Game 28: @ Marquette

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

Yup. Gimmick or not, it's turned them into a premiere defensive team nationally.

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 05:14:40 PM

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

Yup. Gimmick or not, it's turned them into a premiere defensive team nationally.

I can't disagree with you there.  It will only work if your kids buy into it and do what they're supposed to do in it. 

Quote from: Foad on February 22, 2017, 04:58:55 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 04:50:42 PM

you don't have to be an extremely talented player to be a sound defensive player.   Anyone who believes that misnomer are also fooling themselves.

Name half a dozen SJU freshmen who were great defensive players.

Irrelevant.  Besides, I was speaking of the team as a whole.  I like how you attempt to misconstrue what I said.

Quote

Name a team comprised of freshmen that was a great defensive team. I don't think you can.

What team is comprised of freshmen?  Not our team.  A freshman backcourt?  Yes.  Freshman team?  Nope. 

Besides, who said anything about a "great defensive player?"  I said, sound defensively.  I don't recall a St. John's team compiled of freshman (the backcourt was frosh-led) during the 2000-2001 team looking this bad as a group.  I don't recall many of the Kentucky teams looking this bad on defense.  I don't recall the 2002-2003 Syracuse team looking this bad on defense.  I don't recall the "Fab 5" looking this bad on defense. 

Wtf. The FAB FIVE was called the FAB FIVE for  reason.Because they were FAB. We don't even have the TEPID THREE. The 2003 Syracuse team included two NBA players including Melo, one of the greatest players on the planet and Hakim Warwick, a future BE PLOTY and they won a national championship. If that's the comparison you're making nothing's going to measure up.

They don't play good defense, I get it. If you're pretending they don't play good defense because Mullin hasn't turned them into a consummate defensive team in the five months he's been coaching them - them being nine underclassmen and five freshmen - you're delusional.

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 05:12:53 PM

Quote from: Foad on February 22, 2017, 04:58:55 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 04:50:42 PM

you don't have to be an extremely talented player to be a sound defensive player.   Anyone who believes that misnomer are also fooling themselves.

Name half a dozen SJU freshmen who were great defensive players.

Irrelevant.  Besides, I was speaking of the team as a whole.  I like how you attempt to misconstrue what I said.

Quote

Name a team comprised of freshmen that was a great defensive team. I don't think you can.

What team is comprised of freshmen?  Not our team.  A freshman backcourt?  Yes.  Freshman team?  Nope. 

Besides, who said anything about a "great defensive player?"  I said, sound defensively.  I don't recall a St. John's team compiled of freshman (the backcourt was frosh-led) during the 2000-2001 team looking this bad as a group.  I don't recall many of the Kentucky teams looking this bad on defense.  I don't recall the 2002-2003 Syracuse team looking this bad on defense.  I don't recall the "Fab 5" looking this bad on defense. 

Wtf. The FAB FIVE was called the FAB FIVE for  reason.Because they were FAB. We don't even have the TEPID THREE. The 2003 Syracuse team included two NBA players including Melo, one of the greatest players on the planet and Hakim Warwick, a future BE PLOTY and they won a national championship. If that's the comparison you're making nothing's going to measure up.

They don't play good defense, I get it. If you're pretending they don't play good defense because Mullin hasn't turned them into a consummate defensive team in the five months he's been coaching them - them being nine underclassmen and five freshmen - you're delusional.

Don't attempt to place an asterick, per those particular groups, with the star rankings or ability to play in the NBA.  You asked the question about freshmen teams playing defense, and I responded in kind.  Those were or are teams lead by freshmen.  Not to mention, Warrick wasn't a highly, rated player coming out of HS (I believe he was a 3-star kid coming into Syracuse).  I doubt anyone expected the kind of play they recevied out of Warrick.  But, he played above expectations, so kudos.

Once again, you don't have to be extremely talented to be a sound defensive player.  This team looks worst than last year's bunch on the defensive end.  That group was something bad to witness.  So, that in itself tells enough.   

