and instead have to consider the overall team impact.

I know Westbrook does a lot of things D'Angelo doesn't or at least hasn't, which is why it's far from a perfect comparison. But D'Angelo plays a similar role for this team in that he has an incredible ability to put pressure on the defense with his style of play. Last year he was really the only guy that could do that for us from the perimeter, which resulted in (sometimes way) more bad shots than you'd like. With Jordan and a healthy Branch and Greene we should have more with that capability, which should take some of the burden off of Dee and help him become a more efficient scorer (by the @Georgetown game last year, it was beyond clear that every coach in the conference knew if you cut off Harrison SJU could not win, and our record after his suspension proved that a valid strategy).

But even with the increased options we need Harrison to play his game. Absolutely, I'd like to see him get up in the low 40%s overall and be more consistently in the mid 30%s from 3. But really that's nickel diming; we're talking about 3-5 made shots out of every 100. While that can make a difference, I believe it's worth the tradeoff to have a player who draws a lot of attention from opposing defenses and in doing so opens things up for others (not to mention getting near 20 or more himself most nights, which is no small bonus). We haven't had the personnel to fully take advantage of that, which has created a circular issue in that Harrison forces more. Now that we do I think it should result in a more controlled attack from Harrison (even if it still involves higher shot totals at average-ish percentages) and a more balanced attack from the team.

Sorry for the length, but I think the % issue gets overplayed when it's close. The difference between a PF shooting 35% and 50% can hurt you. A 2 going high 38% when you'd like him at 42-43% is less statistically significant in a 30 game college season. More important is the style of play, if that player is causing defenses to react, and if the shots are in-offense. I think that will be the important piece to watch with Dee this year, and if executed effectively could be a huge element in making this team go offensively this year (something clearly lacking last year).

SJU,
I appreciate your comments and much of what you says makes sense, but I disagree on some points. You make the argument that a 38% shooter as a two-guard isn't as important a PF having a poor shooting percentage. I would argue it a different way. I think D'Lo's 39% shooting - as a volume shooter, while it does take pressure off other guys, is still too painful for the team to bear, because he is a volume shooter. It doesn't matter if you are a PF, C or Guard - if you shoot a ton, you have to be efficient for your position. D'Lo, unfortunately was not.

It's one thing if D'Lo were a two-guard taking pressure off a team, not being a volume shooter, but the fact of the matter is that he is a volume shooter - a big one. He is shooting a ton. Otto Porter - a high NBA draft pick - only took 11 shots per game last year; McLemore on Kansas - only 11 shots a game. Curry on Duke - only 12 shots a game.... but D'lo took almost 15 shots a games. How does that makes sense with his shooting percentage? It doesn't make sense. (that's the coaches' fault, not D'Los)

Seth Curry shot 48%, McLemore shot 50% last year. They were shooters/guards on winning teams. If D'Lo shoots 39% vs. that 48% to 49%, that is a 10% difference on 14.6 shots per game = 1.46 more made baskets x 2.4 pts per shot for D'Lo = 2.7 points per game. That is a difference of 3 points per game. If our team team has 3 more points per game, we beat #15 Marquette last year, we beat Villanova and we take Providence to overtime last year. And we feel A LOT better about our overall year. That's a big difference from only one guy - yet, you say it is manageable (for lack of a better term). Well, I disagree - I argue it's REALLY important that our volume shooter be more efficient.

Mark my words, if D'lo is shooting is 39% this season, on 14.6 shots per game, we're toast. You can mail it in. No way we win as many games as we want.

Frankly, D'Lo is our best player, and I don't blame him for his lower shooting percentage. His low shooting percentage is not on him at all. It's on the coaches. I blame the coaches for not installing a better offense where he's not forced to take bad shots. It absolutely drove me nuts last year, when we passed the ball along the perimeter and did nothing with it and we had to force a shot up at the end of the clock. Do you think it was any surprise that Porter, McLemore and Curry all took four less shots a game than D'lo? They have better players / better systems surrounding those shooters. We seemingly did not have a offensive system at all (at least one that our kids could run). D'Lo has natural scoring ability - ala Dwight Hardy or Marcus Hatten, but the coaches have to make him more efficient.

