Next year
- Thread starter SJUISBACK
- Start date
Unless you can specifically attribute wins and losses to Dunlap using data, I'm not sure it is a good idea to go there. I'm not discounting Dunlap's value, but Lavin is the one with wins behind his name, whether by design or by chance. Lavin's the one with 5 sweet 16's, elite 8's, a decade worth of NCAA appearances. Dunlap as there for ONE season of it and another losing season, only the second in Lavin's career. If that is the case, then maybe Dunlap isn't as smart as you give credit. Only now is he starting to make his mark in big time basketball. Lavin has an NCAA appearance under his name here as well as an NIT. He arguably forewent an NCAA appearance to "make a point" to D'Angelo or "grandstand" as fun and the rest of you lawyers call it. If that is really the case, then he's toying with NCAA bids like it is child's play and you aren't giving him nearly enough credit, or he's an idiot because he took a good NCAA team and took them out of contention for the tourney. Which is it?
beast of the east
Active member
If only factcheck.org wasn't accused so often of political bias.
I will go with "none of the above."
Lavin took a team of Norm's players to the NCAA with Dunlap on the bench.
Dunlap then did a good enough job with a team consisting of zero returning players to send Moe Harkless to the NBA and to himself land an NBA head coaching job.
Lavin has now taken a team with at least two and maybe three NBA prospects on it and managed to turn it into a train wreck. If you want data, maybe you want to take a look at the Big East team stats, where you will discover that St. Johns was in the bottom two or three in the league in virtually every single offensive category. But really it doesn't take much statistical analysis to watch the team this past year and see that it was even more poorly coached than it was under Norm.
You can think that there were NCAA prospects if you want. In my opinion we were a mediocre team in a mediocre league in a mediocre year overall for college basketball. If you think Harrison and his 4% shooting percentage (I exaggerate, but only a little bit) would have made an enormous difference in the team losing 9 of its last 12 (including post-season), well, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.
As for his UCLA tenure, it seems to me that it looked a whole lot like his current St J tenure, only with better players. There's no question that talent can cover up a whole lot of flaws.
Lawman, we have 3 NBA prospects on this team? Stop inflating. Dunlap didn't "turn" Harkless into an NBA prospect. You don't have a clue who helped his development most on this staff. I suspect he was an NBA prospect simply because he had NBA potential and skills. Nobody including Jakarr is as good as Moe at this point and that has nothing to do with the coaching staff, except that they recruited these kids.
Why do you automatically credit Dunlap for all the good but Lavin for all the bad? Don't you see the flaw in that? It's convenient. Pitino and Calhoun suck, it was really Willard and Blaney all along... Doesn't hold. Lavin didn't have Dunlap during by far his most successful years. You think we are more poorly coached than under Norm them there is no helping you. That's crazy talk.
Harrison and his 4%? How about his near 20 points per game? I absolutely know he would have gotten us mo wins both in the regular season and he ncaa's. His recent streak of poor play has more to do with his attitude than it does with his ability. 4% shooting? We benched one of the most dynamic scorers in the Big East.
I have one criticsim for Lavin which some might not agree with and some might. He shouldn't have taken 2 HUGE games off when his father died, but should have tried to come back for Louisville. That is the point in time when we lost D'Angelo and we lost our prospects for the season. I won't expand any further, but I think we were done at that point.
Sorry Marcus but I must respectfully disagree.
Norm had an impossible job. He was handed nothing other than a handfull of players in a brutal BE, 6 wins, probation, local coaches who would not speak to our staff and was told to be squeaky clean but try to win against Huggins, Pitino, Calhoun, Boeheim ( anything those 4 have in common which stands out ? ) JTIII, Dixon, Tom Cream, ND Coach, Wright, and turned the laughing stock of college bball into a mediocre team. That is what Norm did. He recruited the leftovers, because that is the best he could get, Sean Evans, Paris Horne, Juco kids , Boothe and got 16 or 17 wins out of them as juniors. The next season Norm's constant progression was coached up by one of the great minds in college bball and the group overachieved. Having said that, Dunlap or no Dunlap, had Norm remained the coach we would have won a few more games though I doubt as many as when we had Dunlap on the sidelines.