Yes, it's true we have five freshmen, but really?   Two who never ever plays, and probably won't ever really receive any burn, and one who barely receives any burn.  Regardless, this isn't a team full of freshmen, so it's irrelevant.   

Who said anything about a superb defensive team?  Miss me with the BS, as I never said anything about being consummate.  Sound or decent is what I've being saying all along.  I can't even say it's mediocre.  There are times they don't even look interested in playing defense.  Frankly, the defense on the team isn't even bad, IMO.  It's awful!

They don't play good defense, I get it. If you're pretending they don't play good defense because Mullin hasn't turned them into a consummate defensive team in the five months he's been coaching them - them being nine underclassmen and five freshmen - you're delusional.

Don't attempt to place an asterick, per those particular groups, with the star rankings or ability to play in the NBA.  You asked the question about freshmen teams playing defense, and I responded in kind.  Those were or are teams lead by freshmen.  Not to mention, Warrick wasn't a highly, rated player coming out of HS (I believe he was a 3-star kid coming into Syracuse).  I doubt anyone expected the kind of play they recevied out of Warrick.  But, he played above expectations, so kudos.

Once again, you don't have to be extremely talented to be a sound defensive player.  This team looks worst than last year's bunch on the defensive end.  That group was something bad to witness.  So, that in itself tells enough.   

Yes, it's true we have five freshmen, but really?   Two who never ever plays, and probably won't ever really receive any burn, and one who barely receives any burn.  Regardless, this isn't a team full of freshmen, so it's irrelevant.   

Who said anything about a superb defensive team?  Miss me with the BS, as I never said anything about being consummate.  Sound or decent is what I've being saying all along.  I can't even say it's mediocre.  There are times they don't even look interested in playing defense.  Frankly, the defense on the team isn't even bad, IMO.  It's awful!

What's delusional is not expecting some improvement over the season just because they are freshmen and underclassmen. Actually, awful would be an improvement for this team.

Quote from: Poison on February 22, 2017, 01:08:33 PM

Ahmed is the worst of it. 

The worst of what?  He's doing everything but getting assists and driving the bus.

The worst of getting in the way of our offense. It's a 5 on 5 game. As a fan of the Chris Mullin hire you can't actually think that Ahmed's play is what he was coached into. He's a ball hog, and if he had better court vision, he'd be significantly better, as would the team.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on February 22, 2017, 02:16:11 PM

Quote from: Poison on February 22, 2017, 01:08:33 PM

Ahmed is the worst of it. 

The worst of what?  He's doing everything but getting assists and driving the bus.

The worst of getting in the way of our offense. It's a 5 on 5 game. As a fan of the Chris Mullin hire you can't actually think that Ahmed's play is what he was coached into. He's a ball hog, and if he had better court vision, he'd be significantly better, as would the team.

I could not agree more. I can't remember anyone as bad as him when it comes to court vision.If he learned to play more with the team more rather then as an individual the team would be tremendously better. When we go on a run during games and he gets the ball I yell at the tv for him to pass it.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on February 22, 2017, 02:16:11 PM

Quote from: Poison on February 22, 2017, 01:08:33 PM

Ahmed is the worst of it. 

The worst of what?  He's doing everything but getting assists and driving the bus.

The worst of getting in the way of our offense. It's a 5 on 5 game. As a fan of the Chris Mullin hire you can't actually think that Ahmed's play is what he was coached into. He's a ball hog, and if he had better court vision, he'd be significantly better, as would the team.

I think it's a stretch to say he gets in the way of our offenses when the truth is that for large stretches, like when either L or P are sitting, he is our offense.

That said, I don't disagree with your post entirely.

He's a lot better at sharing now than he was against BC and in Atlantis. Perhaps, he can show continued improvement in this area and have a great senior campaign.   

The team is a lot better with him than it would be without him.  That I can say unequivocally. There are better candidates to point to while playing the blame game.

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

MJ what about it is gimmicky? Never heard it referenced before as such

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 05:14:40 PM

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

MJ what about it is gimmicky? Never heard it referenced before as such

Because, it's  a sagging man defense about 15" feet from the rim.  It's mainly about preventing penetration (but, can also aide in stopping other facets of an opposing offense).  But, it's a defense that depends on all five players on the floor to be active and on the same page.  Bennett's kids seems to have bought it, and nearly perfected it. 