This season, with our point guard play, + Sanchez and hopefully more efficient Sampson and Pointer and throw in a Hooper, it's all on the coaches to make the offense run be better. D'Lo's # of shots taken should come down by about four shots a game to the 11 per range - and he should be able to score around 15 to 16 pts a game with a higher FG%. The scoring efficiency must go way up from our volume shooter. There is no way around it. Again, it's not D'Lo's fault - it's on the coaches.

A lot of good points BK, and I don't think we disagree on that much. We certainly need D'Lo to play better than he played (mostly towards the end of) last year, but in my opinion too much gets made of the 2nd half of last season (which was admittedly not the production we need from him). As I've said before, there were legitimate debates on this board at the end of his freshman year whether Harkless was ROY on his own team (taking nothing away from Mo) because of how impressive Harrison had been. Which wasn't surprising considering Harrison was 3rd in the league in scoring during conference play and torched four Top 11 teams for 20+ (ironically on 44, 47, 45, and 41% shooting, respectively).

So it isn't like he hasn't shown the ability to do exactly what we are talking about here, and as a result it seems that a lot of hairs get split over Harrison's play the last 15 games last year which, as you noted, he was only partially responsible for. There won't be books written about our offensive schemes last year (unless of course it's part of a "how not" series), and there were a limited number of true scoring threats.

Which leads into circumstances and expectations as you allude to in your post. McLemore and Curry were two of the most efficient guards in the country, playing on two of the best teams, with multiple NBA-caliber scoring threats. On top of that Duke and Kansas are two of the most well-oiled half-court offensive teams in the game with balance across the board year in and year out (playmakers, traditional bigs, knockdown shooters). Harrison is not yet that kind of player and STJ is not yet that kind of team, and even if we were are unlikely to play that style of game.

I think a better example individually and from a team standpoint is Louisville. They won the NC without anywhere near the offensive efficiency from their guards as a Michigan, Duke, Kansas or a whole host of other teams. A lot of that is because of the incredible pace at which they play in which they never stop forcing the issue, which is hopefully how we intend to play. Russ Smith averaged 18.7 PPG on 41% and 14 shots per game. While I completely agree there is a huge statistical significance between 38% and 50% at the volume D-Lo shoots, there is far less so between 38% and 41%. Russ Smith, like Dee, is a guy that drew a lot of attention with his constant-attack style, and not surprisingly the bigs on Louisville shot incredible percentages (not only on drop offs but gimme putbacks). Which brings us back to the global analysis of shooting percentages, not just one player, and Russ Smith is proof positive that your best player can volume shoot at average-ish percentages and help the team win at the highest level.

Anyway, the hope is that all of this will be moot. D-Lo has more around him this year, which should help him be just as productive as he's always been shooting a bit less and at higher percentages. I certainly hope it's a statistically significant jump where he shoots in the high 40's, but given how few guards get to those levels and our style of play I'm not sure that's realistic. If he can get into the low 40s (like Smith last year) primarily by eliminating the forces and maintaining his style of play I don't think his percentages are something we should concern ourselves with. Efficiency is a great luxury but putting the ball in the hoop is an absolute necessity, and in that respect Dee is absolutely invaluable as he has already shown an ability to be one of the best in the conference at it. While our overall depth is off the charts, I'm not sold yet that the individual scoring ability is so off the charts that we can take for granted having a kid who spots us 18 points every night and plays hard at both ends. That's a luxury in its own right.

 

[SJU85]

I know it's almost a week ago now but just read through the D'Angelo FG% debate. Enjoyed it and wanted to chime in.

Dee is career 38.4% from the field, 34.2% from 3, 78.8% from the line. Hardly the type of efficiency you want from a 2, but far from team-crippling either. We'd all like to see those percentages go up, but that can be said for most everybody on this team last year save Jakarr, Dom, and CJ (all of whom do a lot of their work close to the rim).

