Your prediction re: St. John's Win/ loss record is
- Thread starter otis
- Start date
You're including teams like uconn, nova, Marquette and others who have just as much to prove as we do. None of them have "proof" that they can be top 25 teams. That's simply not true. They also have all lost significant talent. Teams need to re-prove every year. Just because we played with only 6 guys last year doesn't mean we are destined for the same results nor does is preclude you from looking objectively at our overall level of talent and depth compared to other teams in the league. I mean, you include WVU as an example and they're not even in the Big East any more... It tells me you're not really reading what you're typing, and just blanketly saying all those teams will be better...
Being ranked in the top 25 doesn't mean we're "great." Stop dealing in hyperbole. Being ranked can merely mean you're a good team. It seems you're stretching some points to prove your point.
Quite frankly, I think we will be amongst the top 8 teams in the conference when it's all said and done. 'Nova, UConn, and Notre Dame isn't necessarily a better team than St. John's. IMO, I think 'Nova and UConn will finish below the Johnnies. We seem to also have Notre Dame's number of late. By the way, WVU is no longer in the Big East (a team we manhandled a season ago while being shorthanded).
I think Marquette will be solid, but I'm curious to see how they'll replace Crowder and Johnson-Odom. We didn't match up well with Pitt a season ago. I'll contribute it to our lack of depth and size. Let's see how those problems were rectified.
There isn't anything wrong with being skeptical until this group show they are worth the accolades. But, to continue to make assertions like we're still playing with a 6-man rotation (5 freshmen and a JUCO transfer)weakens your point.
We're playing with 4 freshmen (one of 'em who was a 5th year senior and garnered AAA POY in the tough NEPSAC, while one of the frosh is an extraordinary shotblocker); 4 sophomores (one of 'em who could be considered for POY in the Big East) who gained a ton of experience (it's six when you include Branch and Bourgault); a 24-year old "do-it-all" JUCO All-American; and a leader in our JUCO A-A senior.
No one is saying they will be great. Several believe they can be good.
BOB BARKER
Member
SINCE I DONT KNOW MUCH ABOUT SJ OPPONENTS...HOW GOOD OR BAD THEY ARE....HOW EACH GAME IS REFFED.....WHAT INJURIES WILL OCCUR....WHETHER A KEY PLAYER WILL LEAVE THE PROGRAM, MY RAW GUESS IS 17-10...AND HOPE THAT IS GOOD ENUF FOR THE NCAAS...
I agree with MCNPA on this and would add that Cincy has a few things to prove, as well. Kilpatrick and Wright are good, but D'Lo was a better scorer than both. Jackson is a good bench player, but hasn't prove himself as a starter. I'm not saying they won't be good, but they're incoming class isn't great and they have questions. I think we'll be at least their equal, but can be better than them as we'll.
Isn't WVU in the BE for 1 more year? Anyway, you are missing the point. Nova has a championship, they have been MUCH more relevant than us in the past few decades, and they are consistently ranked. When they are ranked, it's not 23 either...it's more like 5-15. That's why people know Nova more than SJ nationally on the basketball scene. Marquette was just one of the best teams in the Big East and are almost always ranked as well as in the tourney. To act like we are just as good as those teams is reaching. Nova still gets better recruits than we do even now IMO. We get good recruits now, but they get more blue chippers. Marquette was just SECOND in the Big East! All I'm saying is this: if we really are as good as Nova and Marquette (2 teams who will likely be ranked this year), then we will be right there with them in the top half of the Big East. The only major success we have had recently was the NCAA berth in 2011. That's IT. We have a totally different team now that has not proven it can consistently beat good teams yet.
I obviously hope they prove me wrong, but after so many years of failure, you have to take a step by step approach and look for a progression. Teams rarely go from 13-19 to ranked and in the tournament in 1 year with a bunch of freshmen and sophs. I think the excitement has clouded reality a bit. I just don't think we should have such high standards for an inexperienced group right after losing our best player. We still don't even have a real PG until December, so Branch will likely be delayed on the learning curve.
I obviously hope they prove me wrong, but after so many years of failure, you have to take a step by step approach and look for a progression. Teams rarely go from 13-19 to ranked and in the tournament in 1 year with a bunch of freshmen and sophs. I think the excitement has clouded reality a bit. I just don't think we should have such high standards for an inexperienced group right after losing our best player. We still don't even have a real PG until December, so Branch will likely be delayed on the learning curve.
I see why you catch so much flak by some members of the board. First of all, West Virginia is no longer a member of the Big East. They are currently residing in the Big 12.
The San Francisco Dons also have a championship (I believe they have two). Villanova won a championship before you were born (nearly 30 years ago). What does 'Nova's relevancy has to do with the team they'll put on the court in 2012-2013?
Who cares where one is ranked whenever they are amongst the top 25 teams in the poll? What does that has to do with the price of cheese? No one is even arguing such. We're talking about THIS upcoming season.
Marquette is usually one of the better teams in the conference. No doubt about it. Marquette also has to replace two very, valuable players in Crowder and Johnson-Odom. I'm one who believes Marquette will have a good season, but there are still a couple of question marks.
