Game 1: New Orleans

  • 121 replies
  • 13370 views

Johnny23

  • *****
  • 3277
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #80 on: November 11, 2017, 05:51:27 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #81 on: November 11, 2017, 06:51:14 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 06:52:04 PM by Poison »

redslope

  • *****
  • 1823
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #82 on: November 11, 2017, 06:57:30 PM »
Was at the game and thought that there were positives and negatives and one must remember this was the first game of the season.  I agree that rebounding was atrocious and will be a weakness all year--don't look to see much offensive rebounding as that is where fouls have a high probability of occurring and that is something that we can't afford.  Bench was extremely short and not much contribution. (The women's team got 35 points off the bench while men got 8).  Couldn't put NO away after getting up by 22 with 6 minutes left--need to finish better.

Positives were team speed which was incredible.  T/O's were cut down in second half.  Marcus looked like mid season-smooth and under control and 4 steals.  The fouls which were a problem in exhibitions were cut down-Owens none in 23 minutes and Clark 3 in 29 minutes (one could see impact of sitting out on Clark when he would come out--expect better things from him as he gets game conditioned.

redslope

  • *****
  • 1823
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #83 on: November 11, 2017, 06:58:49 PM »
Was at the game and thought that there were positives and negatives and one must remember this was the first game of the season.  I agree that rebounding was atrocious and will be a weakness all year--don't look to see much offensive rebounding as that is where fouls have a high probability of occurring and that is something that we can't afford.  Bench was extremely short and not much contribution. (The women's team got 35 points off the bench while men got 8 points).  Couldn't put NO away after getting up by 22 with 6 minutes left--need to finish better.

Positives were team speed which was incredible.  T/O's were cut down in second half.  Marcus looked like mid season-smooth and under control and 4 steals.  The fouls which were a problem in exhibitions were cut down-Owens none in 23 minutes and Clark 3 in 29 minutes (one could see impact of sitting out on Clark when he would come out--expect better things from him as he gets game conditioned.

Johnny23

  • *****
  • 3277
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #84 on: November 11, 2017, 06:59:54 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.

Exactly why I think our only hope for him is cleaning house and bringing in a strong staff. Otherwise status quo.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #85 on: November 11, 2017, 07:03:01 PM »
If Owens has no fouls in 23 minutes, then he needs more minutes.

He needs to play as much as possible. Not starting him is a miss.  I'd sit him only for short rest or if he gets 3 fouls before half. 

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #86 on: November 11, 2017, 07:07:50 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.

Exactly why I think our only hope for him is cleaning house and bringing in a strong staff. Otherwise status quo.
If the new AD has a pair he teams with the President and tells Mo to make changes to staff and if he refuses no contract extension unless he meets expectations by year 5 which I think is the end of contract.

Foad

  • *****
  • 6065
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #87 on: November 11, 2017, 07:16:30 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

So because Steve Lavin was fired, therefore players improved under Rico Hines. That's exquisitely nice personic.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #88 on: November 11, 2017, 07:20:45 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.

Exactly why I think our only hope for him is cleaning house and bringing in a strong staff. Otherwise status quo.
If the new AD has a pair he teams with the President and tells Mo to make changes to staff and if he refuses no contract extension unless he meets expectations by year 5 which I think is the end of contract.

Why is replacing the staff the answer we are so sure of? He fielded this staff. It’s his judgement.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #89 on: November 11, 2017, 07:23:12 PM »
Just watched, thought you guys would be more positive.
Rebounding- I thought we tried and competed. I even saw Ahmed boxing out.
Defense- they weren’t good, but we only gave up 61 points. I think the guards played well.
Yakwe- was terrible. Hoping it was just a bad game
Amar- was horrific- still looking for his own shot immediately after coming in. His shot still sucks. He picked up 2 fouls really quick.
Ponds and Lovett were awesome. The 2 new guys were really goood. I thought amhed played a much smarter game ( for him).
Good assessment. Thought we were more committed on defense. But think they'll need even more intensity given our rebounding disadvantage.

Yakwe has no feel for the game. Whatever athleticism he may have does not show itself. Routinely lets his man back him down. Almost seems like he's wearing sneaker skates.


Johnny23

  • *****
  • 3277
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #90 on: November 11, 2017, 07:42:08 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.

Exactly why I think our only hope for him is cleaning house and bringing in a strong staff. Otherwise status quo.
If the new AD has a pair he teams with the President and tells Mo to make changes to staff and if he refuses no contract extension unless he meets expectations by year 5 which I think is the end of contract.

From your lips...

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #91 on: November 11, 2017, 09:01:21 PM »
I don't get the hate towards Bash after just one game.  He is vitally important as the third scorer and shooter. We don't win more than 15 games without him. I expect him to improve quite a bit.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #92 on: November 11, 2017, 09:10:42 PM »
Rico Hines was a tremendous player development coach. We watched D'Ang, Phil, Dom and even players like Gift and Jamal Branch all improve greatly over their time with Hines.

Gazundheit averaged 9 points and 5.5 rebounds as a junior and 2 points and 2 rebounds as a senior. Branch averaged six points and three assists as a sophomore and 5 points and 2 assists as a senior. Harrison averaged 16 points as a freshman and 17 points as a senior. Greene became a better three point shooter as an upperclassman and did nothing else well as an any classman. Pointer's improvement was IIRC a result of Lavin lighting a fire under him by suggesting that he red shirt.

So to recap: no one improved greatly over their time with Hines except Pointer and probably that had nothing to do with Hines, who spent his time at SJU raw dogging road whores and collecting academic transcripts in parking lots.

