Rumble in the Garden / SJU Review / May 4
- Thread starter jerseyshorejohnny
- Start date
[quote="jerseyshorejohnny" post=284018][URL][URL]https://www.rumbleinthega...98/st-johns-review-offense-tumble-free-throws[/URL][/URL][/quote]
Eye-opening piece. Thanks JSJ.
Thinking, we have new pieces (if Shamorie returns)—Dixon, Figueroa, Keita—that potentially could provide a sea change boost to the offense, and defense.
Eye-opening piece. Thanks JSJ.
Thinking, we have new pieces (if Shamorie returns)—Dixon, Figueroa, Keita—that potentially could provide a sea change boost to the offense, and defense.
Class of 72
Active member
Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19
[quote="Class of 72" post=284203]Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.
Last edited:
JackofVirginia
Active member
[quote="jerseyshorejohnny" post=284018][URL][URL]https://www.rumbleinthega...98/st-johns-review-offense-tumble-free-throws[/URL][/URL][/quote]
All the percentages changed once Lovett quit - no brainer.
All the percentages changed once Lovett quit - no brainer.
[quote="Chicago Days" post=284206][quote="Class of 72" post=284203]Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?[/quote]
Based on the roster, I think a great season for next year's team would be 21 wins before the BET, playing Friday in the BET and getting into the first weekend of the dance. I also think that after 4 years this staff should be getting this program to that level of performance, even though what I've seen so far doesn't make me confident that they can. But the penny can drop at any time, let's hope it's this coming season. Anything better than those expectations would be icing on the cake.
PS that is all based on Shamori returning, I don't see the team achieving any of those KPI's without him.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?[/quote]
Based on the roster, I think a great season for next year's team would be 21 wins before the BET, playing Friday in the BET and getting into the first weekend of the dance. I also think that after 4 years this staff should be getting this program to that level of performance, even though what I've seen so far doesn't make me confident that they can. But the penny can drop at any time, let's hope it's this coming season. Anything better than those expectations would be icing on the cake.
PS that is all based on Shamori returning, I don't see the team achieving any of those KPI's without him.
Last edited:
Class of 72
Active member
[quote="Chicago Days" post=284206][quote="Class of 72" post=284203]Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.[/quote]
First, we need Ponds to return for that great season.
Next,finish in the upper half of the conference with 21-23 wins.
Make it to the Big East semi at the very least.
Get to the Dance.
Win at least first game in the tournament.
Finally, sign two of our top recruits.
That would be a great season at the end of year four.
A good season would be 20 wins but just an NIT appearance. It would include signing Gaffney but not Kofi.
A bad season would be no post season and we lose Kofi, Gaffney and anyone else we recruited hard.
I'm not confident Mullin would survive missing the dance and losing Kofi.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.[/quote]
First, we need Ponds to return for that great season.
Next,finish in the upper half of the conference with 21-23 wins.
Make it to the Big East semi at the very least.
Get to the Dance.
Win at least first game in the tournament.
Finally, sign two of our top recruits.
That would be a great season at the end of year four.
A good season would be 20 wins but just an NIT appearance. It would include signing Gaffney but not Kofi.
A bad season would be no post season and we lose Kofi, Gaffney and anyone else we recruited hard.
I'm not confident Mullin would survive missing the dance and losing Kofi.
[quote="austour" post=284208][quote="Chicago Days" post=284206][quote="Class of 72" post=284203]Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?[/quote]
Based on the roster, I think a great season for next year's team would be 21 wins before the BET, playing Friday in the BET and getting into the first weekend of the dance. I also think that after 4 years this staff should be getting this program to that level of performance, even though what I've seen so far doesn't make me confident that they can. But the penny can drop at any time, let's hope it's this coming season. Anything better than those expectations would be icing on the cake.[/quote]
Agree Austour. Just trying to see what ‘72 thinks would qualify for a ‘great season’. So your numbers would be ~21-10 before the BET, 22-11 going into the NCAAs and a final 23-12 record?
Just trying to extract some hard numbers out of people to quantify ‘great’.
Thanks.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?[/quote]
Based on the roster, I think a great season for next year's team would be 21 wins before the BET, playing Friday in the BET and getting into the first weekend of the dance. I also think that after 4 years this staff should be getting this program to that level of performance, even though what I've seen so far doesn't make me confident that they can. But the penny can drop at any time, let's hope it's this coming season. Anything better than those expectations would be icing on the cake.[/quote]
Agree Austour. Just trying to see what ‘72 thinks would qualify for a ‘great season’. So your numbers would be ~21-10 before the BET, 22-11 going into the NCAAs and a final 23-12 record?
Just trying to extract some hard numbers out of people to quantify ‘great’.
Thanks.
[quote="Class of 72" post=284210][quote="Chicago Days" post=284206][quote="Class of 72" post=284203]Mullin needs a great season not just a good one.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.[/quote]
First, we need Ponds to return for that great season.
