Lavin's Interview After Loss
- Thread starter JackofVirginia
- Start date
Thank you for this, I always wondered what coach K and Boehim's records where in their first 5 years.
I think we all need to lay off Lavin because he has us headed in the right direction, from recruiting, to media attention, to improving the facilities by convincing the school to allocate more money to the program and getting alumni to donate. THIS IS WHAT IT TAKES TO BUILD THE PROGRAM THE RIGHT WAY, WITHOUT DIRTY RECRUITING, WITHOUT CHEATING.
You all sound like the millennial generation, needing instant gratification, typical New Yorker's. That is not going to happen, everything that is great takes time and patience, and we are in a better spot than we have been in a long time.
I consider myself a hardcore fan, and a sore looser. The game against Georgetown was so atrocious I had to it turned off after only the first half hour. So yes I am not a fan of loosing but there is so much negativity in here its enough to bring the whole city down.
Stop whining and enjoy the ride to the top, because the program is headed in a great direction.
ZanMan
Well-known member
Also look up Jim Calhoun's and Jay Wright's first 3 seasons at yukon and Nova. There is a pattern there, including with Coach K's first 3 years. The first 3 years weren't successful by any means for them. Year 4 is when they had something successful.
Also, let us not forget that this is really year 2 for Coach Lavin.
It is simple for me...St. John's is my school and my team, and I will root forever. I will never quit following them. If you don't want to wait, find another team and stop your moaning, especially after only 4 conference games have been played!
Also, let us not forget that this is really year 2 for Coach Lavin.
It is simple for me...St. John's is my school and my team, and I will root forever. I will never quit following them. If you don't want to wait, find another team and stop your moaning, especially after only 4 conference games have been played!
ZanMan
Well-known member
We have talented athletes, but they are puppies who have not figured it out together yet.
When you expect instant impact from freshmen and sophs, it can often blow up in your face unless you have the Fab 5.
I do see some talent here, but I don't see upper echelon basketball talent yet at all. That sometimes takes time.
When you expect instant impact from freshmen and sophs, it can often blow up in your face unless you have the Fab 5.
I do see some talent here, but I don't see upper echelon basketball talent yet at all. That sometimes takes time.
basketballjones
Well-known member
The team showed more discipline under Dunlap last year. I hope you don't, but you'll probably see it in the Notre Dame game coming up. St. John's won last year against them, I believe. That game was won with great defense and stopping their 3 point shooters. This year, who knows?
The frustration of some is a result of the team looking less than prepared. If you lose a tough game against a better opponent and you're competing, challenging every shot, the talk about being "the youngest team" and "it's a learning process" carries more weight. St. John's got flat out schooled in the Georgetown game. They moved the ball at will.
The frustration of some is a result of the team looking less than prepared. If you lose a tough game against a better opponent and you're competing, challenging every shot, the talk about being "the youngest team" and "it's a learning process" carries more weight. St. John's got flat out schooled in the Georgetown game. They moved the ball at will.
But, by the same token, we beat a better Cinci team. Some teams come in better prepared for us (Georgetown) than others (Cinci). Unfortunately, our team is very inconsistent right now. We scored a lot of points against Nova and lost. We couldn't score against Rutgers and Georgetown, and lost. We have to put it together on both ends of the floor and avoid those scoring droughts. It will come---soon.
ZanMan
Well-known member
I think the "looking less than prepared" line is often misused.
I have no doubt that 99% of D1 coaches at this level are preparing their players for games properly.
To me, it is the execution after the preparation that we see and judge, and not all players are able to properly execute the way you want them to come game time, especially young freshmen and sophs!
In the past I have prepped my teams endlessly all week for hours on end, and come game time, they looked like we never held a practice all week! I'm quite sure this happens on a higher level too.
Coach Lavin is a pro. Do we really think he is sitting down on the job during practice and letting them play xbox? No freakin way.
I think criticism of the coach is fair.
There is plenty of talent on the roster. Phil Greene is perfectly serviceable at the point. Branch does some things very well, though he also has some weaknesses to be worked on. Between the two of them, the PG spot is certainly adequate for the Big East.
Harrison is obviously as good a 2-guard as there is in the league - at least based on talent. More about him later.
Obekpa is not a finished product, but is already a game-changer as a shotblocker and is coming along as a rebounder. Obviously his offensive game needs work, but he is still a guy just about any team in the league would take and start at center.
Sampson is obviously a talent, and Garrett is a great energy / glue guy who does positive things all over the court.
On the bench Pointer, Balamou, Bourgault are fine role players (though one wonders exactly what role Bourgault has - you would think he is supposed to be a spot-up shooter, but somehow he never gets to do that).
And yet all of these pieces don't seem to fit together. There's no identity on offense, they don't seem to know their roles, there is no rhyme or reason to the substitution patterns. The only visible play is a high pick (usually without even a roll), after which the offense consists of getting the ball to Harrison and hoping he will create something.
Of course everyone has figured that out, which has mostly reduced Harrison's offense to driving and getting fouled. There's no ball movement, and no man movement either. It's arguable that Norm actually ran a better offense.
