St. Francis, Sun. Dec. 6, 11am, FS1 & 970AM

[SJU85]

It is the flashes of talent, (the strong post up move with a jump hook, or quick feet spin, or the leap) that you see that infuriates you when he plays soft, disappears or makes bonehead plays (some which don't appear in the stat line). It probably frustrated the previous regime who looked at what he did in practice and figured they had a gem only to watch him in a game play like a lemon.

He had his moments of course on Sunday, and then he did stuff that made you think, well, let's just say frustrate you and they don't always show up in the stats (twice that I noticed he was supposed to flash to the ball and instead retreated, gave up position and caused turnovers that weren't charged to him because the dribbler (Mussini one time got called for a travel one time and gave up a steal the next).

Again, I would love to be proven wrong but he is frustrating. Maybe he does a Chudney Gray was repeatedly derided on the previous Board, didn't play well in the OT loss to Duke in his Junior year and went back to not playing much. Jarvis mentioned later that year he was playing well in practice and would see more time. Low and behold, he finished that season strong and was sixth man of the year the next year..

 

[mjmaherjr]

Its crazy how little respect Jones gets. Just 13 & 9 in a game where we needed every pt and every rebound we got. No mentions of the great passes he has had to Mussini on cuts to the basket (two today and several previously) or the help he gives breaking the press. And trust me we NEED him to break the press. He is not a perfect player, not even close, but if his name was anything else and he was a JUCO brought in by mullin for the next two years everyone would be happy to have him. Instead we pick his game apart.

Jones doesn't have the best instincts for sure but I like him. I think he is definitely serviceable.

Sometimes it almost feels like to me he doesn't realize how big he really is and what he could do with his body

He's playing a lot better than I thought he would. You have to wonder why he hardly played last year when we lacked depth. He is definitely serviceable ,like you said.

He should have and could have been a useful part of last year's team. Like you said, in light of how short our roster was you you have to wonder why Lavin didn't find a way to utilize him more. Just one of many things that made you wonder. No offense to AA, but CJ was and is the superior player. Chris quickly realized that which is why CJ is playing 30 MPG and AA 14 MPG.

Honestly, Jones got what he deserved last season in terms of playing time. Yes, he has a player's body, but other than a nice play once in a blue moon, he contributed very little. Good for him that he is getting a chance and making the most of it. His numbers are nice so far, but let's keep in mind that this is the part of our schedule where we play an entire roster of guys who would not be recruited anywhere in the Big East. If he puts these numbers up in the Big East part of the schedule, that would be really impressive. I just am not counting on it.

Beast a big part of a coach's job is player development. We saw no improvement in Jones' game in his first couple of years here. Low and behold, in just a few months under Chris's tutelage, we see a vastly improved player. I'm not saying that Jones is going to be an all big east player, but there was some untapped potential there and fortunately Chris has figured out a way to tap in to it. This is not a case of a kid simply improving over time, or we would have seen signs of it over the course of last season. In a perfect world Jones would be coming off the bench giving us 15-20 minutes of hard nosed ball. Unfortunately we are living in a far from perfect world.

I agree 100% with you in concept, but over the years, very few players at SJU improved radically over their tenure.

People said the same thing about Carnesecca for years - that players didn't develop. Some of you will pour over stats and tell me how this guys numbers improved, scoring assists, whatever, but more often than not it had to do with opportunity for more playing time and the kid took advantage of it.

David Russell is a classic example people used to say Carnesecca never taught him a thing. Mel Davis would joke that Carnesecca would never touch a ball in practice because every one of his players had fundamentals he didn't possess.

Zendon, Felipe, and a long list of players never developed much as time went on. Just trying to be objective.

Some, like Hardy, got a shot and made the most of it. Lavin didn't develop him - Roberts hindered him.

There is nothing to suggest as far as I see that Jones is suddenly a new and improved player, except that with a razor thin roster he doesn't have to look over his shoulder to get yanked at the first egregious error. Also, though to be real, if Amar didn't get the opportunity he got as a freshman, perhaps Mussini (another foreign player) doesn't come here at all.