Next,finish in the upper half of the conference with 21-23 wins.
Make it to the Big East semi at the very least.
Get to the Dance.
Win at least first game in the tournament.
Finally, sign two of our top recruits.
That would be a great season at the end of year four.
A good season would be 20 wins but just an NIT appearance. It would include signing Gaffney but not Kofi.
A bad season would be no post season and we lose Kofi, Gaffney and anyone else we recruited hard.
I'm not confident Mullin would survive missing the dance and losing Kofi.[/quote]
Thanks ‘72. I agree that ‘great’ would approximate those win totals but would have to include successfully getting Kofi and JG, plus ‘?’.
https://twitter.com/CoachingChanges/status/993113234226937856?s=19[/quote]
What would qualify for a ‘great season’ in your view, ‘72? 25-28 wins, a BET final and a ‘run’ to the Elite 8–or something very good but less scintillating?
Say, a final 27-10 record, losing in the Sweet 16–would that be ‘great’ or ‘very good’?
The more critical variable in my view would be how the team is positioned beyond next season at season’s end.[/quote]
First, we need Ponds to return for that great season.
Next,finish in the upper half of the conference with 21-23 wins.
Make it to the Big East semi at the very least.
Get to the Dance.
Win at least first game in the tournament.
Finally, sign two of our top recruits.
That would be a great season at the end of year four.
A good season would be 20 wins but just an NIT appearance. It would include signing Gaffney but not Kofi.
A bad season would be no post season and we lose Kofi, Gaffney and anyone else we recruited hard.
I'm not confident Mullin would survive missing the dance and losing Kofi.[/quote]
Thanks ‘72. I agree that ‘great’ would approximate those win totals but would have to include successfully getting Kofi and JG, plus ‘?’.
In my view, we should be a little less specific in our expectations in terms of recruits. I think team needs to win 20 games next year, make the dance and sign a couple of approximately 4 star recruits for 2019. Would love for one to be Kofi, but who knows. Anything less than the tournament next year is a major miss.
L J S A
Well-known member
[quote="salty dog" post=284223]I remember when lots of posters on this forum didn’t think winning 20 games was much of an acomplishment any more even though it was a staple of Looie’s teams[/quote]
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.
[quote="L J S A" post=284309][quote="salty dog" post=284223]I remember when lots of posters on this forum didn’t think winning 20 games was much of an acomplishment any more even though it was a staple of Looie’s teams[/quote]
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.
L J S A
Well-known member
[quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=284317][quote="L J S A" post=284309][quote="salty dog" post=284223]I remember when lots of posters on this forum didn’t think winning 20 games was much of an acomplishment any more even though it was a staple of Looie’s teams[/quote]
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.
[quote="L J S A" post=284331][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=284317][quote="L J S A" post=284309][quote="salty dog" post=284223]I remember when lots of posters on this forum didn’t think winning 20 games was much of an acomplishment any more even though it was a staple of Looie’s teams[/quote]
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.[/quote]
It's the LJSA new math, coming to an elementary school near you real soon.
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.[/quote]
It's the LJSA new math, coming to an elementary school near you real soon.
[quote="L J S A" post=284331][quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=284317][quote="L J S A" post=284309][quote="salty dog" post=284223]I remember when lots of posters on this forum didn’t think winning 20 games was much of an acomplishment any more even though it was a staple of Looie’s teams[/quote]
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.[/quote] Wow I had no idea about that stat
129 teams won 20 games last year. It doesn't have the same luster as it once did, especially when half the teams or more in a major conference reach that mark.[/quote] There are also more games played in a year.[/quote]
Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.[/quote] Wow I had no idea about that stat
LJSA Wrote: Only two of the last 30 champs have won fewer than 30, and they were 25 and 27. Over the past 15 years, if you didn't have at least 26 wins headed into the tournament, you weren't the champ. I can't speak for others, but 26 is the new 20 for me.
This is interesting but you must factor in that in order to become the NCAA champ you must add six wins to your record. That means if you come into the tournament with 24 wins you will hit the thirty mark. That also means that the teams that won the championship with less than thirty had 19 and 21 wins before their tournament runs. Add in the wins you might get from a conference tournament run and you could conceivably add ten wins to your regular season record.
When you are thinking about SJU prognostications for wins you don't really factor in wins from post-season runs since we haven't had any since our 2002-2003 NIT run.
This is interesting but you must factor in that in order to become the NCAA champ you must add six wins to your record. That means if you come into the tournament with 24 wins you will hit the thirty mark. That also means that the teams that won the championship with less than thirty had 19 and 21 wins before their tournament runs. Add in the wins you might get from a conference tournament run and you could conceivably add ten wins to your regular season record.
When you are thinking about SJU prognostications for wins you don't really factor in wins from post-season runs since we haven't had any since our 2002-2003 NIT run.
Last edited: