Need players

Quote from: Poison on January 15, 2018, 09:06:08 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 15, 2018, 12:41:31 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 01:27:10 AM

Let me ask you this, Carmine: what is our record of we replace Ponds with a second Simon? What about if we had two Shamories and no Simon? I say 0-6 and 5-1, respectively.

Please. Even g*d or a genius like me can't answer these questions.

Quote

I don't dislike Simon.

You could have fooled me.

Quote

but let's also not act like that's not the reason we can't win this year.

The reasons we haven't won this year are that Lovett got hurt and we don't have enough players.  Yet alone good ones.

We didn’t have enough players in May of last year. That was when the staff should have been given the cattle prod. That alone is enough to warrant moving on. At least Lavin recruited.

Agreed on the first part but you don't fire someone for a one time mistake. This is a foreseeable consequence of hiring someone with no coaching experience.

I’m sorry, but I saw this coming in May. I expect the head coach to be better at this than the fans are. I know I’m not the only one who saw how careless Mullin was. It’s infuriating to see Goff brag about a 7 point loss. I’d fire him and the entire coaching staff right now.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:13:40 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 15, 2018, 09:06:08 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 15, 2018, 12:41:31 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 01:27:10 AM

Let me ask you this, Carmine: what is our record of we replace Ponds with a second Simon? What about if we had two Shamories and no Simon? I say 0-6 and 5-1, respectively.

Please. Even g*d or a genius like me can't answer these questions.

Quote

I don't dislike Simon.

You could have fooled me.

Quote

but let's also not act like that's not the reason we can't win this year.

The reasons we haven't won this year are that Lovett got hurt and we don't have enough players.  Yet alone good ones.

We didn’t have enough players in May of last year. That was when the staff should have been given the cattle prod. That alone is enough to warrant moving on. At least Lavin recruited.

Agreed on the first part but you don't fire someone for a one time mistake. This is a foreseeable consequence of hiring someone with no coaching experience.

I’m sorry, but I saw this coming in May. I expect the head coach to be better at this than the fans are. I know I’m not the only one who saw how careless Mullin was. It’s infuriating to see Goff brag about a 7 point loss. I’d fire the him and the entire coaching staff right now.

I saw it too and was livid. Lesson learned. Mullin will never make that mistake again.

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last four years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results.

Jarvis took us a shot from the final four. He was landing top recruits and he took us to the tournament and won the NIT his last two full seasons. But our great fans were chanting "Fire Jarvis" in Gampel Pavilion in 2002 while we were on the bubble and prior to beating Duke and winning the NIT. He had a top 50 player Showtime and a top 75 Lamont Hamilton signed. Both were All Big East players.

Lavin won 20 games three times in five years and made two NCAA tournament appearances and two NITs. And we attacked him with venom for three years. Even with that he had Brandon Sampson and Samir Doughty signed. As dysfunctional as Jordan, Obekpa, and DellaRosa were, I think Lavin would have kept them in check enough to keep it together. The starting PG from Creighton beat the sh*t out of his gf last year and Xavier went to the Elite 8 after their starting guard was suspended for beating his gf and their best player, Trevon Bluitt, was arrested for smoking weed. No team is immune from that crap.

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:43:51 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last five  years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results. 

Maybe, because that is what you practically stated in your post.  Duh!

Regardless, of whether Roberts could compete with top recruits or not, he couldn't win ballgames.  How often are Butler and Creighton, and at one time, Xavier (Xavier just recently started consistently landing so-called "top recruits) competing for top recruits? 

IMO, Mullin doesn't deserve a 5th year, if he finishes up this season horribly and doesn't take us to the NCAA Tournament next season. 

Jarvis took us a shot from the final four. He was landing top recruits and he took us to the tournament and won the NIT his last two full seasons. But our great fans were chanting "Fire Jarvis" in Gampel Pavilion in 2002 while we were on the bubble and prior to beating Duke and winning the NIT. He had a top 50 player Showtime and a top 75 Lamont Hamilton signed. Both were All Big East players.