I'm more than willing to jump on the trash Lavin bandwagon when warranted, but Jones had ample opportunity to prove he could play, and failed. With only one true big guy (CO), he had a golden opportunity, but blew it as Lavin coaxed an NCAA bid out of an undersized team. Other than Amar's minutes, who would you have taken minutes away from to give Jones a chance? PG4? Harrison? Jordan? Pointer? Branch? Obekpa? Jones didn't play because he didn't seize an opportunity, and that happens on almost every team every season. Hopefully he makes the most of this chance this year. I'm pulling for him, as are you.

Sometimes its less about actually developing a player's talent, and more about giving a player a defined roll and letting him know how much faith you have in his ability to suceed in that roll.

Cain

What part of "Very few guys" did you not understand. Cain is perhaps the best example of a guy who improved while here. More often than not its about opportunity and confidence. As we've seen with senior laden teams in the NCAAs, experience counts a lot.

With Jones, I don't believe he's being taught so much that he's improved radically, and more that he's been told he's the starting forward and won't be yanked at every lapse. But I would like to revisit this subject after half the Big East season, where there will be enough games against better competition to gauge his progress. I'm not very big on making proclamations about a player when you are in the easy part of your schedule. When you do that Marvis Frazier becomes the next Joe Frazier, and we all know how that went

As I pointed out earlier this year, on talent compromised teams there are always one of two guys who put up career best years. I hope that's the case with Jones.

Whoa my post wasn't even in reference to you. It was a response to Monte's post about sometimes it's about a player getting an opportunity and defined role. In my opinion the 1 player that stands out to me is Cain. He toiled on the bench and to the best of my knowledge didn't do much his 1st 3 years and then when Mahoney started him it was like watching a different player play

That's pretty much why my post was 1 word. Cain. Wasn't saying anything more or less than that although I don't know how I could say anything less than a 4 letter name

 

[we are sju]

I agree 100% with you in concept, but over the years, very few players at SJU improved radically over their tenure.

People said the same thing about Carnesecca for years - that players didn't develop. Some of you will pour over stats and tell me how this guys numbers improved, scoring assists, whatever, but more often than not it had to do with opportunity for more playing time and the kid took advantage of it.

David Russell is a classic example people used to say Carnesecca never taught him a thing. Mel Davis would joke that Carnesecca would never touch a ball in practice because every one of his players had fundamentals he didn't possess.

Zendon, Felipe, and a long list of players never developed much as time went on. Just trying to be objective.

This is just nonsense. The fact is that most players improve measurably from their freshmen to senior years. They develop physically and mentally. Their motor skills and muscle memory improve with repetition. Which is BTW why most students attend university, at least theoretically: to develop proficiency in a particular field of study through interaction with those of greater expertise. You've dismissed as nonsense the foundation of pedagogy, based on anecdotal observations, half of which are not even correct. Lou never taught Mel Davis anything. Yes, and for good reason.

Anecdotally there are any number of SJ players who improved between the FR and SR years, and not just players who had epiphanic senior years like Cain and Dom Pointer. Mark Jackson was awful as a freshman. Awful. Donald Emanuel went from a complete waste of space as an underclassman to a pretty good ball player, and that was under Mike Jarvis, who sucked. The difference between Kyle Cuffe as a freshman and senior, or DJ Kennedy, or Bill Wennington or Robert Werdann or Lavar Postell or Ty Grant or any other myriad of players off the top of my head at just this one school, who improved in obvious ways over time, you'd have to be blind not to see it. Much less what can be observed in the rest of college athletics. Good grief.

There are of course some players who never got better. Some players like Mullin came in as fully formed basketball players. Some players like Russell and McKoy didn't want to get better. Some players like nearly every big white dope Lou ever recruited had little aptitude for the sport and so could not get better. And most players - average players - are not capable of improving "radically." Because you can't teach genius, and certainly not in four years. But you can teach, and even the worst students can learn. Even the dumbest mule will learn to pull the plow if beaten righteously enough.

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.
I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly.
Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

 

[fun]

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.

Mark Jackson's first year he averaged 5.8 PPG, and had 108 assists and 80 turnovers. Moses averaged 6.8 PPG and had 124 assists and 60 turnovers. So unless Jackson was born after that year, the numbers don't bear out your recollection. Was Jackson more talented that Moses? Yes. But Moses won a state championship in high school and was an NBA draft pick. He's not the dope you make him out to be. Which is anyway irrelevant to the point I was making. What is relevant is that Jackson went from 5.8 / 108 / 80 as a FR to 18.9 / 193 / 80 as a senior. Three times as many points, twice as many assists, and the same amount of TOs. So he got better.

