Mount St. Mary's, Wed. Dec. 5, 6:30p, FS-2 / 970 WNYM
- Thread starter Knight
- Start date
Class of 72
Active member
[quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
And, it's not about recruiting in the new millennium or some other bull crap. It's about targeting the players you need and getting them to commit to your system. If your system is 5 out or Hawaii 5-0 and positions become meaningless you will never attract Kofi Cockburn or any other dominant big man. In the hands of teens who need basic x's and o's of being taught the game of basketball your end product on the floor resembles West 4th Street ball. Being given very generalized instructions about defense or different offensive schemes like playing a zone outside of passing the ball for an open shot by whomever leads to opposing coaches quickly seeing what your game plan is and easier to prepare for. ......even a Mount Saint Mary.
Needless to say none of Chris Mullin's players will ever become coaches based on their absorbing basketball strategies while at St. John's.
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
And, it's not about recruiting in the new millennium or some other bull crap. It's about targeting the players you need and getting them to commit to your system. If your system is 5 out or Hawaii 5-0 and positions become meaningless you will never attract Kofi Cockburn or any other dominant big man. In the hands of teens who need basic x's and o's of being taught the game of basketball your end product on the floor resembles West 4th Street ball. Being given very generalized instructions about defense or different offensive schemes like playing a zone outside of passing the ball for an open shot by whomever leads to opposing coaches quickly seeing what your game plan is and easier to prepare for. ......even a Mount Saint Mary.
Needless to say none of Chris Mullin's players will ever become coaches based on their absorbing basketball strategies while at St. John's.
rawdognyc
Well-known member
[quote="Mike Zaun" post=306661][quote="rawdognyc" post=306652][quote="Mike Zaun" post=306578]What do you say to a huge jacked 6'4 guy who is 8-0 fighting midgets but got taken to the last round in almost all of the matches? Would you be confident to put money on him once he starts fighting heavyweights his size?
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..
we are sju
Active member
[quote="Danny Noonan" post=306648][quote="Marillac" post=306644][quote="Danny Noonan" post=306630]Once again team plays Flat, lack of intensity, you have to WANT to come out and bury a team like this. MO doesn’t bring that leadership style and hasn’t had an Alpha player on the court in 3 years. Team could really use a Ron Mouvika personality. Maybe not the most talented but guy competed hard every game/possession.[/quote]
You don't think Ponds is an alpha player? Lol
M'Vouica!!! Hahahahaha[/quote]
I’m talking leadership, intensity, show more emotion. Team plays hard in stretches, never a full 40. Ponds is an all time great at St. John’s. He he even said he was told to work on leadership. I was Ron M as a blue Collar example. Played an intense full 40 they would of blown that team out tonight[/quote]
I understand what you are saying and agree. Basically Trimble is playing because he actually tries on D. If we had a guy off the bench that was a willing defender that was secure enough to will the other guys to defend as well.
You don't think Ponds is an alpha player? Lol
M'Vouica!!! Hahahahaha[/quote]
I’m talking leadership, intensity, show more emotion. Team plays hard in stretches, never a full 40. Ponds is an all time great at St. John’s. He he even said he was told to work on leadership. I was Ron M as a blue Collar example. Played an intense full 40 they would of blown that team out tonight[/quote]
I understand what you are saying and agree. Basically Trimble is playing because he actually tries on D. If we had a guy off the bench that was a willing defender that was secure enough to will the other guys to defend as well.
Windy City Johnny Fan
Member
[quote="rawdognyc" post=306671][quote="Mike Zaun" post=306661][quote="rawdognyc" post=306652][quote="Mike Zaun" post=306578]What do you say to a huge jacked 6'4 guy who is 8-0 fighting midgets but got taken to the last round in almost all of the matches? Would you be confident to put money on him once he starts fighting heavyweights his size?