Some of this is attributable to the fact that only Green, Branch, and Harrison are actually basketball players. Presumably so is Bourgault, though he never gets to play enough to know. But it is clear that the rest are athletes who are supposed to be learning how to be basketball players.
It's obvious that the philosophy is to try to create turnovers out of the zone (not working) and then run the floor for opencourt baskets. That's good, because at the moment running down the floor and dunking is the only thing this team does well. The problem is that (a) the zone isn't working and (b) there is nothing going on the halfcourt offense (I use the term loosely). It's not just the Georgetown game, it's every game. The wins have just papered it over.
At the end of the day, if the players still can't operate the zone, if the staff waits until they are out of the game to switch to man (as in the Georgetown game), if there is no apparent halfcourt offense, and if the ball gets forced to Harrison while all of the other players stand around, if there's no team identity, they don't play together, and they don't know their roles, there is only one place to lay the responsibility.
All of it is fixable, and experience will help. One would have to think that the staff sees the obvious, which is the first step towards fixing it. But they may have to make a decision whether they want to continue trying to make Harrison the next Dwight Hardy, or whether they actually want to run a team game.
But right now it's tough to watch.
There is plenty of talent on the roster. Phil Greene is perfectly serviceable at the point. Branch does some things very well, though he also has some weaknesses to be worked on. Between the two of them, the PG spot is certainly adequate for the Big East.
Harrison is obviously as good a 2-guard as there is in the league - at least based on talent. More about him later.
Obekpa is not a finished product, but is already a game-changer as a shotblocker and is coming along as a rebounder. Obviously his offensive game needs work, but he is still a guy just about any team in the league would take and start at center.
Sampson is obviously a talent, and Garrett is a great energy / glue guy who does positive things all over the court.
On the bench Pointer, Balamou, Bourgault are fine role players (though one wonders exactly what role Bourgault has - you would think he is supposed to be a spot-up shooter, but somehow he never gets to do that).
And yet all of these pieces don't seem to fit together. There's no identity on offense, they don't seem to know their roles, there is no rhyme or reason to the substitution patterns. The only visible play is a high pick (usually without even a roll), after which the offense consists of getting the ball to Harrison and hoping he will create something.
Of course everyone has figured that out, which has mostly reduced Harrison's offense to driving and getting fouled. There's no ball movement, and no man movement either. It's arguable that Norm actually ran a better offense.
Some of this is attributable to the fact that only Green, Branch, and Harrison are actually basketball players. Presumably so is Bourgault, though he never gets to play enough to know. But it is clear that the rest are athletes who are supposed to be learning how to be basketball players.
It's obvious that the philosophy is to try to create turnovers out of the zone (not working) and then run the floor for opencourt baskets. That's good, because at the moment running down the floor and dunking is the only thing this team does well. The problem is that (a) the zone isn't working and (b) there is nothing going on the halfcourt offense (I use the term loosely). It's not just the Georgetown game, it's every game. The wins have just papered it over.
At the end of the day, if the players still can't operate the zone, if the staff waits until they are out of the game to switch to man (as in the Georgetown game), if there is no apparent halfcourt offense, and if the ball gets forced to Harrison while all of the other players stand around, if there's no team identity, they don't play together, and they don't know their roles, there is only one place to lay the responsibility.
All of it is fixable, and experience will help. One would have to think that the staff sees the obvious, which is the first step towards fixing it. But they may have to make a decision whether they want to continue trying to make Harrison the next Dwight Hardy, or whether they actually want to run a team game.
But right now it's tough to watch.
basketballjones
Well-known member
That's what I meant to say.
Holy smokes! A reasoned post that doesn't excoriate everything about Lavin from his coaching to the color of his sneakers. And it was made by one of our resident Lavin dislikers (I do not like to use the term "hater" in sports).
What's next, lawmanfan saying something about the poor economy is not all Bush's fault? Now when it come to describing how lawman feels about Bush, the term hate may apply.
I totally disagree with you re: the point guard situation. Branch may get better (I actually think he's a step ahead of most guys on this team, hence, it seems like he's trying to show off that whip pass, when in reality, our guys just can't handle it), but Greene does nothing but dribble for 30 seconds. That's part of the reason why Harrison is just hoisting shots all day (though I would like to have seen Lavin sit D'Angelo at around the 8 minute mark the other day, if only to challange the other guys to step up there games).
I also find Sampson to be very, very soft, mentally. If things go wrong in the first few minutes of a game, that's it, he's done for the night. Now, he's only a freshman, so that aspect could improve with time, but he's no further along with it now, then he was at the start of the season, IMO.
Lavin's biggest mistake, IMO, was recruiting Pointer, Garrett, Greene, and Balamou. It was not a mistake recruiting any one of those guys individually, but putting them all together cripples us, because none of them can score points with any consistansy (not even a lot is needed, just around 10 ppg from any 2 of them will do). Yes, it's great to have glue/energy guys, who can be a factor without scoring a single point. I think you'll find however, that most of the championship calibar teams have only 1 or 2 players like that, at most. We have 4 or 5, and while it's great, at the end of the day, if you can't put the ball in the basket, you won't win (and I'm even excluding Obekpa because of his defensive prowess, but you could certianly throw him in there, too).