I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly. Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Lou is in the hall of fame because he played upperclassmen over underclassmen. He played upperclassmen because they had the benefit of three or four years of his instruction, which made them better at playing basketball as seniors than they were as freshmen. That's not a debatable point. That a bunch of guys coached by Jarvis and Mahoney didn't improve doesn't prove anything except that Jarvis and Mahoney sucked at coaching.

 

[we are sju]

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.

Mark Jackson's first year he averaged 5.8 PPG, and had 108 assists and 80 turnovers. Moses averaged 6.8 PPG and had 124 assists and 60 turnovers. So unless Jackson was born after that year, the numbers don't bear out your recollection. Was Jackson more talented that Moses? Yes. But Moses won a state championship in high school and was an NBA draft pick. He's not the dope you make him out to be. Which is anyway irrelevant to the point I was making. What is relevant is that Jackson went from 5.8 / 108 / 80 as a FR to 18.9 / 193 / 80 as a senior. Three times as many points, twice as many assists, and the same amount of TOs. So he got better.

I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly. Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Lou is in the hall of fame because he played upperclassmen over underclassmen. He played upperclassmen because they had the benefit of three or four years of his instruction, which made them better at playing basketball as seniors than they were as freshmen. That's not a debatable point. That a bunch of guys coached by Jarvis and Mahoney didn't improve doesn't prove anything except that Jarvis and Mahoney sucked at coaching.

I am not saying he didn't improve but by simple minutes and the responsibility he was given Jackson's stats were going to be be better. I think he has same year his Soph that he did his Junior year if given the same chance, but whatever.

Sealy and Postell improved the most year by year of the players I have seen. Guess Jarvis gets the credit for Postell, huh

 

[Ray Morgan]

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.

Mark Jackson's first year he averaged 5.8 PPG, and had 108 assists and 80 turnovers. Moses averaged 6.8 PPG and had 124 assists and 60 turnovers. So unless Jackson was born after that year, the numbers don't bear out your recollection. Was Jackson more talented that Moses? Yes. But Moses won a state championship in high school and was an NBA draft pick. He's not the dope you make him out to be. Which is anyway irrelevant to the point I was making. What is relevant is that Jackson went from 5.8 / 108 / 80 as a FR to 18.9 / 193 / 80 as a senior. Three times as many points, twice as many assists, and the same amount of TOs. So he got better.

I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly. Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Lou is in the hall of fame because he played upperclassmen over underclassmen. He played upperclassmen because they had the benefit of three or four years of his instruction, which made them better at playing basketball as seniors than they were as freshmen. That's not a debatable point. That a bunch of guys coached by Jarvis and Mahoney didn't improve doesn't prove anything except that Jarvis and Mahoney sucked at coaching.

I am not saying he didn't improve but by simple minutes and the responsibility he was given Jackson's stats were going to be be better. I think he has same year his Soph that he did his Junior year if given the same chance, but whatever.

Sealy and Postell improved the most year by year of the players I have seen. Guess Jarvis gets the credit for Postell, huh

So to sum up the arguments, some players get better, some get worse, and some stay the same. Some stay in the gym after practice and improve, and some spend their college careers smoking weed and cutting class. The coach certainly plays a role, but some players, like a Derrick Caracter, couldn't be tamed even by a hall of fame coach. Dom Pointer didn't suddenly improve from his junior to senior year, although it seemed that way. He was finally put in a position to succeed by a clueless coach who took 4 years to understand that Dom was faster and jumped higher than 99% of the competition, but was useless standing around 30 feet from the basket watching Harrison and Sampson go one on one.

Then there are the few that come with greatness, like Mullin and Mel Davis, who was always a man among boys, and some that have great talent like Kevin Williams but for whatever reason piss their coach off and sit beyond Bobby Kelly. As for the comment that Lou wasn't hands on, I watched a lot of practices back in the day, and Lou was very hands on especially teaching defense.