Dunlap has coaching videos. Couldn't Lavin just watched them? What Dunlap was teaching is no secret. Year one, Lavin and the staff got as much as they could form a group of moderately talented seniors. Last year, Dunlap got the most that he could out of a depleted lineup. This year, Lavin (without Dunlap) got more out of a more full lineup that was still missing a couple of pieces (Branch, first semester and during his injury; Sanchez ineligible; and Gift redshirt). Also, the core from last year was incorporating the new guys in. It didn't immediately turn into a cohesive unit. Furthermore, DLo's suspension really hurt. Next year, assuming there are no major catastrophes, this should be a functioning unit. Then, only their level of talent should determine how far they go.
Well I would contend the epitome of stupid is thinking an opinion can be untrue. You think Norm had it tougher I think Lavin. Now, a better than good thing to do is not act so sanctimoniously as to think your opinion is superior to someone elses and FWIWI think I gave the reasons as to why I thought Lavin had it tougher. But don't let the facts get in the way of your witty reply.By the way, THE definition of insanity is not doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result; that is Einstein's definition of insanity. But hey, who am I to question the self-proclaimed one of the smartest people in the history of smart people.
Is it my imagination or are you panties in a bit of a bunch? There's really no need. I'm just typing.
I understand that there are facts and opinion. The difference between us seems to be that you think that merely characterizing a statement as an opinion relieves you of any obligation to logic or reality. Allow me to disagree.
If eg I say that it is my opinion that the earth is flat, that might qualify both as subjective and a belief, but it remains disprovable. A picture from space showing that the world is round shows false the proposition contained in the opinion. It need not change your opinion, but it disproves the fact about which you have expressed a personal belief.
OTOH I certainly agree that opinions that comprise purely personal preferences are not disprovable. Say you prefer Mozart to Beethoven whereas I prefer Beethoven to Mozart. I would not argue that you should enjoy one more than the other. Or for example several of my learned colleagues on another SJ board are discussing the agreeablity of the physical assets of various female celebrities. That is an argument no one can win: de gustibus non est disputadum. On the other hand if it is your opinion that a college basketball program on NCAA probation facing the death penalty is better off than one not on NCAA probation facing the death penalty, that is disprovable by the application of elementary logic and rhetoric.
Here I will remind you of what the OP said "Norm left this program in better shape then when he got here." That was his opinion, with which you disagreed. And yet when I had the audacity to disagree with your disagreement ith his opinion, you say that "the epitome of stupid is thinking an opinion can be untrue." The upshot of which is that you just called your own statement "the epitome of stupid." Since we have come to at least some small form of agreement, my work here is done.
Class of 72
Active member
While Logen and Fun have done a great job of discussing the past, let's try to get back on topic and discuss "next year".
BTW, I agree Fun that Norm Roberts inherited a program on the edge of extinction with no serious prospects giving SJ even a second thought. Lavin inherited an NCAA team of sold citizens and all he had to do was recruit new blood. After signing a top 5 class for year two, he floundered with year three recruits. I do not consider Sampson a year three recruit and he lost offered players like Gathers and Woods. He may strike out on year four recruits because he pulled a "Normesque" recruiting blunder by redshirting Gift, losing a year 4 recruiting slot, signing Marco Borgault who does not fit the team's athletic profile (plus, he sucks at most aspects of the game) and bringing in Hooper to tutor Sampson.
Lavin, had he had a vision for a future balanced team, would have signed at least two more top 100 players for 2013-14 and a big utility player. What we now have are six question marks at the 1 and 2 positions and will likely lose our entire front line for 2013-2014 with no players on the horizon of equal quality.
Does that look like a recipe for future domination in the Big East? Hardly.
As for next year, here is the roster------who do you cut to free up a ship and create some talent balance?