I don't have a problem with Greene out of that particular group. I think Greene can be a valuable player.... off the ball. He could be serviceable in the point guard role in spot duty (5-8 minutes per game). Otherwise, I think he's better served playing off the ball.
I agree with you, in reference to the others you've mentioned. Pointer, Garrett, and Balamou are beneficial from an individual standpoint. But it's probably a bit overkill to have all 3 of 'em. Considering, Pointer and Garrett are a class ahead of Balamou, then it probably should've been Pointer since he was the first to commit.
It's good to have a handful of gazelles, but it's also imperative to have an all-around basketball player.
Yes, I thought the 3-guard alingment of Branch, Greene, and Harrison was very effective in the Nova game.
You could substitute Jones for Greene in the above group, since energy seemed to be his greatest assest too. Of course, he doesn't play anymore, so I tend to forget about him.
I have been saying all along. Our recruiting classes have been overrated. Pointer will never more than a big east role player. Balamou and Bourgault are MAAC players. Harrison,Obekpa and Sampson have great potential. Garrett is an excellent glue guy nothing more. Greene is not a true point and Branch isn't that good. I still think if we can improve and add a couple more impact players we can be contenders when Harrison is a senior.
Class of 72
Active member
While I agree our recruits have been overrated none of the players you mention were signed to be "starters" except Harrison and Sampson.
In the ideal world of October 2011, our current roster would have been composed of Nurideen Lindsey, Harrison, Harkless, Sampson and Gift/Norvel. Everyone else of the current players would have filled a role off the bench.
Branch is a better player than he has shown. Balamou is a pure freshman who will be a very good player in a couple of years.
The absence of guys like Pelle, Harkless, Sanchez and the loss of Gathers has had a tremendous negative effect on this team and Lavin's timetable.
As I have harped one too many times, my biggest disappointment (being a big Gift fan) was Lav benching him and leaving us with no depth up front and the team's total lack of preparedness for games. Both of those issues I put squarely on the coaching staff......ALL of them.
We need a big upset against ND. If we play as flat as against Gtown, I would hate to read Joeys comments......I am afraid I may totally agree with him! LOL!
Yes some have criticized coach Lavin but I do not recall anyone calling for him to be fired. That would be plain nuts. I just think he needs a lot of talent to win and he seems to be building that talent level and if we sign our 2 targets the future looks bright. Much like beloved coachs Lapchick and Louie, not the greatest strategists or bench coaches but can attract talent and good motivators which allowed them to be sucessful.
westchesterjoe
Active member
I don't recall saying Lavin should be fired. I have questioned what seemingly looks like a non descript offense and a ineffective defense that nearly all of our opponents have exploited, including the USF'S, UNC-ASHEVILLE, Murray State. It goes without saying that BE teams will bulldoze us even more.
Many wishful posters want to say this is Lavin's first year Coaching his players,hoping kids who transferred or went to the NBA, or that never enrolled here would have made this team better. Maybe yes, maybe not.. I THOUGHT HE DID A EXTRAORDINARY JOB WITH Hardy, BURRELL, kENNEDY, HORNE,ETC.
I would think all agree that some degree of improvement should have shown itself by now in Mid January but, what we are seeing now, isn't much different than back in Charleston in November, is it?
As for Louie and Coach Lapchick, they got most of their players from essentially a subway ride away..And, both of these HOF Coaches did impose a style of play that distinguished their teams. No LOUIE wasn't the best in game strategist but, his teams ran plays, played tough man to man defense and most years played in the NCAA'S.
This team doesn't do any of those things other than dribble the ball high and free lance when the shot clock runs down. Defense? I haven't seen anything that would qualify for that word yet.
I'VE been a REDMEN for nearly 60 years, graduated from the Business School and followed the team far longer than many who post here.. If you all think what you are seeing on the Court will improve with age, I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT BUT, i DOUBT IT.
If you think either a offensive or defensive scheme is in place currently, then good luck to you.
Many wishful posters want to say this is Lavin's first year Coaching his players,hoping kids who transferred or went to the NBA, or that never enrolled here would have made this team better. Maybe yes, maybe not.. I THOUGHT HE DID A EXTRAORDINARY JOB WITH Hardy, BURRELL, kENNEDY, HORNE,ETC.
I would think all agree that some degree of improvement should have shown itself by now in Mid January but, what we are seeing now, isn't much different than back in Charleston in November, is it?
As for Louie and Coach Lapchick, they got most of their players from essentially a subway ride away..And, both of these HOF Coaches did impose a style of play that distinguished their teams. No LOUIE wasn't the best in game strategist but, his teams ran plays, played tough man to man defense and most years played in the NCAA'S.
This team doesn't do any of those things other than dribble the ball high and free lance when the shot clock runs down. Defense? I haven't seen anything that would qualify for that word yet.
I'VE been a REDMEN for nearly 60 years, graduated from the Business School and followed the team far longer than many who post here.. If you all think what you are seeing on the Court will improve with age, I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT BUT, i DOUBT IT.
If you think either a offensive or defensive scheme is in place currently, then good luck to you.