 

[simplyred]

Kevin Williams was a 2G, not a PG---albeit more talented than Bobby Kelly. He was athletic but he didn't really meet the prototypical ball control type of PG that Looie loved. The argument has been made for 40 yrs now that he should have started over Kelly but it was never going to happen under Looie. Much as we argue that Mussini is playing out of position at PG, so would Kevin Williams have been playing out of position.

Also, see Green IV, Phil thread(s).

 

[we are sju]

Kevin Williams was a 2G, not a PG---albeit more talented than Bobby Kelly. He was athletic but he didn't really meet the prototypical ball control type of PG that Looie loved. The argument has been made for 40 yrs now that he should have started over Kelly but it was never going to happen under Looie. Much as we argue that Mussini is playing out of position at PG, so would Kevin Williams have been playing out of position.

Was a little kid but if memory serves they basically split the time at the point even if KW wasn't actually a point guard and since no one ever guarded Kelly why not let Williams play most of the time there. Offense ran through Mullin anyway. All Kelly did was bring ball up court.

 

[Ray Morgan]

Kevin Williams was a 2G, not a PG---albeit more talented than Bobby Kelly. He was athletic but he didn't really meet the prototypical ball control type of PG that Looie loved. The argument has been made for 40 yrs now that he should have started over Kelly but it was never going to happen under Looie. Much as we argue that Mussini is playing out of position at PG, so would Kevin Williams have been playing out of position.

Also, see Green IV, Phil thread(s).

Williams could have played blindfolded after a case of high octane malt liquor and he would still have contributed more than Kelly. Looie's rigid approach to basketball, including almost never playing zone, was great for the yearly 20 wins but also limited the ceiling of some talented teams.

 

[we are sju]

Kevin Williams was a 2G, not a PG---albeit more talented than Bobby Kelly. He was athletic but he didn't really meet the prototypical ball control type of PG that Looie loved. The argument has been made for 40 yrs now that he should have started over Kelly but it was never going to happen under Looie. Much as we argue that Mussini is playing out of position at PG, so would Kevin Williams have been playing out of position.

Also, see Green IV, Phil thread(s).

Williams could have played blindfolded after a case of high octane malt liquor and he would still have contributed more than Kelly. Looie's rigid approach to basketball, including almost never playing zone, was great for the yearly 20 wins but also limited the ceiling of some talented teams.

I thought his best coaching job even though we got upset in 2nd round was year after Final Four. Played some zone and let them play uptempo

 

[bamafan]

...and all Kevin Williams did is make the NBA!

 

[beast of the east]

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.

Mark Jackson's first year he averaged 5.8 PPG, and had 108 assists and 80 turnovers. Moses averaged 6.8 PPG and had 124 assists and 60 turnovers. So unless Jackson was born after that year, the numbers don't bear out your recollection. Was Jackson more talented that Moses? Yes. But Moses won a state championship in high school and was an NBA draft pick. He's not the dope you make him out to be. Which is anyway irrelevant to the point I was making. What is relevant is that Jackson went from 5.8 / 108 / 80 as a FR to 18.9 / 193 / 80 as a senior. Three times as many points, twice as many assists, and the same amount of TOs. So he got better.

I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly. Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Lou is in the hall of fame because he played upperclassmen over underclassmen. He played upperclassmen because they had the benefit of three or four years of his instruction, which made them better at playing basketball as seniors than they were as freshmen. That's not a debatable point. That a bunch of guys coached by Jarvis and Mahoney didn't improve doesn't prove anything except that Jarvis and Mahoney sucked at coaching.

I am not saying he didn't improve but by simple minutes and the responsibility he was given Jackson's stats were going to be be better. I think he has same year his Soph that he did his Junior year if given the same chance, but whatever.

Sealy and Postell improved the most year by year of the players I have seen. Guess Jarvis gets the credit for Postell, huh

So to sum up the arguments, some players get better, some get worse, and some stay the same. Some stay in the gym after practice and improve, and some spend their college careers smoking weed and cutting class. The coach certainly plays a role, but some players, like a Derrick Caracter, couldn't be tamed even by a hall of fame coach. Dom Pointer didn't suddenly improve from his junior to senior year, although it seemed that way. He was finally put in a position to succeed by a clueless coach who took 4 years to understand that Dom was faster and jumped higher than 99% of the competition, but was useless standing around 30 feet from the basket watching Harrison and Sampson go one on one.