I know a high school coach who has been studying and would like to implement it.  I told him, I thought it was a "gimmicky" defense.  He agreed, but still loves the defense and wants to implement it.  It's not a fact, but more of my opinion.

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on February 22, 2017, 09:52:52 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 05:14:40 PM

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

MJ what about it is gimmicky? Never heard it referenced before as such

Because, it's  a sagging man defense about 15" feet from the rim.  It's mainly about preventing penetration (but, can also aide in stopping other facets of an opposing offense).  But, it's a defense that depends on all five players on the floor to be active and on the same page.  Bennett's kids seems to have bought it, and nearly perfected it. 

I know a high school coach who has been studying and would like to implement it.  I told him, I thought it was a "gimmicky" defense.  He agreed, but still loves the defense and wants to implement it.  It's not a fact, but more of my opinion.

Love it too was just asking. Thanks!

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 10:05:08 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on February 22, 2017, 09:52:52 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 05:14:40 PM

Quote from: Johnny23 on February 22, 2017, 05:01:18 PM

Mullin and team need to spend some time watching UVA play defense. Their D under Bennett is as good as anyone's.

It's somewhat of a gimmick defense, IMO, but Bennett and his kids has damn-near perfected it at Virginia.  It's called the Pack-Line defense.

MJ what about it is gimmicky? Never heard it referenced before as such

Because, it's  a sagging man defense about 15" feet from the rim.  It's mainly about preventing penetration (but, can also aide in stopping other facets of an opposing offense).  But, it's a defense that depends on all five players on the floor to be active and on the same page.  Bennett's kids seems to have bought it, and nearly perfected it. 

I know a high school coach who has been studying and would like to implement it.  I told him, I thought it was a "gimmicky" defense.  He agreed, but still loves the defense and wants to implement it.  It's not a fact, but more of my opinion.

Love it too was just asking. Thanks!

You're welcome, dude!

Once again, you don't have to be extremely talented to be a sound defensive player.  This team looks worst than last year's bunch on the defensive end.  That group was something bad to witness.  So, that in itself tells enough.   

Yes, it's true we have five freshmen, but really?   Two who never ever plays, and probably won't ever really receive any burn, and one who barely receives any burn.  Regardless, this isn't a team full of freshmen, so it's irrelevant.   

Who said anything about a superb defensive team?  Miss me with the BS, as I never said anything about being consummate.  Sound or decent is what I've being saying all along.  I can't even say it's mediocre.  There are times they don't even look interested in playing defense.  Frankly, the defense on the team isn't even bad, IMO.  It's awful!

Yes, the defense on a team comprising nine underclassmen and five first year players is awful. The only thing I find surprising about that is that you seem surprised by it, because when asked to name a team of freshmen that played good defense you had to reach back 20 years and named two teams with half a dozen NBA players on them that both played for the national championship. The fab five was the greatest collection of college freshmen ever assembled, five McDonalds all americans, the smallest of whom was 6'5", 210 pounds. If you don't see how insane the comparison between that and a team that starts Malik Ellison I can't help you.  The 67 Celtics played good defense too, why didn't you name them, if Amar Alibeoqitz could just match Bill Russell's defensive intensity we might be able to make the NIT.

And PS neither Michigan nor Syracuse were great defensive teams, they were average defensive teams, Michigan was 118th and Syracuse was 165th out of about 300. They won because they had more talent than everyone else. If Melo and Chris Webber were on this year's St John's team no one would care about the defense.

Quote from: mjdinkins on February 22, 2017, 06:00:06 PM

Once again, you don't have to be extremely talented to be a sound defensive player.  This team looks worst than last year's bunch on the defensive end.  That group was something bad to witness.  So, that in itself tells enough.   

Yes, it's true we have five freshmen, but really?   Two who never ever plays, and probably won't ever really receive any burn, and one who barely receives any burn.  Regardless, this isn't a team full of freshmen, so it's irrelevant.   