Who are the players that have improved under Mullin?

I'll happily answer that question if you are able to explain why your question is even vaguely relevant to whether players improved under Rico Hines.

Because we fired a coach who just made the NCAA tournament because of his perceived incompetence, and we’ve replaced this coach with a lesser group of coaches and overall talent group.

I don't think either Lavin or the current coaching staff are the answer. I'll let this season play out although I already have a feeling I know the ending. I'm starting to think the only way this thing gets turned around under CM is if they replace most of his coaching staff with proven sideline coaches and recruiters.

Lavin’s talent was that he could talk to recruits and their families. He brought talent here from all over the country. He couldn’t develop a system that worked. He could make half time adjustments, and he never had control of his program. Plenty of problems, but at least we could the strengths and weaknesses.

With Mullin, his strength is his name. He’s not a talker. He’s not a recruiter. He doesn’t teach hustle and work ethic, or we’d see the evidence if that. Jeff Goodman was spot on when he asked what Mullin did. He’s Chris Mullin. That’s what he does.

Exactly why I think our only hope for him is cleaning house and bringing in a strong staff. Otherwise status quo.
If the new AD has a pair he teams with the President and tells Mo to make changes to staff and if he refuses no contract extension unless he meets expectations by year 5 which I think is the end of contract.

Why is replacing the staff the answer we are so sure of? He fielded this staff. It’s his judgement.
Because they just do not look like a well coached team. They obviously want mulling to succeed but he needs lots of help. Didn't say change the whole staff but get a balance of recruiters and x and o's (good ones).

isham

  • **
  • 77
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #93 on: November 11, 2017, 10:22:07 PM »
last night I saw a major coaching mistake that probably went unnoticed. With 2 mins left in the half coach changed to a zone.  If you haven't used it for 18 mins dont use it now because it allows the opponent to adjust at half time and it loses its effectiveness if you need to use it in the 2nd half.  You wont see a H S coach make that mistake.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #94 on: November 11, 2017, 10:47:09 PM »
last night I saw a major coaching mistake that probably went unnoticed. With 2 mins left in the half coach changed to a zone.  If you haven't used it for 18 mins dont use it now because it allows the opponent to adjust at half time and it loses its effectiveness if you need to use it in the 2nd half.  You wont see a H S coach make that mistake.

You're joking, right? No coach needs halftime to adjust to a 2-3.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #95 on: November 12, 2017, 12:03:56 AM »
last night I saw a major coaching mistake that probably went unnoticed. With 2 mins left in the half coach changed to a zone.  If you haven't used it for 18 mins dont use it now because it allows the opponent to adjust at half time and it loses its effectiveness if you need to use it in the 2nd half.  You wont see a H S coach make that mistake.

It was just a look out of a timeout.
*wipes ketchup from his eyes* - I guess Heinz sight isn’t 20/20.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #96 on: November 12, 2017, 01:42:54 AM »
It was a very entertaining game and I enjoyed it.

Even a small smattering of optimism would have improved the life of Chicken Little.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #97 on: November 12, 2017, 09:07:14 AM »
last night I saw a major coaching mistake that probably went unnoticed. With 2 mins left in the half coach changed to a zone.  If you haven't used it for 18 mins dont use it now because it allows the opponent to adjust at half time and it loses its effectiveness if you need to use it in the 2nd half.  You wont see a H S coach make that mistake.

And it was a bad zone at that.

Foad

  • *****
  • 6065
Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #98 on: November 12, 2017, 09:10:15 AM »
last night I saw a major coaching mistake that probably went unnoticed. With 2 mins left in the half coach changed to a zone.  If you haven't used it for 18 mins dont use it now because it allows the opponent to adjust at half time and it loses its effectiveness if you need to use it in the 2nd half.  You wont see a H S coach make that mistake.

Coach Mullin is playing chess while you're playing checkers. He showed the zone precisely so that New Orleans would spend their entire halftime frantically drawing up plays to thwart the 2-3 and then he didn't use it again, thereby mooting their entire strategy. Classic black ops, I'm surprised you fell for it.

Re: Game 1: New Orleans
« Reply #99 on: November 12, 2017, 11:34:23 AM »
Was at the NO game and saw some things we need to focus on, along with quite a few things to like.  The ball moved crisply on offense, and, aside from a few instances with Bashir, our shots were open looks that came after good passes and in the flow of a very effective offense. Ponds had a few 3s rim out, but he looks great, and, along with Lovett, and Simon, gives us probably the strongest backcourt in the BE. In 2+ years, CM and company have assembled what will likely turn out to be St. John's best outside shooting team ever.  Clark had a very efficient game and Owens played solidly in his 20 minutes or so. Yes, Yakwe was disappointing, but 8 minutes hardly represents a fair sample size to write him off for the rest of this season. 

While our strength clearly is in our guards, I still think that our front court is athletic and versatile enough to complement them and play uptempo winning basketball, even with our rebounding deficiencies.  We won the game handily and have the potential to grow and improve as a team.  Why not play a few more games before we leap to judgment?
 
I cannot believe the negativity of many posters here.  Are we going to spend the entire season relitigating Lavin's removal and openly rooting for CM to fail?  It's clear that we've improved year over year, that the program is moving in the right direction, and that we don't yet know how good this team will be.  We already will be adding front court strength next year in Keita, Roberts, and Diakite, and there's a good chance we add even more talent.  Realistically, where did people think we would be at the start of Mullin's third year?