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..[/quote]
You make fair points. But you have to make a bunch of assumptions to take the view that sliding Keita back into our lineup is going to fix all - or even many - of the issues. I mean nobody really knows what he is at this point even when healthy. Nothing to do but wait and see though. To me, the one issue that we should be able to control 100% is our intensity - and while I've seen it in various stretches throughout various games, aside from the Rutgers game, i haven't seen it throughout a 40 minute game.
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..[/quote]
You make fair points. But you have to make a bunch of assumptions to take the view that sliding Keita back into our lineup is going to fix all - or even many - of the issues. I mean nobody really knows what he is at this point even when healthy. Nothing to do but wait and see though. To me, the one issue that we should be able to control 100% is our intensity - and while I've seen it in various stretches throughout various games, aside from the Rutgers game, i haven't seen it throughout a 40 minute game.
rawdognyc
Well-known member
[quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=306674][quote="rawdognyc" post=306671][quote="Mike Zaun" post=306661][quote="rawdognyc" post=306652][quote="Mike Zaun" post=306578]What do you say to a huge jacked 6'4 guy who is 8-0 fighting midgets but got taken to the last round in almost all of the matches? Would you be confident to put money on him once he starts fighting heavyweights his size?
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..[/quote]
You make fair points. But you have to make a bunch of assumptions to take the view that sliding Keita back into our lineup is going to fix all - or even many - of the issues. I mean nobody really knows what he is at this point even when healthy. Nothing to do but wait and see though. To me, the one issue that we should be able to control 100% is our intensity - and while I've seen it in various stretches throughout various games, aside from the Rutgers game, i haven't seen it throughout a 40 minute game.[/quote]
Intensity! That's where I see the problem with playing cupcakes is that these guys feel they can beat these teams on talent alone. Which is true. They can and they have. However when they get ramped up for a game, it's like watching a totally different team. Totally agree with you there. It's like they almost don't want to exert themselves too much against the interior opponent until they see the game is too close or even fall behind. Then they up their intensity and use full court pressure and the game changes. With that being said, it's hard to go full throttle all game when you're only going 7 deep. I'd like to see more Williams and Roberts in these games even when it's not a blow out. I would presume at the very least their talent level is at least on par with these low d1 schools. Forget Earlington in my opinion. He'll be the first player ever to shatter a backboard with a 3 point shot.
8-0 is nice but the team is a mess right now. Mullin is there talking to the team as if they're up 30. I'm not acting like I have all the answers because I don't but that's not my job and to act like coaching is not a major major issue is nuts at this point. Yes of course he tells them to close out and blah blah blah, but whatever IT is, it's not working. This is a team of absolute stud players who are upperclassmen and Mullin is well into year 4. Enough is enough. I don't think we are Kansas. Marist would kill these guys.[/quote]
Your analogies are always the worst. St. Johns is more like a veteran boxer that has had a mediocre career up to date. Finally that boxer has won eight fights in a row against younger boxers who are doing all they can to knock this veteran boxer out, but somehow the veteran finds whatever means possible to win the fight. Sometimes in a very ugly fashion. This veteran boxer is hoping with more training that he will be able to win some of his difficult fights that he has coming up.
If we were Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. I could somewhat understand your analogy, but again at that point it's still idiotic. These teams are playing other D1 teams. Any team can beat any other team on any given night. That's proven fact. Your analogy is so far fetched that it would never happen. That's not how analogies work.[/quote]
Perhaps my analogy was exaggerated a bit, partly for emphasis. However, the difference between this St. John's team and the MSM team last night was absolutely supposed to be David vs. Goliath. If it was VCU then I take your point. We're still better than VCU but at least they aren't complete bums.
