Mike Vacc SJU Critique

[stjohnschris]

Thanks for the link, great read and hits all the big picture points. Completely agree that moving forward should be an overall package, from the AD, to the facilities, to the coach. If we commit to all 3, we stand to attract interest from high level coaches wanting the job, which attracts a bigger pool of quality recruits. We should not have to lean on our proximity to Astoria to attract a 7 foot player from Greece. I think that the off-the-court player issues stands to do more damage to SL than his actual coaching and recruiting performance. It will be interesting to see how the new President deals with all of this.

 

[ctstorm]

. I think that the off-the-court player issues stands to do more damage to SL than his actual coaching and recruiting performance. It will be interesting to see how the new President deals with all of this.

We know how Father H would have dealt with it.

 

[Mean Gene]

Fun
Yes, but I think he was stating that if you are prepared to let go off a somewhat succesful coach, you had better be prepared to replace him with a big time coach. And I do not think the school would be prepared to do that.
I agree Lavin seems to be a happy medium for the school, but if replaced I think the school goes the other way instead of moving forward. That is why I would rather keep him warts and all.

My point about posters complaints about Lavin is that the things they complain about, ineligibilities, supensions, weed, self promoting would be far worse with an even more succesful coach.

I agree with the article your interpretation We Are SJU. I think Lavin is the happy medium. I agree with Vaccaro that a decision has to be made to devote the resources and facilities to the program to move it forward and to become a big time program in the current era. If the university is committed to doing that, then I say you extend Lavin for three years to let him set up his recruiting etc. That gives him four years, by that time the university can do what it has to in terms of committing the resources and upgrading the facilities and such. Once all that is done, and we have what we need to entice a big time coach to come here, you can then evaluate where Lavin is after another four years and after he's had the chance to work with all additional resources etc. If Lavin and the program are not where they need to be at that juncture, then you go out and get a big time coach when you have everything you need to get him here.

 

[newsman13]

The funny thing is I happen to agree with Vaccaro, but the vast majority who want Lavin replaced seem to want to keep the Mom and Pop mentality. If your complaint is supensions and ineligibilities, well I don't care how you upgrade your facilities you would be looking at a Norm Roberts type coach. And with that type of coach you could build a state of the art facility on the dark side of the moon and you would still be a small time sdhool.

Isn't Vaccaro's point that keeping Lavin is an admission that Saint John's is a small time school? That the level that he's achieved - he's not as crazy an Fran, not as corrupt as Jarvis and not as bad as Norm - is good enough?

I don't know about small time. That's Iona. Keeping Lavin or bringing in a Hurley/Miller would maintain our status as the big dog in NYC while being the fire hydrant for the national dogs. When Lavin was brought in, many of us, including me, thought he was the big time hire we hoped for. Maybe another Calhoun/Wright type...someone who would lead us to national prominence. I know nothing about Gempshaw. My gut tells me he'll be happy as the big dog in NYC and that's it. Most of the posters here feel the same...the occasional NCAA one and done with aspirations for more every 15 years or so.

 

[redstorm89]

When people say we need facility upgrades, what kind of upgrades does taffner need? I know carnesseca arena is a mess.

 

[jerseyshorejohnny]

The funny thing is I happen to agree with Vaccaro, but the vast majority who want Lavin replaced seem to want to keep the Mom and Pop mentality. If your complaint is supensions and ineligibilities, well I don't care how you upgrade your facilities you would be looking at a Norm Roberts type coach. And with that type of coach you could build a state of the art facility on the dark side of the moon and you would still be a small time sdhool.

Isn't Vaccaro's point that keeping Lavin is an admission that Saint John's is a small time school? That the level that he's achieved - he's not as crazy an Fran, not as corrupt as Jarvis and not as bad as Norm - is good enough?

I don't know about small time. That's Iona. Keeping Lavin or bringing in a Hurley/Miller would maintain our status as the big dog in NYC while being the fire hydrant for the national dogs. When Lavin was brought in, many of us, including me, thought he was the big time hire we hoped for. Maybe another Calhoun/Wright type...someone who would lead us to national prominence. I know nothing about Gempshaw. My gut tells me he'll be happy as the big dog in NYC and that's it. Most of the posters here feel the same...the occasional NCAA one and done with aspirations for more every 15 years or so.