The key analysis is the percentages relative to the role. It's not an apples to apples comparison, but Russell Westbrook is a volume shooter with an average FG% for his career (43%) and an atrocious 3P% (30%). Much gets made of how much he shoots at those percentages, especially with one of the best and most efficient scorers in the NBA on the same team.

The only person you never hear complain? Durant, who seems to genuinely enjoy playing with him to boot. He knows better than anybody that all the pressure Westbrook puts on the opposing defense with his hyper-attack style only makes his life easier. In many ways Westbrook's style of play - which comes with some inherent inefficiency - helps Durant's efficiency. You can't look at a player (and his percentages) in a vaccum and instead have to consider the overall team impact.

I know Westbrook does a lot of things D'Angelo doesn't or at least hasn't, which is why it's far from a perfect comparison. But D'Angelo plays a similar role for this team in that he has an incredible ability to put pressure on the defense with his style of play. Last year he was really the only guy that could do that for us from the perimeter, which resulted in (sometimes way) more bad shots than you'd like. With Jordan and a healthy Branch and Greene we should have more with that capability, which should take some of the burden off of Dee and help him become a more efficient scorer (by the @Georgetown game last year, it was beyond clear that every coach in the conference knew if you cut off Harrison SJU could not win, and our record after his suspension proved that a valid strategy).

But even with the increased options we need Harrison to play his game. Absolutely, I'd like to see him get up in the low 40%s overall and be more consistently in the mid 30%s from 3. But really that's nickel diming; we're talking about 3-5 made shots out of every 100. While that can make a difference, I believe it's worth the tradeoff to have a player who draws a lot of attention from opposing defenses and in doing so opens things up for others (not to mention getting near 20 or more himself most nights, which is no small bonus). We haven't had the personnel to fully take advantage of that, which has created a circular issue in that Harrison forces more. Now that we do I think it should result in a more controlled attack from Harrison (even if it still involves higher shot totals at average-ish percentages) and a more balanced attack from the team.

Sorry for the length, but I think the % issue gets overplayed when it's close. The difference between a PF shooting 35% and 50% can hurt you. A 2 going high 38% when you'd like him at 42-43% is less statistically significant in a 30 game college season. More important is the style of play, if that player is causing defenses to react, and if the shots are in-offense. I think that will be the important piece to watch with Dee this year, and if executed effectively could be a huge element in making this team go offensively this year (something clearly lacking last year).

SJU,
I appreciate your comments and much of what you says makes sense, but I disagree on some points. You make the argument that a 38% shooter as a two-guard isn't as important a PF having a poor shooting percentage. I would argue it a different way. I think D'Lo's 39% shooting - as a volume shooter, while it does take pressure off other guys, is still too painful for the team to bear, because he is a volume shooter. It doesn't matter if you are a PF, C or Guard - if you shoot a ton, you have to be efficient for your position. D'Lo, unfortunately was not.

It's one thing if D'Lo were a two-guard taking pressure off a team, not being a volume shooter, but the fact of the matter is that he is a volume shooter - a big one. He is shooting a ton. Otto Porter - a high NBA draft pick - only took 11 shots per game last year; McLemore on Kansas - only 11 shots a game. Curry on Duke - only 12 shots a game.... but D'lo took almost 15 shots a games. How does that makes sense with his shooting percentage? It doesn't make sense. (that's the coaches' fault, not D'Los)

Seth Curry shot 48%, McLemore shot 50% last year. They were shooters/guards on winning teams. If D'Lo shoots 39% vs. that 48% to 49%, that is a 10% difference on 14.6 shots per game = 1.46 more made baskets x 2.4 pts per shot for D'Lo = 2.7 points per game. That is a difference of 3 points per game. If our team team has 3 more points per game, we beat #15 Marquette last year, we beat Villanova and we take Providence to overtime last year. And we feel A LOT better about our overall year. That's a big difference from only one guy - yet, you say it is manageable (for lack of a better term). Well, I disagree - I argue it's REALLY important that our volume shooter be more efficient.

Mark my words, if D'lo is shooting is 39% this season, on 14.6 shots per game, we're toast. You can mail it in. No way we win as many games as we want.