I don't remember what our fans were doing in Gampel in 2002, but regardless, that doesn't have anything to do with Jarvis and how he finished up his career at St. John's.  I also don't recall Hamilton being a top 75 player.  More like a top 100 player, but whatever.

Jarvis needed to be canned.  I just thought it should've been done after that particular season.

Lavin won 20 games three times in five years and made two NCAA tournament appearances and two NITs. And we attacked him with venom for three years. Even with that he had Brandon Sampson and Samir Doughty signed. As dysfunctional as Jordan, Obekpa, and DellaRosa were, I think Lavin would have kept them in check enough to keep it together. The starting PG from Creighton beat the sh*t out of his gf last year and Xavier went to the Elite 8 after their starting guard was suspended for beating his gf and their best player, Trevon Bluitt, was arrested for smoking weed. No team is immune from that crap.

Again, I thought Lavin received the shaft.  If anyone believes Mullin's first team would've looked the same with Lavin back for an additional season, then I have a bridge to sell you in Barrow, Alaska.

But, Lavin is also gone, and Mullin needs to produce an NCAA Tournament bid next season.  Anything else is white noise.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:21:58 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:43:51 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last five  years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results. 

Maybe, because that is what you practically stated in your post.  Duh!

No it's it not, it's a conclusion YOU reached by making a huge inference. I was the most vocal Norm detractor alive to the tune of multiple forum bans. He was a disaster and worth risking the perils of starting over. Mullin isn't YET. His error was taking a chance on Lovett and not being ready for Mussini and Ellison leaving.  He should be held accountable for that, but it's  not on par with failing to compete for top recruits or going 7-9 then 5-13 then 6-12 then 6-12 with full rosters.

Let's look at it like a marriage. Norm was the drunk who beat his wife regularly and couldn't hold a job. Mullin has a job, but left the gate open and his toddler fell down a small set of stairs. There is no way Mullin will ever leave that gate open again (Lovett and short roster). If Mullin keeps hitting the bars, he's gotta go too.

He gets next year without question and should be forced to hire a seasoned assistant if he fails to win 18-19 games.

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 10:32:25 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:21:58 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:43:51 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last five  years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results. 

Maybe, because that is what you practically stated in your post.  Duh!

No it's it not, it's a conclusion YOU reached by making a huge inference. I was the most vocal Norm detractor alive to the tune of multiple forum bans. He was a disaster and worth risking the perils of starting over. Mullin isn't YET. His error was taking a chance on Lovett and not being ready for Mussini and Ellison leaving.  He should be held accountable for that, but it's  not on par with failing to compete for top recruits or going 7-9 then 5-13 then 6-13 then 6-12 with full rosters.

Conclusion, hell!  You said it!  But, I already knew you would attempt to weasel out of it. 

Let's stop all the dancing....  Does he deserves a 5th year, if he finishes this season with one, two or three conference wins and miss out on the NCAA Tournament next season?

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:52:21 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 10:32:25 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:21:58 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:43:51 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last five  years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results. 

Maybe, because that is what you practically stated in your post.  Duh!

No it's it not, it's a conclusion YOU reached by making a huge inference. I was the most vocal Norm detractor alive to the tune of multiple forum bans. He was a disaster and worth risking the perils of starting over. Mullin isn't YET. His error was taking a chance on Lovett and not being ready for Mussini and Ellison leaving.  He should be held accountable for that, but it's  not on par with failing to compete for top recruits or going 7-9 then 5-13 then 6-13 then 6-12 with full rosters.

Conclusion, hell!  You said it!  But, I already knew you would attempt to weasel out of it. 

Let's stop all the dancing....  Does he deserves a 5th year, if he finishes this season with one, two or three conference wins and miss out on the NCAA Tournament next season?

Dude, are you all there? I said when your fire a coach the consequences can be felt for years after unless you hire someone like Jamie Dixon. You turned that into "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach." Do you not see how those two statements are worlds apart? Jesus Christ. There are plenty of good reasons to fire a coach:  if he molested or assaulted players, if he doesn't get top recruits, if he can't demonstrate a reasonable pattern of imorovement, etc. Please show me where I eliminated those possibilities for firing a coach in my very brief posts. For your truly absurd statement to be true, you must be able to prove that.