I'm 100% plus confident that "Bobby" knows how important basketball is to St. John's as a university.

As we all know, SJU has somewhat of an enrollment issue and one of the ways to adress that is through a basketball team that is consistently competitive

(my definition, FWIW, is the NCAA's, at least, 3 out of every 5 years).

To use a cliche, basketball is our "front porch" .

Everybody wants to be part of a winner, no more so than 18 year olds who are applying to college.

 

[jerseyshorejohnny]

I guess he reads the board

I sent him an e-mail yesterday re Coach Lapchick and the 50th aniiversary of the NIT Win over Villanova in 1965.

Perhaps he will weave the SJU nugget into one of his columns this week.

 

[fun]

Fun
Yes, but I think he was stating that if you are prepared to let go off a somewhat succesful coach, you had better be prepared to replace him with a big time coach. And I do not think the school would be prepared to do that.
I agree Lavin seems to be a happy medium for the school, but if replaced I think the school goes the other way instead of moving forward. That is why I would rather keep him warts and all.

My point about posters complaints about Lavin is that the things they complain about, ineligibilities, supensions, weed, self promoting would be far worse with an even more succesful coach.

I don't disagree that things aren't that bad and could get worse. But if you're right the example MV uses, Villanova, did the opposite of what you suggest: they let go a coach who had at least as much success as Lavin (Lappas was 174-110 at VU with 4 NCAA appearances in 9 years) and brought in an up and coming mid major coach in Wright.

The problem with Lavin is that he needs to recruit to win - because he's, you know, a nitwit - and he seems none to interested in recruiting. He said earlier this year that recruiting "is the least of my concerns." That's a problem. It should be his number one priority, because he brings little else to the table. And it's especially a problem because the bloom is off the rose - he's not going to get the benefit of the doubt from recruits who've seen how poor a manager of talent he is.

 

[Class of 72]

Fun
Yes, but I think he was stating that if you are prepared to let go off a somewhat succesful coach, you had better be prepared to replace him with a big time coach. And I do not think the school would be prepared to do that.
I agree Lavin seems to be a happy medium for the school, but if replaced I think the school goes the other way instead of moving forward. That is why I would rather keep him warts and all.

My point about posters complaints about Lavin is that the things they complain about, ineligibilities, supensions, weed, self promoting would be far worse with an even more succesful coach.

I don't think we can make easy assumptions like things would be far worse with a coach with a more successful record than Lavin but one thing is certain and that is that, as I have harped on for most of the Lavin-related debates, is if St. John's fires him and the best some of his biggest critics here can come up with is Masiello or Cluess or Hurley then all the facilities upgrades in the world won't make a difference in predicting future success. All that I agree with Vaccaro about in his article (thanks for getting some of your material from redmen.com ) is that if Lavin is replaced they need a brand name to continue what Lavin started in building the St. John's brand in NYC. A perceived "up-and-comer" from Manhattan College will not cut it any longer in NYC. Where I disagree is in assessment of the "infrastructure". I like many here have spent time in Taffner and it has state-of-the-art amenities unlike any schools in the NYC metro area and certainly as good as Rutgers from the BIG. My avatar was taken in Taffner and I am proud of the facility. I doubt Vaccaro has taken an extensive tour but we will never, ever have the facilities of Kentucky or North Carolina that he references and other than tearing down Carnesecca and building a corporate sponsored arena, not much else will improve our cinder block arena other than putting more lipstick on a pig.
And no Dr. Fun, keeping a $2 million coach with the highest paid staff in the Big East is not staying in a mom and pop culture and it basically comes down to what is the lifeblood of a successful program and that is recruiting. I submit that 2 NCAA bids, an NIT and 3 20 win seasons would be more than enough to extend Lavin had he secured the commitments of Diallo, Briscoe, Sampson along with a JC, and firm commitments from Rysheed Jordan and Obekpa to return. As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

 

[1and1sju]

As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

Or, as Gonzaga and Villanova have shown, it's about the competency of the coach.
Few and Wright weren't big names, but they were smart coaches, good managers, and hungry to be successful.

Fun is absolutely right. MV's article makes the point that if you're OK with mediocrity, then Lavin is fine. If you want to take a step forward, changes are necessary. And I couldn't agree more.

