I realize that next year will be the 3rd year for Mullin and staff to be on the sidelines, but, I don't view it as year 3 of the rebuild, I view it as year 2. Why? Because he did not get to go through a full recruitment cycle and was left with no players his 1st year. He took a bunch of grad transfers that weren't very good, just to put a team on the floor. So for me, the rebuild just finished year 1, and I am happy with what I have seen, and hope for better days to come.
That's fair. To me if we are in hunt for NCAA bid for most of next season, retain Ponds & other core guys, land a solid 18 recruiting class & are positioned well for 19 kids, it should give us confidence we are on track for continuous success.
Agree. To add to the attributes you noted and as think we've discussed previously Year 4 is really the telling one for NCAA IMO. Would be great to make it next year, think in a few months we'll be looking at a roster that has a reasonable chance to make it, but not going to be a referendum on this staff if they don't. Think .500 or better overall and in league with a mid-high teen W total are the musts. If that adds up to NCAA or if we outperform that and are squarely in NCAA great, but not a must.
Year 4 you really need to be there. As Providence and Marquette and even Seton Hall demonstrated this year it's tough to make the tournament but it's not that tough. Providence is dancing for their 4th year in a row which is more than SJU has been since 2000. They can't be that much better positioned than us to succeed.
Don't know when I first got concerned about Lavin's ability to establish year over year success here, but it was definitely by the time SJU didn't make the tourney with loaded and balanced roster in terms of experience in Year 4. For that kind of team all the early talk about peaking by February, then the 5 game losing streak to start conference play, and blowing a 7 point late first half lead that turned into a 17 point late second half deficit in the BET v. Providence (although we scratched back) with confounding substitution patterns when it was essentially an NCAA play-in game...I recall sitting in MSG after that one and at the end of that season having questions. Just didn't seem like we were getting most out of what we had.
Think it's fair to evaluate this staff on similar timeline.