SJ:
-NET Ranking: 32
-4 and 5 star veteran players
-Home court
-NCAA expectation
-Major conference team
Mount:
-NET Ranking: 348 (out of 353)
-2 star players maybe a 3 star if they're lucky, very young and inexperienced
-Just took a 4.5 hr bus ride away game
-Expected to finish last in an awful low major conference
-Low major team
Just look at the facts. This was a real game until the final 4 or 5 minutes as 25 point favorites. Don't get angry at the fans who see the cracks in the foundation. Just because the foundation is still standing with cracks doesn't mean you should disregard the cracks everywhere. The fact that you and some others would even dare to imply that we shouldn't expect to be much better than Mount right now is absolute absurdity. If we can't expect to blowout one of the worst teams in America at home in a year where people were saying we had the most talent since our Elite 8 run, then do we even have any expectations anymore? Again, the score is misleading stop looking at the final score and acting like we had a 14 pt cushion all game. It was single digits dangerously late. If you can't seriously question coaching at this point, you never will. Jack, I respect your POV and maybe I'm just getting nervous over nothing and we turn it around suddenly. But there's an obvious pattern here. Even one of my friends who doesn't follow the team has been paying attention this year and he says "every game is the same" and he asks "why can't St. John's kill these guys? Don't they suck?". That's general consensus outside of Redmen.com and it's the perspective I hold as well.[/quote]
See. That's the misconception that you and the others that think like you have any about those of us that choose to stay positive and fully enjoy being 8-0. We see the obvious faults that you and the others point out. It's pretty clear that we don't close out well on the 3 point shooter. That's because we are forced to typically have 2 guys cover their big in the middle. That's because of the other obvious problem, we don't have a big right now. We all hope that once Keita comes back, he'll help to correct that issue. So like last night, when teams are hot from 3, they can stay in a game with us. When they are shooting poorly like Rutgers did, we blow them out. It's really not that difficult to understand. It will be slot easier to press more and cover the paint and 3 point shooters more once our big is back. Yes, we're fully aware that it would've been nice to have a capable back up big just in case something happened to Keita like it did. However even without our big we still are at 8-0. So we choose to look at that. Instead of repeating the same crap over and over again about our weaknesses..[/quote]
You make fair points. But you have to make a bunch of assumptions to take the view that sliding Keita back into our lineup is going to fix all - or even many - of the issues. I mean nobody really knows what he is at this point even when healthy. Nothing to do but wait and see though. To me, the one issue that we should be able to control 100% is our intensity - and while I've seen it in various stretches throughout various games, aside from the Rutgers game, i haven't seen it throughout a 40 minute game.[/quote]
Intensity! That's where I see the problem with playing cupcakes is that these guys feel they can beat these teams on talent alone. Which is true. They can and they have. However when they get ramped up for a game, it's like watching a totally different team. Totally agree with you there. It's like they almost don't want to exert themselves too much against the interior opponent until they see the game is too close or even fall behind. Then they up their intensity and use full court pressure and the game changes. With that being said, it's hard to go full throttle all game when you're only going 7 deep. I'd like to see more Williams and Roberts in these games even when it's not a blow out. I would presume at the very least their talent level is at least on par with these low d1 schools. Forget Earlington in my opinion. He'll be the first player ever to shatter a backboard with a 3 point shot.
[quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....
we are sju
Active member
[quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.
[quote="we are sju" post=306685][quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.
[quote="fordham96" post=306687][quote="we are sju" post=306685][quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
I have my CM reservations like you. However, saying that if you have 13 scholarships and "10 of them should be ready to contribute" is insane. Find me a Duke, Nova, UNC team where they have 10 guys ready to contribute. That is not a fair bar to set for any team/staff, especially a SJU team who struggled in recent years.
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
I have my CM reservations like you. However, saying that if you have 13 scholarships and "10 of them should be ready to contribute" is insane. Find me a Duke, Nova, UNC team where they have 10 guys ready to contribute. That is not a fair bar to set for any team/staff, especially a SJU team who struggled in recent years.
[quote="Chris7" post=306690][quote="fordham96" post=306687][quote="we are sju" post=306685][quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
I have my CM reservations like you. However, saying that if you have 13 scholarships and "10 of them should be ready to contribute" is insane. Find me a Duke, Nova, UNC team where they have 10 guys ready to contribute. That is not a fair bar to set for any team/staff, especially a SJU team who struggled in recent years.[/quote]
First off they do. Couple of things Duke and Nova don't and are not using all 13 scholarships. And I can assure you Duke's 9th and 10th guys are better than SJU. Go a step further, Duke's 9th and 10th guys are better than SJU's 5th and 6th guys, wanna bet?