 

[paultzman]

As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

Or, as Gonzaga and Villanova have shown, it's about the competency of the coach.
Few and Wright weren't big names, but they were smart coaches, good managers, and hungry to be successful.

Fun is absolutely right. MV's article makes the point that if you're OK with mediocrity, then Lavin is fine. If you want to take a step forward, changes are necessary. And I couldn't agree more.

Lavin aside, Xavier to me is a model that is attainable Imo & would satisfy me. Also, dancing 3 out of 5 years as JJ noted is fine.

 

[we are sju]

I am by no means a recruiting expert, but just based off the difference between his first year as opposed to lately he does appear he has gone the way of Jarvis at the end. I think based off of UCLA and his first year he thought recruiting here would not be as hard as it turned out to be.

As far as Nova, that is the program I wish the admin would aspire to replicate. Not sure they have the guts, wherewithall or whatever to accomplish that though.

 

[TonyinFairfield]

As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

Or, as Gonzaga and Villanova have shown, it's about the competency of the coach.
Few and Wright weren't big names, but they were smart coaches, good managers, and hungry to be successful.

Fun is absolutely right. MV's article makes the point that if you're OK with mediocrity, then Lavin is fine. If you want to take a step forward, changes are necessary. And I couldn't agree more.

Could not disagree more with this fallacy that if you support Lavin, then you are accepting of mediocrity. I will withhold my assessment of Lavin's return until the balls are put away, but quite honestly, I am leaning toward bringing him back. That does NOT mean I accept mediocrity. What it means is that Lavin, while not the spectacular coach I thought he would be, has done a good job here. He has brought St. John's back in the limelight, and yes, for some not so positive reasons, but for what I believe are more positive than negative reasons.

The names thrown about as Lavin's replacement are, IMHO, taking a huge step backward. Did anybody hear Masiello after last night's debacle against a horrible Hampton team? He sounds worse than Lavin in Lavin's high spin moments. Now, if you told me that Jay Wright, Coach K or others at that caliber wanted to come here, then yes, I'd support that in a heartbeat. Because its a step up.

But one of the Hurleys? Masiello? Zach Spiker? That would be going backwards, not forwards.

So please, stop this propaganda that if you support Lavin, then you support mediocrity. That is pure and simple, BS.

And I can't believe I contributed to this thread becoming yet another debate about Lavin!

 

[Jack Williams]

As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

Or, as Gonzaga and Villanova have shown, it's about the competency of the coach.
Few and Wright weren't big names, but they were smart coaches, good managers, and hungry to be successful.

Fun is absolutely right. MV's article makes the point that if you're OK with mediocrity, then Lavin is fine. If you want to take a step forward, changes are necessary. And I couldn't agree more.

Lavin aside, Xavier to me is a model that is attainable Imo & would satisfy me. Also, dancing 3 out of 5 years as JJ noted is fine.

Exactly. I'm not a greedy fan at all. My wish as a program is to hear St. John's called on selection Sunday consistently. That's Xavier. They aren't always in the best position to make a deep run, but just being there is a great feeling and every few years we could make a sweet sixteen run or better.

Even this week I can't tell you how great it is walking around school and hearing people talk about St John's/SDSU on their bracket. It's just fun to be in and have all these people talking about you and watching you.

 

[we are sju]

Back before they hired Lavin(of which I thought was avery good one for the school) I was advocating going the mid major route and hiring a very good X and O guy who could recruit guys that fit his system. Make the three a big part of the offense and try and dip your feet back into NYC. I think if we would have done that it might have taken a little bit longer but we would have set ourselves up for the future of the program. Now if you go that route after Lavin, I just think the turn around will take too long and it will be basically taking a step back. This is the main reason that outside of getting a bigger name you keep Lavin.

Unfortunately I remember the dark days very vividly and I am petrified of returning to that Norm. Pun intended.

 

[Class of 72]

As Gonzaga and Villanova, two good examples, have shown, it is not about facilities it is about the players.

Or, as Gonzaga and Villanova have shown, it's about the competency of the coach.
Few and Wright weren't big names, but they were smart coaches, good managers, and hungry to be successful.

Fun is absolutely right. MV's article makes the point that if you're OK with mediocrity, then Lavin is fine. If you want to take a step forward, changes are necessary. And I couldn't agree more.