Since Lavin has been at St. John's:
2011
St. John's recruiting: Pointer (#35), Harkless (#38), Sampson (#40), Harrison (#47), Pelle (#51), Garrett (#73), JUCO All-American's (Lindsey and Achiuwa).
Villanova recruiting: Tyrone Johnson (#56)
2012
St. John's: Obekpa (#69). *Sampson (#40) and **Branch (#52). *5th year prep senior/**transfer.
Villanova: Daniel Ochefu (#44), Ryan Arcidiacono (#55)
Per CBS Sports recruiting (as, they counted our JUCO transfers).... We were rated higher than 'Nova's 2012 class.
Yeah.... 'Nova is running laps, from the earth to the moon, around us in recruiting. We can't hold a yard stick to what they are bringing in. By the way, I have a hunch we'll have a better recruiting class than 'Nova in 2013, as well.
It's obvious you haven't paid any attention to 'Nova's roster, if you think they are going to be a good team, this season. You're just going on the past five years or so, which doesn't jive. By the way, you mentioned 'Nova and Marquette will be ranked, right? Where will they be ranked? Remember, if they are ranked near the bottom of the polls, then it doesn't mean much.
Our team has quite a few questions, and they have to prove themselves. I, along with several others, believe the pieces are there to be a good team for the upcoming season.
When teams are used to being studs in the top 15 constantly and going to tournaments, it brings the fans out to games, and it gives the team a winning culture. You can't tell me a winning culture has nothing to do with it. Look at the Yankees vs. the Mets...the Mets just seem to have a losing culture no matter how good their players are. SJ has had a losing culture for a while and it is much closer to the norm recently than success. Nova is used to winning and being at the top, as is UConn and Marquette. They are all well established programs. We have been bad way more than we have been good in the past decade or so. It's a what have you done for me lately world today, and no one cares we were good in the 80's. Nova has been great just a few years ago just like UConn, and Marquette. St. John's has not. Is our potential there? Sure. Have we proven anything yet? Nope.
Other than midnight madness and a 13-19 season last year, what has this team shown you that says we are a force to be reckoned with? Almost all of the Big East teams have great recruits. Having good recruits just makes it a level playing field, it doesn't mean we will beat them. I think we have to be really cautious...give the players time to gel instead of demanding 20 wins right away. Let's not get too greedy...let's get ranked before we talk about going further. Let's beat Cuse or L'Ville before we talk about being a top 8 Big East team. I like evidence, not potential.
Other than midnight madness and a 13-19 season last year, what has this team shown you that says we are a force to be reckoned with? Almost all of the Big East teams have great recruits. Having good recruits just makes it a level playing field, it doesn't mean we will beat them. I think we have to be really cautious...give the players time to gel instead of demanding 20 wins right away. Let's not get too greedy...let's get ranked before we talk about going further. Let's beat Cuse or L'Ville before we talk about being a top 8 Big East team. I like evidence, not potential.
If we beat Cuse or Louisville, maybe we should in the top two in the conference. We don't need to beat either of those teams to be in the top 8. By the way, who demanded 20 wins? We're just saying we think this team has a good shot at it based on the high level of recruits...and, no, 'Nova has not brought in the same level of recruits in the last few years. Hence, the writers' predictions for them to have a down year.
Um...the writers think we are a bottom of the Big East team...#12 to #15. I brought this up earlier in the month...the only way those of you who say we are capable of 20 wins are correct is if the writers have no idea what they are talking about, because they don't expect much and they have in depth knowledge of our transactions. So you are going against almost every expert. Nova a few years ago had one of THE best recruiting classes in the nation with Cheek. They can easily be as good as us this year. Teams can look great on paper and be just ok in reality. Look at the Miami Marlins...that's why you don't set such high expectations before they prove they are that good. Talent and results are 2 different things.
Can't we be humble and more realistic and just hope this team finishes above .500? No Harkless, no true PG until December, key players Sampson, Obekpa, Sanchez, Marco, etc. are all brand new and inexperienced, and even our players coming back are sophs still learning. Lavin is just getting back as well and will likely need some time to get back in the groove. Ask any expert and they will call it a longshot for us to be a top 8 team, be ranked, and make the tourney.
Can't we be humble and more realistic and just hope this team finishes above .500? No Harkless, no true PG until December, key players Sampson, Obekpa, Sanchez, Marco, etc. are all brand new and inexperienced, and even our players coming back are sophs still learning. Lavin is just getting back as well and will likely need some time to get back in the groove. Ask any expert and they will call it a longshot for us to be a top 8 team, be ranked, and make the tourney.
I dont disagree with a lot of what you said but I think the culture of our program literally changed the day we hired Lavin. Nova changed very quickly when they hired Wright.
I think it's more pronounced with us because Lavin changed us from a mom and pop type program to instant big time in his vision and he just gets things done in a way thats never been done here.
I met Jay a decent amount of times when he coached at hofstra and you could tell right away he was going to be a winner. He was wearing Armani suits and I dont even know if he was making 100k in the beginning at hofstra. The guy is charismatic. Heck one of my friends was ready to hump his leg like a dog I think one night when we were drinking some beers with him at Monteray's across the street from hofstra many years ago.