Then there are the few that come with greatness, like Mullin and Mel Davis, who was always a man among boys, and some that have great talent like Kevin Williams but for whatever reason piss their coach off and sit beyond Bobby Kelly. As for the comment that Lou wasn't hands on, I watched a lot of practices back in the day, and Lou was very hands on especially teaching defense.

It was Larry Washington who sat behind Bobby Kelly. Washington appeared to be more talented. Carnesecca always favored PGs who didn't turn the ball over, passed first and could run a half court offense.

As for Kevin WIlliams, Carnesecca joked that obviously he didn't know very much about basketball since he didn't start KW but he made an NBA roster and had a pretty good run at one point.

 

[fun]

It was Larry Washington who sat behind Bobby Kelly.

No, it wasn't.

In 1982 Bobby Kelly started 30 games and played nearly 1000 minutes on a team with starters David Russell, Bill Goodwin, Jeff Allen, and Chris Mullin.

Kevin Williams started 0 games and played 400 minutes off the bench, second in bench minutes behind Bill Wennington (500)

Larry Washington played in 9 games all year, 43 minutes total. He sat behind George Garrison, who played 65 minutes in 13 games.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1982.html

In 1983 Kelly started 32 games and played 800 minutes. Williams started 1 game and played 800 minutes.

Larry Washington was not on the team that year.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1983.html

Larry Washington was on the 81 team but Bob Kelly was not.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1981.html

Thus did Larry Washington never sit behind Bobby Kelly. Odd. You made this very same mistake several years ago and I schooled you on over a period of days much to the delight of my many fans. Evidently none of it took. Evidently I did not beat you righteously enough.

 

[monte]

I agree 100% with you in concept, but over the years, very few players at SJU improved radically over their tenure.

People said the same thing about Carnesecca for years - that players didn't develop. Some of you will pour over stats and tell me how this guys numbers improved, scoring assists, whatever, but more often than not it had to do with opportunity for more playing time and the kid took advantage of it.

David Russell is a classic example people used to say Carnesecca never taught him a thing. Mel Davis would joke that Carnesecca would never touch a ball in practice because every one of his players had fundamentals he didn't possess.

Zendon, Felipe, and a long list of players never developed much as time went on. Just trying to be objective.

This is just nonsense. The fact is that most players improve measurably from their freshmen to senior years. They develop physically and mentally. Their motor skills and muscle memory improve with repetition. Which is BTW why most students attend university, at least theoretically: to develop proficiency in a particular field of study through interaction with those of greater expertise. You've dismissed as nonsense the foundation of pedagogy, based on anecdotal observations, half of which are not even correct. Lou never taught Mel Davis anything. Yes, and for good reason.

Anecdotally there are any number of SJ players who improved between the FR and SR years, and not just players who had epiphanic senior years like Cain and Dom Pointer. Mark Jackson was awful as a freshman. Awful. Donald Emanuel went from a complete waste of space as an underclassman to a pretty good ball player, and that was under Mike Jarvis, who sucked. The difference between Kyle Cuffe as a freshman and senior, or DJ Kennedy, or Bill Wennington or Robert Werdann or Lavar Postell or Ty Grant or any other myriad of players off the top of my head at just this one school, who improved in obvious ways over time, you'd have to be blind not to see it. Much less what can be observed in the rest of college athletics. Good grief.

There are of course some players who never got better. Some players like Mullin came in as fully formed basketball players. Some players like Russell and McKoy didn't want to get better. Some players like nearly every big white dope Lou ever recruited had little aptitude for the sport and so could not get better. And most players - average players - are not capable of improving "radically." Because you can't teach genius, and certainly not in four years. But you can teach, and even the worst students can learn. Even the dumbest mule will learn to pull the plow if beaten righteously enough.

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.
I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly.
Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Louie was not going to take the PG duties away from his senior PG and hand them over to a promising but raw freshman. Not on a stacked team with
championship aspirations. No way, no how. I always felt far more comfortable with the ball in Moses' hands than I did in Jax that year. I criticized Louie for a lot of things, how he handled the Moses/Jax situation is not one of them.

 

[we are sju]

I agree 100% with you in concept, but over the years, very few players at SJU improved radically over their tenure.