As usual, you are half right. Jay Wright is a coach I pushed for before Villanova hired him because he was the hottest coach in the NYC college scene with proven head coaching success. He was ours for the taking at one time.
If competency was a benchmark then John Calipari would not be on the short list for the Hall of Fame.
His success has been solely based on getting the best players money can buy, whether it be Memphis or UK. At the highest level it is about getting the right players at the "right time".
Lavin's failure has been "timing".

 

[we are sju]

Again not advocating it and I think he has done just enought to get an an extension, but if things don't work out.... I'll take BYU guy. I know they blew a big lead but I would watch those guys play anyday. That was crazy. That was the most fun game I have seen in awhile. Ole Miss team was pretty fun too.

 

[Knight]

Interesting article. What type of program do we want to have? Would a top program be happy with NCAA appearance 60% of the time (3 of 5 years)? What are the appearance rates of the top 20?

 

[Class of 72]

Again not advocating it and I think he has done just enought to get an an extension, but if things don't work out.... I'll take BYU guy. I know they blew a big lead but I would watch those guys play anyday. That was crazy. That was the most fun game I have seen in awhile. Ole Miss team was pretty fun too.

I think the fact that Lavin has "done just enough" is the reason he is in the hot seat. Most fans are justifiable in thinking "just enough" is not enough for a staff paid in excess of $3 million.
Sustainable success is built on talented players and looking past this year, which was a success in my book, we have only one talented player verbally committed.
That is a huge, huge problem. It is also a situation Lavin has avoided addressing using the cover of NCAA rules as a defense. The fact that 2016 players are not rushing to put St. John's on their list is also problematic for him. We will know more in the next few weeks if he advances one game in the tourney and is given time to close some player deals.

 

[doodyny33]

Been a fan of his articles all year but this one didn't really get going. Too short for what he was trying to say. We as did hards get it but a casual fan won't be informed of much from that article.

Concise articles are common during Tourney week. I agree with him that SJU has to be realistic in its expectations of the program & provide commitment & resources to achieve those. That commitment should include the presence of an outstanding & visionary AD. I am confident our new President is evaluating the Athletic Department in his analysis of the University & will effect positive change.

Yea it's a good article. I wish it was longer I guess but you are right it is probably short and to the point because of tourney week and also to keep people's attention.

As for the president, I think it's hard to fire someone after a tournament appearance, so I believe Lavin will be back. Hopefully he isn't given a five year deal or something. I'd rather just fire him unless we beat duke. If we beat duke I'll live with the guy because that'd be awesome and a miracle.

Have tried to stay out of the Lavin debate as I know just how much time there will be to discuss it when season is over. I'm also not completely sure where I come out on it yet. So many glaring positives and negatives, very polarizing IMO. Most importantly, really looking forward to SDSU on Friday and these seniors hopefully getting a tournament win.

However did want to point out that, while I generally agree with you Jack that it is difficult to fire someone after a tournament appearance, I don't think that's going to be the primary factor here (whether Lavin stays or goes). This is a new President who seems to be measured and appreciates big picture. I'm sure he also cares about things like image. We as fans can (and perhaps have to, to keep our sanity) joke about the bad news that seems to hit this program too often, and then can just move onto the next game. This is just a diversion for us.

A leader in charge of overseeing it doesn't have that luxury, especially when it comes to one of the most visible arms of the Univeristy that he cares about more than the basketball program. This is very real for him, he more than likely sees it as volatility, and that's a word that matters in business even more than it does in hoops.

Complete agree with the above. Whether we as fans choose to believe it or not, Lavin has been moderately successful here (2 NCAA's and 2 NIT's in 5 season). While I wish the results were better at times, he's been great when compared to his predecessors.

That being said, the school officials have much better insight into what is going on behind-the-scenes. Why are there constant transfer rumors? Why have their been so many players academically disqualified? Why are players getting suspended every season? These are all legitimate questions and while Harrington may have turned a blind eye to them, I get the feeling Gempesaw will not. Now, to be fair, it could be a run of bad luck and unfortunate circumstances. But I am sure the president will have a lengthy, lengthy discussion and probably much more involvement in these issues if he was to hand out an extension to coach.