As charismatic as Jay was/is I honestly believe it's not even close when comparing to Lavin. I'm not even sure how to explain it but Lavin has this sort of presence about him. Maybe it comes from him doing all the tv work but I think it's more than that. Both are awesome guys and both had their work cut out for them at both places but if we go head to head with Jay for a recruit I think Lavin is the favorite and I think he is a better coach. Just my opinion
Are we talking about the same experts who picked us 13th two seasons ago? Some things you've said make sense, while other parts of your posts comes off as obfuscation. You'll also be surprised how some of the prognosticators doesn't have a clue.
There is always a team or two who'll make waves when no one expected it. I don't believe anyone is saying this group will be gangbusters. Some believe this team has enough ammunition to be a good team.
Lavin has been out of the game for one season. He was out longer than that before he came aboard and led the team to an NCAA Tournament a couple of seasons ago. So, I'm not sure him needing to get back into a "groove." It's not like he was out of the game like Dick Vermeil prior to coming back to the NFL.
I particularly do not care what "experts" have to say when it comes to preseason polls. I'm still of the opinion there is sufficient talent to be amongst the top 8 teams in the conference when it's all said and done. Barring anything catastrophic (taking a page from crgreen), then I see us "dancing."
I guess we'll touch back on this thread in 5 months.
I'll add that I believe a lot of writers, fans of other programs and pundits simply don't know enough about our team, especially the new recruits. A guy like Orlando Sanchez is tremendously underrated IMO. Not many guys at 6'9" with his skill set. The kid is a pro and will replace Moe more admirably than most out there realize. We have a lot of sleeper type recruits that people aren't paying much attention to. Kids like Jamal Branch was a top notch PG coming out of HS, guys like Bourgault, Balamou and Christian Jones who nobody knows about. From the pieces I've seen of them, I came away very impressed. Those are on top of studs like Obekpa and Sampson who are the only recruits the pundits are talking about.
We bring back a lot of experienced sophs as well as an All Big East player. I think we have a lot more going for us than those "experts" even realize. We would have won 20 games last year if we had Jakarr, Pelle and Amir all eligible IMO. This year we're back on track in a big way. Like I said though, I prefer being under the radar and stealing all the press as the season moves along. We have the talent and depth now to deal with most teams out there.
We bring back a lot of experienced sophs as well as an All Big East player. I think we have a lot more going for us than those "experts" even realize. We would have won 20 games last year if we had Jakarr, Pelle and Amir all eligible IMO. This year we're back on track in a big way. Like I said though, I prefer being under the radar and stealing all the press as the season moves along. We have the talent and depth now to deal with most teams out there.
I think it's extremely difficult to forecast this season accurately but let me say this.. Last year we had the same annual thread and almost everyone here was low balling the team's record from 11-15 wins. I was shocked because not all the butt mud had hit the fan quite yet. The people who post here have a very good idea regarding the pulse of a team trust me on that. If they say we have a good chance at 20 wins then we unquestionably do. I would trust mcn or moose or mjdink or maher(among others) over any writer. Is it even worth comparing the time and commitment they have put into knowing the ins and outs of this program compared to some rinky dink writer making a deadline? No disrespect meant to the BE journalists but their Redmen acumen isn't close to what the people who write on these boards is.
No offense, but to compare a sports forum's expertise on a team versus ESPN New York writers and other professionals is a slap in the face to them. 9/10 times, if the writers say a team will be good, they will be. So far I haven't seen any writers who pick us finishing better than about 10 or 12 in the conference let alone dancing. I believe they hype us up when we deserve it too...2 years ago we had hype regarding our class, then Gathers, Pelle, Wood, etc. all decommitted and it kind of set us back. Please realize I'm not being negative, I'm just trying to be objective. We literally just had 1 good, not great year in 2011. Other than that, a bunch of nothing. Lavin has helped raise our national status no doubt, but there's still a ton of work to do. We have the team on paper, now we have to prove we aren't just paper tigers. I may only be 23, but I know being a fan in general that no matter how good you look on paper, great seasons are never guaranteed. I'd like to watch this team get into conference play a bit before I start drinking the kool aid and believe me...I want to drink it.
Dominik Cheek? He wasn't even in the starting lineup last year as a 3rd year player. Malik Wayns went pro and we out -recruited them. And to call Sanchez and Bourgault inexperienced is just way off base.
If the team finishes just above .500 that is a complete and utter failure simply by looking a their strength of schedule.
The same "experts" that you're touting (take Dave Telep for instance) are responsible for over and under ranking recruits and showing favoritism to recruits from their home state.
If SJU is inexperienced according to you, then what is UConn who is ranked higher than us?
You really think a few journalists know these teams better than most here? That's absurd. Half these guys know little about the roster and do 10 minutes of research before making these lists. You're not being objective at this point, closer to obtuse. You don't have to buy in to the idea of 20 wins, but youre mistake if you think most of these writers know the teams half as well as the fans.