Barring unusual circumstances I believe coaches should be given four full years before their job is in jeopardy. That gives them the opportunity to see their first recruiting class to completion and their first full recruiting class to its junior season.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:52:21 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 10:32:25 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 10:21:58 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:43:51 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:35:06 PM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 09:18:18 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 09:11:07 PM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on January 15, 2018, 08:53:36 PM

Quote from: cjfish on January 15, 2018, 08:47:14 PM

The worst thing this program could do would be to fire Mullin in the next two years...the program would go down the tubes for another 10 years unless we brought Pitino out of retirement and became a bandit program.

I don't agree at all. You can't just keep the job because your last name is Mullin. If things don't improve greatly you have to make the change.

This talk of firing Mullin is absurd. It's a knee jerk reaction to losing.

It's only absurd because you didn't say it first.

Listen up, dude....  I'll give him another season (although, I would understand dismissing him, if we were to finish up with 1 or 2 conference wins), and understand that he'll be here next season.  But, if he doesn't make it to the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then he needs to be removed.  Period!

It's absurd because you don't talk about firing a new fvcking coach after 2 1/2 years. He started with just Amar. At least norm had Showtime and Lamont Hamilton as freshmen and guys like Andre Stanley. Every coach should be given 4 years minimum.

Again, it's only absurd because you didn't say it, know-it-all.  As, much as I liked Andre Stanley for what he was going through, per taking care of his ill mother and catching the train from his home to make it to school and practice everyday.....  Let's just say we'll leave it right there. 

Quote

We go through the same cycle every three years! I didn't want Jarvis fired and I didn't want Lavin fired for the same reasons. It dooms the program for years unless you bring in a Jamie Dixon caliber coach which we'll never get.

Jarvis needed to be fired, so I was fine with it.  I just didn't like the timing, and felt it was better off done after the season.  He had basically quit on the job (insubordination). 

I didn't want Lavin fired, either (although, I kinda understood why).  Frankly, I think he somewhat had gotten the shaft. 

You don't know what kinda coach we are capable of bringing in.  Even if it's dumb luck, there is always a chance you can hit on someone similar to a Jamie Dixon. 

Quote

When you fire a coach you lose years of recruiting, you lose all of your signed recruits and current players, and then you have to scramble to replace them with an unbalanced roster and kids like Lovett you have to take a chance on. The consequences of those actions are felt for years. We're just getting over Norm's ten-man senior class from years ago.

So, by your beliefs there is never a good reason to fire a coach because of losing out on years of recruiting, right?  No coach should ever be fired, correct?  That is essentially what you've just stated.  But, I'll await your attempt to retract or BS your way outta that comment by saying "that isn't what you meant."

If we're not in the NCAA Tournament a season from now, then we should move on. 

Lastly, all you're giving me are excuses.  Save 'em.

How does my writing about the perils of firing a coach become "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach" in your mind? What a preposterous inference. I wanted Norm fired because he could not compete for top recruits and he went 7-9, 5-13 and then 6-12 and 6-12 his last five  years in conference, showing no sign of improvement. I'd ask the same for Mullin with those results. 

Maybe, because that is what you practically stated in your post.  Duh!

No it's it not, it's a conclusion YOU reached by making a huge inference. I was the most vocal Norm detractor alive to the tune of multiple forum bans. He was a disaster and worth risking the perils of starting over. Mullin isn't YET. His error was taking a chance on Lovett and not being ready for Mussini and Ellison leaving.  He should be held accountable for that, but it's  not on par with failing to compete for top recruits or going 7-9 then 5-13 then 6-13 then 6-12 with full rosters.

Conclusion, hell!  You said it!  But, I already knew you would attempt to weasel out of it. 

Let's stop all the dancing....  Does he deserves a 5th year, if he finishes this season with one, two or three conference wins and miss out on the NCAA Tournament next season?