Who said anything about a superb defensive team?  Miss me with the BS, as I never said anything about being consummate.  Sound or decent is what I've being saying all along.  I can't even say it's mediocre.  There are times they don't even look interested in playing defense.  Frankly, the defense on the team isn't even bad, IMO.  It's awful!

Yes, the defense on a team comprising nine underclassmen and five first year players is awful. The only thing I find surprising about that is that you seem surprised by it, because when asked to name a team of freshmen that played good defense you had to reach back 20 years and named two teams with half a dozen NBA players on them that both played for the national championship. The fab five was the greatest collection of college freshmen ever assembled, five McDonalds all americans, the smallest of whom was 6'5", 210 pounds. If you don't see how insane the comparison between that and a team that starts Malik Ellison I can't help you.  The 67 Celtics played good defense too, why didn't you name them, if Amar Alibeoqitz could just match Bill Russell's defensive intensity we might be able to make the NIT.

And PS neither Michigan nor Syracuse were great defensive teams, they were average defensive teams, Michigan was 118th and Syracuse was 165th out of about 300. They won because they had more talent than everyone else. If Melo and Chris Webber were on this year's St John's team no one would care about the defense.

Who said anything about "great" or even freshmen initially?  You did, not me.  You're arguing your own strawman, dumb arse.

After a loss our beloved PG gave away another pair of sneakers (autographed)... this time to a Marquette fan 

https://twitter.com/ericgebby/status/834245239896420352/photo/1

It's understandable believing that the awful defense is due to the youth/experience of the team. Whatever contributions the teams youth/experience has on our lack of defense, it could also be true that there is a lack of defensive emphasis by the staff. Next year there should be no more excuses. If this continues I don't think anyone could argue against it being the staff. This is the only element of the Mullin regime that I fear, no emphasis on defense. 

Agree with this.  There are reasons for the defensive ineptitude - having to play 3 guards at times, two or three of whom are very small; having to play a 4 man who is undersized; lacking beef on the interior; the youth and inexperience of the guys who play major minutes and that Coach and the staff are incorporating so many new players trying to learn to play together. 

That said, I will be looking for a major improvement next year on the defense side of the ball, and if it doesn't happen, a substantial part of the blame will be on the staff.  Simon and Clark should help, as should the maturation and growth of our players.

I think Mullin can coach offense; it is not a given, some staffs cannot.  Even last year we had some pretty solid offensive showings despite the lack of talent, etc.  And I'm confident this staff can recruit, so long as Mullin remains engaged on that front because he is a big part of the sell.  But jury is out on the defense.

It's understandable believing that the awful defense is due to the youth/experience of the team. Whatever contributions the teams youth/experience has on our lack of defense, it could also be true that there is a lack of defensive emphasis by the staff. Next year there should be no more excuses. If this continues I don't think anyone could argue against it being the staff. This is the only element of the Mullin regime that I fear, no emphasis on defense. 

My response to this is yes and no and maybe. I would not expect a young team to focus on defense or know how to play it. My experience as a voyeur of college basketball is that it takes players several years to realize that they can win more games by stopping the other guys from scoring more points than they can by scoring more points than they do do and more importantly to learn how to do that, which is why maturity is important. In terms of Mullin's system, it may be that playing good defense is important to the extent that playing good defense comprises inhibiting the other guy from scoring more points than the offensive system produces. That is, if you can implement an offensive system that produces 90 points, a defense that results in 85 points is a winning system, despite the fact that you're giving up 43 points  a half. Norm's defensive system was intended to restrict the opponent to 65 points. He often succeeded, but failed on the other side of the ball. It's all relative. No one is going to win games giving up 50 points a half, but you can win games giving up 40 points a half if your offense results in 45.

There is no question that this team is not a good defensive team. The question is whether good is good enough to win.

 

I don't think any coach at a school like ST. John's can win consistently giving up 40 points a half.

I don't think any coach at a school like ST. John's can win consistently giving up 40 points a half.

Two months ago you thought anyone who thought Mullin who knew what he was doing was fooling himself. Perhaps you should spend less time thinking.