Frankly, D'Lo is our best player, and I don't blame him for his lower shooting percentage. His low shooting percentage is not on him at all. It's on the coaches. I blame the coaches for not installing a better offense where he's not forced to take bad shots. It absolutely drove me nuts last year, when we passed the ball along the perimeter and did nothing with it and we had to force a shot up at the end of the clock. Do you think it was any surprise that Porter, McLemore and Curry all took four less shots a game than D'lo? They have better players / better systems surrounding those shooters. We seemingly did not have a offensive system at all (at least one that our kids could run). D'Lo has natural scoring ability - ala Dwight Hardy or Marcus Hatten, but the coaches have to make him more efficient.

This season, with our point guard play, + Sanchez and hopefully more efficient Sampson and Pointer and throw in a Hooper, it's all on the coaches to make the offense run be better. D'Lo's # of shots taken should come down by about four shots a game to the 11 per range - and he should be able to score around 15 to 16 pts a game with a higher FG%. The scoring efficiency must go way up from our volume shooter. There is no way around it. Again, it's not D'Lo's fault - it's on the coaches.

I don't think you can compare the amount of shots taken by Porter, McLemore and Curry with D'Lo as they played on teams that had more firepower and they were not the only guys who could hit shots.

What the kids got was a chance to play with each other against competition instead of the repetition of pick-up games which can get stale after awhile. The coaches got a chance to see them play, get a feel of things and can now do some tweaking. This gives us a head start for when the balls start for organized practice and I am sure things will be somewhat different. To add what an invaluable trip that got to take and the things they were able to see.

I expect D'Lo percentage to improve this year as hit shot selection will be better as the personnel on this team begin to mesh.

 

[Pleasedontbanmeagain]

Re: the Niagara game on 12/15/1984...................I missed it, thank god. Living upstate NY for many years, sometimes the only games I could get to see live were the Niagara and the Syracuse game so I looked forward to them. On 12/15 of that year we had a snowfall of epic proportions and I gave up trying to drive in it about 40 miles short of the Falls in Batavia NY.
I got a motel room but found that the game was not televised!
I woke up at midnight and , feeling certain that StJ had been victorious, I call the sports desk at the NY Times to get a score .I had the guy check it twice before I began the sleepless portion of the rest of my evening.
They still celebrate that night in the Falls and anyone who has a button marked "62/59 Dec.15,'84" wears it proudly to their gym.
In retrospect for a position almost 40 years later, I almost understand it better today. Basketball was different then. You could get a good game out of any team in the eastern USA. Earlier that year we had lucked out wins by ONE point against Fordham and St, Bonny's. Guys who seem like pigeons today were threats then. As great a group of talent we had then, we played half a dozen or so 1 and 2 point games against Providence, BC, Syr., etc. It wasn't until March, after our first loss to the Hoyas, the "greatest college team of the second half of the century", that we got hot and really took charge from the tip off. Much of the early part of the season was trailing at the half or sometime with 10 to go,and hanging in in the last three minutes to snag a win
That season aged a lot of us prematurely. As great as the season was, the kids didn't make it easy for Looie and the fans for the first 20 games save for the 1 point win over G'town in the Garden on January 26, 1985. That was all of our most memorable moments of the Garden, of StJ and of that wonderful team.

One point win over G'town in Jan which propelled us to #1 ranking was actually on the road. they then beat us twice in MSG and for the third time in Final 4.

Attended all MSG games. Had to leave early from one of the G'town games which started at 9pm, went on to catch last LIRR train to Ronkonkoma. That made our lost even worse.

Ronkonkoma line pre electrification, ouch.

Oh come on, it's not that bad. Nassau people always make fun of me and say "oh wow that's SO FAR!". It's only about 1 hour 15 minutes now. When you consider it goes 37 MPH average making a million stops and it also takes around the same amount of time (give or take 10-15 min) to get to Manhattan from many parts of Staten Island and even Queens it really isn't that bad. To Jamaica is only about 45 min on the express trains from Ronk. They need more expresses.