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
I have my CM reservations like you. However, saying that if you have 13 scholarships and "10 of them should be ready to contribute" is insane. Find me a Duke, Nova, UNC team where they have 10 guys ready to contribute. That is not a fair bar to set for any team/staff, especially a SJU team who struggled in recent years.[/quote]
First off they do. Couple of things Duke and Nova don't and are not using all 13 scholarships. And I can assure you Duke's 9th and 10th guys are better than SJU. Go a step further, Duke's 9th and 10th guys are better than SJU's 5th and 6th guys, wanna bet?
Did anyone else notice that on a couple of occasions Shamorie seem to have free lanes to the basket and then proceeded to kick it out to someone standing behind the arc. Its good to see him be unselfish but I thought on both plays he was free to the basket and he certainly finishes well.
Moose
Well-known member
[quote="sjc88" post=306695]Did anyone else notice that on a couple of occasions Shamorie seem to have free lanes to the basket and then proceeded to kick it out to someone standing behind the arc. Its good to see him be unselfish but I thought on both plays he was free to the basket and he certainly finishes well.[/quote]
Yes. He's been doing it a lot lately at CA in particular during those cupcake matchups.
Maybe it's Rysheed Jordan syndrome and he only wants the bright lights of MSG, Barclays, American Airlines Arena etc.
Yes. He's been doing it a lot lately at CA in particular during those cupcake matchups.
Maybe it's Rysheed Jordan syndrome and he only wants the bright lights of MSG, Barclays, American Airlines Arena etc.
Class of 72
Active member
[quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Even bad teams like MSM play 8-9 players. My point is that players 4-9 shouldn't all be guards. We play all guards because the team is poorly constructed. It is poorly constructed because talented players 6'6 and above have been going elsewhere for whatever reason and we needlessly end up with the Trimbles, Wrights, Dixons and Carahers of college basketball. It sounds unfair in light of the Keita injury but even MSM had 4 players 6'8 and above and one was a freshman starter. The bottom line is Matt needs help in locating and evaluating talent. Mullin said all the right things over 3 years ago about being in the high school gyms, etc. and he, Matt and Slice were everywhere. After that disastrous first year the enthusiasm has waned except for Matt. Imagine the perception now had Mullin convinced his nephew Bol Bol to play for him or they convinced Moses Brown whow was down the block from St. John's to play for them instead of pursuing the Brown that was a transvestite or the Brown that gets little playing time at Nevada.
What recruiting battles has Mullin really won in 4 years?
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Even bad teams like MSM play 8-9 players. My point is that players 4-9 shouldn't all be guards. We play all guards because the team is poorly constructed. It is poorly constructed because talented players 6'6 and above have been going elsewhere for whatever reason and we needlessly end up with the Trimbles, Wrights, Dixons and Carahers of college basketball. It sounds unfair in light of the Keita injury but even MSM had 4 players 6'8 and above and one was a freshman starter. The bottom line is Matt needs help in locating and evaluating talent. Mullin said all the right things over 3 years ago about being in the high school gyms, etc. and he, Matt and Slice were everywhere. After that disastrous first year the enthusiasm has waned except for Matt. Imagine the perception now had Mullin convinced his nephew Bol Bol to play for him or they convinced Moses Brown whow was down the block from St. John's to play for them instead of pursuing the Brown that was a transvestite or the Brown that gets little playing time at Nevada.
What recruiting battles has Mullin really won in 4 years?
Here is another way to look at the roster and Duke, Kentucky and Villanova if youw ant to use them as an example.
If you asked them to use all 13 scholarships on recruited players (because many of them will use the scholly they aren't using on players for walk-ons) do you really think they would compose a roster similar to SJU where they literally not only get nothing but clearly don't feel comfortable playing the back end of their rosters? No.
If you asked them to use all 13 scholarships on recruited players (because many of them will use the scholly they aren't using on players for walk-ons) do you really think they would compose a roster similar to SJU where they literally not only get nothing but clearly don't feel comfortable playing the back end of their rosters? No.
we are sju
Active member
[quote="fordham96" post=306687][quote="we are sju" post=306685][quote="fordham96" post=306684][quote="Class of 72" post=306669][quote="thetux1" post=306668]We dropped 38 spots in the RPI playing this game which was 100 times more difficult than it should have been. Everyone is complaining about closing out on 3 point shooters but damn we could use a rim protector. Thank you Tariq Owens[/quote]
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
You are on a ST John's fan forum even if you aren't much of a fan. So your stance on 'WE" thing is pretty stupid. In fact fans chant "WE ARE ST JOHN'S" at games. I think if you ever go to a game you should take a stand on that one. Tell a bunch of people that They are not ST John's.
As far as an actual point that you tried to make I happen to agree. This roster does not have 8-10 guys that should be playing on a BE rotation on a good team. Jury out on Keita but currently have 5 guys. Now one of the 5 is great, 2 very good and 2 very solid.
But if your point was a good team should have 9-10 of the 13 that could contribute, then yes we fall way short on that.
The degree of difficulty in winning a game against a vastly inferior opponent takes a toll. Other than being undefeated the press has not been kind to this team. When your tallest "active" player is a 6'7 small forward and your bench consists entirely of THREE guards who are very average players expect very little positive outlooks regardless of opponent.
That ONE injury causes all this angst reflects on how our roster gets jerry-rigged every season.
.[/quote]
But I was told most good teams only play 8-9 guys even when they use all 13 scholarships. So you are saying that good programs should make sure when they use those scholarships they always should have 10-11 solid players that you can use just in case an injury or one kid starts to falter at the expense of another you always have a good pool to pick those 8-9 core kids from. What a concept....[/quote]
Yeah a concept no one uses
Our problem is not that we only play 7 or 8.
The problem is only one of those guys is over 6-7 and our current 6th and 7th men are not that good. No problem playing 8 if you have 8 solid guys. We have 5 solid guys. Feel free to Bash Mullin on that.[/quote]
First off I don't know what you mean by we. I don't pretend to be a part of the team.
And that was my entire point. If you have 13 scholarship players you better have at least 10 that are ready to contribute and then from that you pick a rotation. That ALWAYS was my point. That is why I stressed CONSTANTLY they are using all 13 scholarships and are essentially getting NOTHING against very WEAK competition out of 5 spots right now and I would throw Trimble in there to be quite honest as maybe the 6th man giving them little to nothing, You cannot run a big time program and get so little out of the middle to back end of a full 13 man program. It won't work. And this is not year 2 or year 3 this is year 4. The recruiting has been poor period. That was also my larger point and I stand by both points now more than ever. I don't care if they are 8-0, I think you agree with me on that point. 8-0 against this schedule does not prove anything with regards to this recruiting strategy.[/quote]
You are on a ST John's fan forum even if you aren't much of a fan. So your stance on 'WE" thing is pretty stupid. In fact fans chant "WE ARE ST JOHN'S" at games. I think if you ever go to a game you should take a stand on that one. Tell a bunch of people that They are not ST John's.
As far as an actual point that you tried to make I happen to agree. This roster does not have 8-10 guys that should be playing on a BE rotation on a good team. Jury out on Keita but currently have 5 guys. Now one of the 5 is great, 2 very good and 2 very solid.
But if your point was a good team should have 9-10 of the 13 that could contribute, then yes we fall way short on that.
Last edited:
Nova played 8 guys last night and that does NOT include their prize HS All-American Quinerly who obviously is having some issues (my guess is Jay is sending a message because he has that luxury). And they are not using all 13 scholarships. And Nova lost 4 UNDERCLASSMEN to the draft.
But I think you would agree Quinerly would be playing at SJU big minutes.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401083355
But I think you would agree Quinerly would be playing at SJU big minutes.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401083355