Bourgault
Hooper
God's Gift
Obekpa
Sanchez
Balamou
Garrett
Pointer
Sampson
Greene
Branch
Harrison
Jones
BTW, I agree Fun that Norm Roberts inherited a program on the edge of extinction with no serious prospects giving SJ even a second thought. Lavin inherited an NCAA team of sold citizens and all he had to do was recruit new blood. After signing a top 5 class for year two, he floundered with year three recruits. I do not consider Sampson a year three recruit and he lost offered players like Gathers and Woods. He may strike out on year four recruits because he pulled a "Normesque" recruiting blunder by redshirting Gift, losing a year 4 recruiting slot, signing Marco Borgault who does not fit the team's athletic profile (plus, he sucks at most aspects of the game) and bringing in Hooper to tutor Sampson.
Lavin, had he had a vision for a future balanced team, would have signed at least two more top 100 players for 2013-14 and a big utility player. What we now have are six question marks at the 1 and 2 positions and will likely lose our entire front line for 2013-2014 with no players on the horizon of equal quality.
Does that look like a recipe for future domination in the Big East? Hardly.
As for next year, here is the roster------who do you cut to free up a ship and create some talent balance?
Bourgault
Hooper
God's Gift
Obekpa
Sanchez
Balamou
Garrett
Pointer
Sampson
Greene
Branch
Harrison
Jones
beast of the east
Active member
Norm had an impossible job considering his talent. period.
beast of the east
Active member
Why don't you jsut give up the fact that every dialogue isn't a legal brief, and not flood this place with your attempts at overwhelming anyone you engage with pure self centered crap. Having a real job as a lawyer might give you a chance to do this in a court of law. This isn't one, it's just to exchange opinions.
In 5 full seasons Jarvis took his teams to three NCAA bids and one NIT championship. No one hear believes Norm was capable of doing that, regardless of personnel. As a result, he was offered an NBA job, which certainly means that people were watching, and that they viewed his work and talent as very good. he was fired after beginning his 6th season by going 2-4. He angered the AD with mostly attitude, including the famous, "I don't care about wins and losses. I'm a teacher .His career record is 412-293. After leaving St. John's he coached 5 years at Florida Atlantic, taking a team from 6 wins his first season to 21 wins and an NIT berth two seasons later. His overall record at Florida Atlantic was not good, but his overall career resume isn't horrible
I suspect Jarvis' self destruction was partly due to the fact that he was very hostile towards St. John's for not allowing his son to ascend to the head coaching job if Jarvis decided to take the NBA position Jordan offered him. From that point on, the public JArvis seemed very different than the man who "demanded" Coach Carnesecca attend games as a condition of his employment and seemd a great ambassador of our program.
Norm's college coaching record is 105-185. He lost everywhere he coached, going all the way back to the freshmen teams at Molloy, where peers who knew him then said he had no idea of what he was doing.
There is no question that the ability to secure employment at the head coaching level in Division one sports is reflective of your career accomplishments to date. Jarvis accomplished a lot in his career, and overall had a successful five season run at St. John's.
Norm Roberts was a joke, a gigantic mistake that the school did not have the guts to correct, most likely because FH liked Norm. Maybe not as much as Rob Wile, but Norm was given almost 1 million in severance.
It's hardly a flood. I post here once a week or so. If only others would show the same restraint.
Again, I'm not interested in discussing Mike Jarvis's record. You may be and I would not suggest that you refrain from doing so, but perhaps you could indulge your fetish without quoting me as a preamble?
If it please the court I interrupt the hosing to correct the record. That is not the Jarvae record. In fact, the NCAA just scolded FAU for celebrating Jarhead's 400th victory prematurely:
"The NCAA has warned Florida Atlantic it must stop counting victories by Owls coach Mike Jarvis that were vacated while he was coach at St. John’s [...] The letter, from James A. Elworth, the NCAA’s Assistant Director for the Committee on Infractions, asks FAU to correct Jarvis’ biography on its official website to not count the victories and not refer to championships won in that time frame."
http://www.fauowlaccess.com/article...-cant-count-46-of-mike-jarvis-victories-.aspx
This recap would be fascinating were anyone arguing that Norm was a better or more successful coach than Jarhead. Since no one is, it's irrelevant and is thus
Norm's been to three Elite 8s and a Final Four as an assistant. That's hardly the resume of someone who "has no idea what he was doing." Perhaps you meant to say that he was ill suited to the SJ head coaching job. If that's what you meant we've reached common ground.