People said the same thing about Carnesecca for years - that players didn't develop. Some of you will pour over stats and tell me how this guys numbers improved, scoring assists, whatever, but more often than not it had to do with opportunity for more playing time and the kid took advantage of it.

David Russell is a classic example people used to say Carnesecca never taught him a thing. Mel Davis would joke that Carnesecca would never touch a ball in practice because every one of his players had fundamentals he didn't possess.

Zendon, Felipe, and a long list of players never developed much as time went on. Just trying to be objective.

This is just nonsense. The fact is that most players improve measurably from their freshmen to senior years. They develop physically and mentally. Their motor skills and muscle memory improve with repetition. Which is BTW why most students attend university, at least theoretically: to develop proficiency in a particular field of study through interaction with those of greater expertise. You've dismissed as nonsense the foundation of pedagogy, based on anecdotal observations, half of which are not even correct. Lou never taught Mel Davis anything. Yes, and for good reason.

Anecdotally there are any number of SJ players who improved between the FR and SR years, and not just players who had epiphanic senior years like Cain and Dom Pointer. Mark Jackson was awful as a freshman. Awful. Donald Emanuel went from a complete waste of space as an underclassman to a pretty good ball player, and that was under Mike Jarvis, who sucked. The difference between Kyle Cuffe as a freshman and senior, or DJ Kennedy, or Bill Wennington or Robert Werdann or Lavar Postell or Ty Grant or any other myriad of players off the top of my head at just this one school, who improved in obvious ways over time, you'd have to be blind not to see it. Much less what can be observed in the rest of college athletics. Good grief.

There are of course some players who never got better. Some players like Mullin came in as fully formed basketball players. Some players like Russell and McKoy didn't want to get better. Some players like nearly every big white dope Lou ever recruited had little aptitude for the sport and so could not get better. And most players - average players - are not capable of improving "radically." Because you can't teach genius, and certainly not in four years. But you can teach, and even the worst students can learn. Even the dumbest mule will learn to pull the plow if beaten righteously enough.

Jackson was born better than Moses. We will never agree on this.
I will say their are more cases of guys who got worse here year by year than got better outside of the Pointer / Cain anomaly.
Shaw, Jessie, Lopez, Burrell and Mason immediately jump out

Louie was not going to take the PG duties away from his senior PG and hand them over to a promising but raw freshman. Not on a stacked team with
championship aspirations. No way, no how. I always felt far more comfortable with the ball in Moses' hands than I did in Jax that year. I criticized Louie for a lot of things, how he handled the Moses/Jax situation is not one of them.

The only game we were competitive with Gtown that year Jackson and Shelton Jones were effective in helping break the press. Moses looked like a deer in headlights vs that press.

 

[redmannorth]

It was Larry Washington who sat behind Bobby Kelly.

No, it wasn't.

In 1982 Bobby Kelly started 30 games and played nearly 1000 minutes on a team with starters David Russell, Bill Goodwin, Jeff Allen, and Chris Mullin.

Kevin Williams started 0 games and played 400 minutes off the bench, second in bench minutes behind Bill Wennington (500)

Larry Washington played in 9 games all year, 43 minutes total. He sat behind George Garrison, who played 65 minutes in 13 games.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1982.html

In 1983 Kelly started 32 games and played 800 minutes. Williams started 1 game and played 800 minutes.

Larry Washington was not on the team that year.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1983.html

Larry Washington was on the 81 team but Bob Kelly was not.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/st-johns-ny/1981.html

Thus did Larry Washington never sit behind Bobby Kelly. Odd. You made this very same mistake several years ago and I schooled you on over a period of days much to the delight of my many fans. Evidently none of it took. Evidently I did not beat you righteously enough.

I was in school then and Fun is correct.
As a matter of fact Williams played far more in crunch time than Kelly did during the 1982-1983 season.
There was a more than valid reason Kevin Williams did not start which Coach Lou has never publicly revealed being the extreme gentlemen he was and is. Leave it at that. It served everyone well. Kevin played, was a second round draft pick and I believe is a school teacher today.

 

[fun]

The only game we were competitive with Gtown that year Jackson and Shelton Jones were effective in helping break the press. Moses looked like a deer in headlights vs that press.

Mark Jackson played 40 minutes in the Niagara loss that year and split time with Moses in the three GT losses. In the one game we beat GT Moses played 27 minutes to Jackson's 13.