Jon Rothstein's Preseason Top 25

Its frustrating to think we are still considered a bubble team. We should be much better than last year and we were a bubble team before Dlo got suspended. But, the only thing that really matters is what we do in games, it really doesn't matter what pundits think at this point.

True and I am very optimistic. I don't go in much for making predictions and I don't think I've ever done so in 15 years of redmen.com but I'm going to predict that this team gets into the Top 10 rankings. This is the best team we've had since the Erick Barkley crew and we have a LOT of weapons that most teams won't be able to matchup with. That team had a lot of chemistry aside from the skills. If these guys come together like that as a team this will be a great team.

Wow...top 10? For that to happen this team will have to look like a totally different team from last year. Night and day. Jordan will have to be the real deal, Hooper will have to knock down 3's consistently, Sampson, Pointer, and Harrison will have to significantly improve, Sanchez has to dominate with rebounds, and we will need to be healthy for a top 10 spot to even be realistic. I'd be thrilled being anywhere in the top 25 and if we made the sweet 16 I'd be ecstatic and so would the city. It's just hard to picture this team having that much success growing up as they sucked 95% of my lifetime. We no doubt have the horses...the question is, will they live up to these expectations? Let's hope this is a season to remember. Make or break year for Lavin.

Please explain why it is make or break.

Because this is a season where Lavin will have as talented and veteran a team as he ever will. All the horses are here...if we have a bad year it won't be for lack of talent or too much inexperience. The missing piece is Lavin getting them prepared now. When I said make or break I don't mean fired obviously, but if we don't at the very least make the tournament and flirt with the top 25-30 while finishing in the top 4 in conference, then something is wrong and Lavin will have tons of articles written about him being on the hot seat. He has his best horses out there, so what happens this year will be more attributed to the coach IMO. Let me turn that around...if we miss the tourney, how does Lavin NOT get placed on the hot seat with a sweet 16 capable team talent wise?

Certainly fans have expectations for this season (including me; indeed I have very high hopes); and also for certain this is a high pressure job for Lavin. But I think that this season there is still room for an in-between result where it doesn't 'break' or 'make' the momentum of the program. What would happen if they make the tournament and win only one game and get upset in the second round? Is that a failure? what if they lost in the 1st game of the tournament, but Lavin has again brought even more high-level recruits? Would that be a 'break' season? On the other hand, let's say that we make the sweet sixteen or elite eight, but we can't get a single stud recruit to come on board? Is that a 'make' season? I know I'm parsing words, but I think there is a little more wiggle room between the two absolutes of 'make' or 'break'. A whole range of possibilities can happen, and most likely the team's results and the direction of the program will be something between and an absolute stunning success and an absolute failure.

1. Make tourney and win only 1 game then upset in 2nd round = mild success because we still made the tourney which is the absolute bare minimum we are expected to do.

2. Lost in 1st game of tourney but Lavin brings more high-level recruits = mild success because we made the tourney, but questions would begin to surface and he would be seen as a glamorous recruiter with no results, so the high-recruiting profile would start to seem meaningless.

3. Make sweet 16 or elite 8 but can't get stud recruits = 100% wild success...this is a results-oriented business and both of those are exceptional results so recruiting takes the back seat here.

Results are more important than recruiting...just ask Temple, Wichita State, Butler, Creighton, etc. If Lavin does not take us to the tourney at the bare minimum, this season will be seen as a severe failure. If we make the tourney but get knocked out asap people will say "well, at least SJU is taking steps towards being a long-term relevant program again, but his recruiting prowess seems like it means nothing if the results don't match the recruiting talent". We will be seen as paper tigers.

But how do all those possible results 'make' or 'break' the program or Lavin? They don't to me, it just means you look forward to the following year and you re-load. It just seems to me that you are saying that if somehow this season doesn't pan out the way we want, the program is done. I don't think it would be. What if the Ws and Ls are not we want, but we continue to have great recruiting momentum? The program wouldn't be 'broken'.

One could argue it was make or break for Lavin his first three seasons if he could show he could recruit here and turn/change the perception of the program. That to me is more make or break than any single season's worth of Wins and Losses. The perception of program is markedly different from the pre-Lavin era. I think he's gotten us through the make or break phase. We're relevant again. That's what's important to me.
 
The perception of program is markedly different from the pre-Lavin era. I think he's gotten us through the make or break phase. We're relevant again.

Makes sense.

Lavin has gotten us past one important phase, which was to make us relevant again and garner the attention of blue-chip players.

He finally has the outfit that he truly feels will consistently win games. Win this season, and the water underneath gets more smoother.
 
Its frustrating to think we are still considered a bubble team. We should be much better than last year and we were a bubble team before Dlo got suspended. But, the only thing that really matters is what we do in games, it really doesn't matter what pundits think at this point.

True and I am very optimistic. I don't go in much for making predictions and I don't think I've ever done so in 15 years of redmen.com but I'm going to predict that this team gets into the Top 10 rankings. This is the best team we've had since the Erick Barkley crew and we have a LOT of weapons that most teams won't be able to matchup with. That team had a lot of chemistry aside from the skills. If these guys come together like that as a team this will be a great team.

Wow...top 10? For that to happen this team will have to look like a totally different team from last year. Night and day. Jordan will have to be the real deal, Hooper will have to knock down 3's consistently, Sampson, Pointer, and Harrison will have to significantly improve, Sanchez has to dominate with rebounds, and we will need to be healthy for a top 10 spot to even be realistic. I'd be thrilled being anywhere in the top 25 and if we made the sweet 16 I'd be ecstatic and so would the city. It's just hard to picture this team having that much success growing up as they sucked 95% of my lifetime. We no doubt have the horses...the question is, will they live up to these expectations? Let's hope this is a season to remember. Make or break year for Lavin.

Please explain why it is make or break.

Because this is a season where Lavin will have as talented and veteran a team as he ever will. All the horses are here...if we have a bad year it won't be for lack of talent or too much inexperience. The missing piece is Lavin getting them prepared now. When I said make or break I don't mean fired obviously, but if we don't at the very least make the tournament and flirt with the top 25-30 while finishing in the top 4 in conference, then something is wrong and Lavin will have tons of articles written about him being on the hot seat. He has his best horses out there, so what happens this year will be more attributed to the coach IMO. Let me turn that around...if we miss the tourney, how does Lavin NOT get placed on the hot seat with a sweet 16 capable team talent wise?

Certainly fans have expectations for this season (including me; indeed I have very high hopes); and also for certain this is a high pressure job for Lavin. But I think that this season there is still room for an in-between result where it doesn't 'break' or 'make' the momentum of the program. What would happen if they make the tournament and win only one game and get upset in the second round? Is that a failure? what if they lost in the 1st game of the tournament, but Lavin has again brought even more high-level recruits? Would that be a 'break' season? On the other hand, let's say that we make the sweet sixteen or elite eight, but we can't get a single stud recruit to come on board? Is that a 'make' season? I know I'm parsing words, but I think there is a little more wiggle room between the two absolutes of 'make' or 'break'. A whole range of possibilities can happen, and most likely the team's results and the direction of the program will be something between and an absolute stunning success and an absolute failure.

1. Make tourney and win only 1 game then upset in 2nd round = mild success because we still made the tourney which is the absolute bare minimum we are expected to do.

2. Lost in 1st game of tourney but Lavin brings more high-level recruits = mild success because we made the tourney, but questions would begin to surface and he would be seen as a glamorous recruiter with no results, so the high-recruiting profile would start to seem meaningless.

3. Make sweet 16 or elite 8 but can't get stud recruits = 100% wild success...this is a results-oriented business and both of those are exceptional results so recruiting takes the back seat here.

Results are more important than recruiting...just ask Temple, Wichita State, Butler, Creighton, etc. If Lavin does not take us to the tourney at the bare minimum, this season will be seen as a severe failure. If we make the tourney but get knocked out asap people will say "well, at least SJU is taking steps towards being a long-term relevant program again, but his recruiting prowess seems like it means nothing if the results don't match the recruiting talent". We will be seen as paper tigers.

But how do all those possible results 'make' or 'break' the program or Lavin? They don't to me, it just means you look forward to the following year and you re-load. It just seems to me that you are saying that if somehow this season doesn't pan out the way we want, the program is done. I don't think it would be. What if the Ws and Ls are not we want, but we continue to have great recruiting momentum? The program wouldn't be 'broken'.

One could argue it was make or break for Lavin his first three seasons if he could show he could recruit here and turn/change the perception of the program. That to me is more make or break than any single season's worth of Wins and Losses. The perception of program is markedly different from the pre-Lavin era. I think he's gotten us through the make or break phase. We're relevant again. That's what's important to me.