You are however mistaken, as usual. Jack Curran, the winningest coach in NYC basketball history, recommended SJ hire Roberts:
"Roberts had one particularly impeccable recommendation, namely from Jack Curran, the Catholic High School coach of the year twenty times in the 46 years he’s been at Archbishop Molloy High School in Briarwood. Few New York hoop names held more magisterial sway than Jack Curran’s, except perhaps Lou Carnesecca’s, whom Curran replaced at Molloy in 1958. In the eighties, Roberts worked as an assistant to Curran, who suggested he would make a “good hire” for St. John’s.
Unless you think Curran thought that a "good hire" at SJ comprised someone who "has no idea what he was doing" you seem to have overstated your case.
I don't like talkiug about cutting guys loose or pressuring them to leave, as I think both sides made a commitment to play here, and I think it is unfair to force someone out.
Having said that, I think the most "expendable" guys, should they elect to leave (which would probably be mutually beneficial) are:
Marco - I have said enough about how I feel about his game at this level
Balamou - Not because he's not a great athlete who could conceiveably develop into a nice 4 year player
Garrett - I think he has more limited upside, though he is one of the better rebounders, his skill set is duplicated by and large by other kids who should see more minutes, and he has other options
I think this team, as constructed, will be fine and do well next year, but if a few openings were to occur, these are the ones that I think would be most positive if they were to develop. BUT, at this juncture, who would be the replacements? You have to be careful at this time of year in signing anyone. While I know people on this board don't like to use the phrase "wasted scholarships", sometimes it is better to hold scholarships for the next year, so that the school is not in a position of having to talk about who should be forced out. If the talent that can be brought in is not APPRECIABLY better, then I say hold onto the ship.
Having said that, I think the most "expendable" guys, should they elect to leave (which would probably be mutually beneficial) are:
Marco - I have said enough about how I feel about his game at this level
Balamou - Not because he's not a great athlete who could conceiveably develop into a nice 4 year player
Garrett - I think he has more limited upside, though he is one of the better rebounders, his skill set is duplicated by and large by other kids who should see more minutes, and he has other options
I think this team, as constructed, will be fine and do well next year, but if a few openings were to occur, these are the ones that I think would be most positive if they were to develop. BUT, at this juncture, who would be the replacements? You have to be careful at this time of year in signing anyone. While I know people on this board don't like to use the phrase "wasted scholarships", sometimes it is better to hold scholarships for the next year, so that the school is not in a position of having to talk about who should be forced out. If the talent that can be brought in is not APPRECIABLY better, then I say hold onto the ship.
beast of the east
Active member
I've spoken first hand to guys who coached against Roberts at Molloy. In their opinion, he was horrible, had no clue as to what he was doing, and still doesn't.
Here's an indirect quote from a friend of mine who grew up with a D1 coach who coached against St. John's during Roberts tenure: "It was unbelievable. I've never seen anything like it. Normally, you press, and if the other team can't handle it, they make an adjustment. You go big, they sub in. With Roberts, it was nothing - he'd do nothing to counter whatever we did."
I know you only know what your read, but I've been aorund HS circles, and I do know that any coach who is trying to get a player recruited, will suddenly say things like "This guy is the best guard I ever coached", or "He has more tlaent than anyone I've seen in 20 years", all untrue superlatives. Curran, like most guys, was asked for a referral, and with nothing to lose, offered a guy he hired and liked a chance. Obviously, that worked out well.
What a joke to bring up Bill Self's success and attribute it to Roberts. Roberts has one role, and that's to initiate dialogue for top recruits at top schools. You might as well give the trainer at Kansas responsibility for strategy resulting in wins.
