There are absolutely coaches who could get this team on the tourney. You remind me of friends I had in high school when senior year we used to play tackle football and the guys thought they were tougher than the players on the high school football team and wanted to challenge them. Had to tell my buddies they would kill us because of how organized they would be. We go into games at a disadvantage because of coaching simple as that. Best thing Mullin could do for us is continue to have a staff recruit at a high level and then turn the reins over to a much more competent basketball coach.
Ok then what coach is ST John's University going to bring in that would get 5 BE quality players to the tourney. Don't bother answering because answer is no one. Again the fact that we only have 5 players is on Mullin and his little asst that everyone loves. And yes there are better coaches, but a 5 seed? Lavin? That is laughable.
Whether, it be a 5 seed or lower, or with Lavin or another coach.... There are coaches who can get this team to the NCAA Tournament or, at the least, have 'em on the bubble.
Mike Jarvis went 12-4 (25-8 overall) in the Big East, and won the conference totournament with essentially a 6-man rotation and no one over 6'8" in the lineup (Erick Barkley also missed 5 games during the season, which practically limited it a 5-man roster).
Barkley, Bootsy and Postell are way better than Ponds, Simon and Ahmed.
Maybe, so. But, it still was a short rotation. That was the argument.
Basically, the current short rotation has sufficient talent, but they have care blanche to do whatever on the offensive end and it can, at times, resemble a fire drill when teams have or group running around scrambling with sound ball movement on the defensive end.
Some of y'all sound like a few Gamecock fans I know. The SEC East is straight up trash, outside of Georgia. But, some Gamecock fans believe it is good football with teams just beating up on one another in the East. I know the difference between sports "cannibalism" and seeing a shitty product.
Do they have enough talent without LoVett?
Yep. Do you think they're the worst team in the conference without LoVett? Be honest.
Remember, this team was on the cusp of beating two teams (Seton Hall & Creighton) ON the road that, IMO, are better than Providence and DePaul (whom both smoked us at home).
Really? DePaul beat the stew outta us at home.
We don't have the talent without LoVett to be anywhere near the NCAA bubble or the NIT. I'd say we'd be better than DePaul and Georgetown but not by that much.
Well, in that case, we really wasn't that talented from jumpstreet per your synopsis. That also means we're not gonna be that talented next season, as I doubt LoVett is at St. John's in '18-'19.
Nevertheless, I'll agree to disagree.
Not necessarily though. My prognosis was that we were a very delicate team and couldn't afford a single injury. We were/are talented 1-5 but that's really abotu it. If everyone was healthy for the whole season, we could be a 7-10 seed in the NCAA tourney. One injury could derail us. Unfortunately, that injury happened. This delicate structure has a lot to do with Mullin and Matt A's constructing the team.
If (as I expect) LoVett leaves, we should still be a lot more deeper with Keita, Williams, Brooks and Dixon. I would hope it's also safe to assume Roberts is better than Amar. We should have a solid 8 man rotation if no one else from our starting lineup transfers/leaves early.
Your latter paragraph is focusing on depth rather than overall talent. Depth is good, but overall talent is better.
Keita is decent, but still somewhat raw. Maybe, the year off helps him. Brooks probably will be of aide, as I think he can help us right outta the gate. Remember, he's also yet to sign. I'm not expecting a ton from Williams, but I'd love to be surprised. Dixon probably will also help us outta the gate.
Once again, some of y'all continue to ignore the elephant in the room.