The way I'd describe it is Lavin is at a crossroads. One sign says "Paper Tigers" and the other sign says "National Relevance". If we don't make the tourney we are paper tigers in the worst way. If we do make the tourney we are on our way towards national relevance, provided that we keep those appearances up. This season is the one that will tell us which exit our program takes...either a true turning point or more of the same failure. We will see which exit Lavin takes the team, obviously you know which one I want us to take.
 
If Im not mistaken the Barkley teams did not have preseason top 25 rankings.

They were ranked in the preseason. I believe they were ranked somewhere between #16-#18.

EDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999–2000_NCAA_Division_I_men's_basketball_season#Pre-season_polls

I call BS... the team Jarvis took over was definitely NOT ranked going into the pre-season... and if they were it was borderline top 35, certainly not between 16-18..lol... Gotta love the re-visionist history!!.... barkley's second year we were ranked before the season, NOT the first!
 
If Im not mistaken the Barkley teams did not have preseason top 25 rankings.

They were ranked in the preseason. I believe they were ranked somewhere between #16-#18.

EDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999–2000_NCAA_Division_I_men's_basketball_season#Pre-season_polls

I call BS... the team Jarvis took over was definitely NOT ranked going into the pre-season... and if they were it was borderline top 35, certainly not between 16-18..lol... Gotta love the re-visionist history!!.... barkley's second year we were ranked before the season, NOT the first!

I, intended to say during Barkley's second year they were ranked in the preseason. I felt you would've picked up on it since I posted the link from that particular season.

Revisionist history? Nah, fella.... Just responding to a poster.
 
We received the best present we could have possibly asked for by getting Orlando Sanchez, a 6'8 remarkably skilled big man, with three years of college experience (one as a redshirt at STJ). Sanchez single-handedly cures many of the ills St. John's suffered from last season. He is 220 pounds, a terrific rebounder down low, he passes and moves the ball extremely well for a big man, and he even hits threes at a good clip.

I have read several times that Sanchez is a good outside shooter. But the stats give another consideration:

As sophomore Sanchez was 5-19 (.263) in 3 point shooting. Remember Bourgault shot .42 in the same team.

Davon Marshall shot .47.

=4&divid=0&slid=2&seasonselect=556&collegeid=1232&report_id=3759&requesttimeout=15

And Sanchez was 40-68 (.582) in free throws.

=4&divid=0&slid=2&seasonselect=556&collegeid=1232&report_id=3757&requesttimeout=15


Davon Marshall is not the best example. He shot 43.1% from three (and 85% from FT line) on SEVEN attempts per game during his first season with Liberty. He averaged over 32 minutes per game, scored 13.6 per game, and played a different position than he did at Monroe for many of those minutes.
Also, on that Monroe roster besides Marshall and Bourgault, was Drimir Ferguson who shot 35% from three and 82% fromt he line in his first (and only) season with NC Central. He shot 36% and 74% at Monroe.

Sanchez only had 19 attempts from three, so it is tough to base too much off the statistic. From watching a handful of Monroe games, I can tell you that their "system" does not favor a skilled player like Sanchez. Davon Marshall is as good of a shooter as there is in the entire country. If he wasn't 5'9, he would be in a high major. Ferguson took way too many ill-advised threes that really ruined the flow for Monroe. And, of course, there was also the sweet shooting Bourgault to take shots. Sanchez was a post player, and very far down the todum pole for three pint attempts.

Look at what Ndour did this year after the ballhogs all left. He went from 3-10 (30%) from three last year to 15-34 this year (44%).
 
Its frustrating to think we are still considered a bubble team. We should be much better than last year and we were a bubble team before Dlo got suspended. But, the only thing that really matters is what we do in games, it really doesn't matter what pundits think at this point.

True and I am very optimistic. I don't go in much for making predictions and I don't think I've ever done so in 15 years of redmen.com but I'm going to predict that this team gets into the Top 10 rankings. This is the best team we've had since the Erick Barkley crew and we have a LOT of weapons that most teams won't be able to matchup with. That team had a lot of chemistry aside from the skills. If these guys come together like that as a team this will be a great team.

Wow...top 10? For that to happen this team will have to look like a totally different team from last year. Night and day. Jordan will have to be the real deal, Hooper will have to knock down 3's consistently, Sampson, Pointer, and Harrison will have to significantly improve, Sanchez has to dominate with rebounds, and we will need to be healthy for a top 10 spot to even be realistic. I'd be thrilled being anywhere in the top 25 and if we made the sweet 16 I'd be ecstatic and so would the city. It's just hard to picture this team having that much success growing up as they sucked 95% of my lifetime. We no doubt have the horses...the question is, will they live up to these expectations? Let's hope this is a season to remember. Make or break year for Lavin.

Please explain why it is make or break.

Because this is a season where Lavin will have as talented and veteran a team as he ever will. All the horses are here...if we have a bad year it won't be for lack of talent or too much inexperience. The missing piece is Lavin getting them prepared now. When I said make or break I don't mean fired obviously, but if we don't at the very least make the tournament and flirt with the top 25-30 while finishing in the top 4 in conference, then something is wrong and Lavin will have tons of articles written about him being on the hot seat. He has his best horses out there, so what happens this year will be more attributed to the coach IMO. Let me turn that around...if we miss the tourney, how does Lavin NOT get placed on the hot seat with a sweet 16 capable team talent wise?

Certainly fans have expectations for this season (including me; indeed I have very high hopes); and also for certain this is a high pressure job for Lavin. But I think that this season there is still room for an in-between result where it doesn't 'break' or 'make' the momentum of the program. What would happen if they make the tournament and win only one game and get upset in the second round? Is that a failure? what if they lost in the 1st game of the tournament, but Lavin has again brought even more high-level recruits? Would that be a 'break' season? On the other hand, let's say that we make the sweet sixteen or elite eight, but we can't get a single stud recruit to come on board? Is that a 'make' season? I know I'm parsing words, but I think there is a little more wiggle room between the two absolutes of 'make' or 'break'. A whole range of possibilities can happen, and most likely the team's results and the direction of the program will be something between and an absolute stunning success and an absolute failure.

1. Make tourney and win only 1 game then upset in 2nd round = mild success because we still made the tourney which is the absolute bare minimum we are expected to do.

2. Lost in 1st game of tourney but Lavin brings more high-level recruits = mild success because we made the tourney, but questions would begin to surface and he would be seen as a glamorous recruiter with no results, so the high-recruiting profile would start to seem meaningless.

3. Make sweet 16 or elite 8 but can't get stud recruits = 100% wild success...this is a results-oriented business and both of those are exceptional results so recruiting takes the back seat here.

Results are more important than recruiting...just ask Temple, Wichita State, Butler, Creighton, etc. If Lavin does not take us to the tourney at the bare minimum, this season will be seen as a severe failure. If we make the tourney but get knocked out asap people will say "well, at least SJU is taking steps towards being a long-term relevant program again, but his recruiting prowess seems like it means nothing if the results don't match the recruiting talent". We will be seen as paper tigers.

But how do all those possible results 'make' or 'break' the program or Lavin? They don't to me, it just means you look forward to the following year and you re-load. It just seems to me that you are saying that if somehow this season doesn't pan out the way we want, the program is done. I don't think it would be. What if the Ws and Ls are not we want, but we continue to have great recruiting momentum? The program wouldn't be 'broken'.

One could argue it was make or break for Lavin his first three seasons if he could show he could recruit here and turn/change the perception of the program. That to me is more make or break than any single season's worth of Wins and Losses. The perception of program is markedly different from the pre-Lavin era. I think he's gotten us through the make or break phase. We're relevant again. That's what's important to me.

The way I'd describe it is Lavin is at a crossroads. One sign says "Paper Tigers" and the other sign says "National Relevance". If we don't make the tourney we are paper tigers in the worst way. If we do make the tourney we are on our way towards national relevance, provided that we keep those appearances up. This season is the one that will tell us which exit our program takes...either a true turning point or more of the same failure. We will see which exit Lavin takes the team, obviously you know which one I want us to take.

I agree with BK, we are relevant again and that is what is important to me as well.
 
The fact that we are a relevant national program again is great. The problem is however, recruits read the pre season rankings/ hype as well. If a team that is supposed to do well, has a stacked roster with a supposedly great staff, falters, then recruits and their entourage may take notice. (Kentucky being the exception) So while I'm all for high pre season rankings and grandiose expectations, soetimes it's better to come in a tad less visible and surprise. Then again, arguments can be made for high pre season rankings/ expectations as well.
 
Back
Top