Why are we talking about next year? It’s almost February and he hasn’t won a conference game. Mullin doesn’t deserve a 4th year. He needs to man up and do the right thing and resign.

Dude, are you all there? I said when your fire a coach the consequences can be felt for years after unless you hire someone like Jamie Dixon. You turned that into "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach." Do you not see how those two statements are worlds apart? Jesus Christ. There are plenty of good reasons to fire a coach:  if he molested or assaulted players, if he doesn't get top recruits, if he can't demonstrate a reasonable pattern of imorovement, etc. Please show me where I eliminated those possibilities for firing a coach in my very brief posts. For your truly absurd statement to be true, you must be able to prove that.

Man, don't attempt to play me.  That is what you said in many ways.  You've retracted what you said, fabricator.  Manipulating what you stated. 

You don't know whether you have Jamie Dixon or not, unless you've hired a mannequin.  Even if it's dumb or blind luck, you won't know until after a handful of seasons. 

So, stop BS, dude.  The only one absurd is you, bullshitter.  Besides, no one knew what Jamie Dixon could do until he got a moved out of the assistant seat to the head coach seat.  Pitt would've never known what they had if they didn't hire him.  The only thing you likely knew about Jamie Dixon that he was an assistant with Pitt.  Heck!  You might've not known that until he was hired to be the head coach.

You stick to your guns, and I'll stick to mine.

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 11:17:08 PM

Dude, are you all there? I said when your fire a coach the consequences can be felt for years after unless you hire someone like Jamie Dixon. You turned that into "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach." Do you not see how those two statements are worlds apart? Jesus Christ. There are plenty of good reasons to fire a coach:  if he molested or assaulted players, if he doesn't get top recruits, if he can't demonstrate a reasonable pattern of imorovement, etc. Please show me where I eliminated those possibilities for firing a coach in my very brief posts. For your truly absurd statement to be true, you must be able to prove that.

Man, don't attempt to play me.  That is what you said in many ways.  You've retracted what you said, fabricator.  Manipulating what you stated. 

You don't know whether you have Jamie Dixon or not, unless you've hired a mannequin.  Even if it's dumb or blind luck, you won't know until after a handful of seasons. 

So, stop BS, dude.  The only one absurd is you, bullshitter.  Besides, no one knew what Jamie Dixon could do until he got a moved out of the assistant seat to the head coach seat.  Pitt would've never known what they had if they didn't hire him.  The only thing you likely knew about Jamie Dixon that he was an assistant with Pitt.  Heck!  You might've not known that until he was hired to be the head coach.

You stick to your guns, and I'll stick to mine.

Amar's defense > Your logical reasoning

I see now that you are working with an IQ in the Marcus Lovett Sr. realm. I guess that explains all the commas. I really hope you just had too much to drink tonight.

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 11:23:27 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 11:17:08 PM

Dude, are you all there? I said when your fire a coach the consequences can be felt for years after unless you hire someone like Jamie Dixon. You turned that into "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach." Do you not see how those two statements are worlds apart? Jesus Christ. There are plenty of good reasons to fire a coach:  if he molested or assaulted players, if he doesn't get top recruits, if he can't demonstrate a reasonable pattern of imorovement, etc. Please show me where I eliminated those possibilities for firing a coach in my very brief posts. For your truly absurd statement to be true, you must be able to prove that.

Man, don't attempt to play me.  That is what you said in many ways.  You've retracted what you said, fabricator.  Manipulating what you stated. 

You don't know whether you have Jamie Dixon or not, unless you've hired a mannequin.  Even if it's dumb or blind luck, you won't know until after a handful of seasons. 

So, stop BS, dude.  The only one absurd is you, bullshitter.  Besides, no one knew what Jamie Dixon could do until he got a moved out of the assistant seat to the head coach seat.  Pitt would've never known what they had if they didn't hire him.  The only thing you likely knew about Jamie Dixon that he was an assistant with Pitt.  Heck!  You might've not known that until he was hired to be the head coach.

You stick to your guns, and I'll stick to mine.

Amar's defense > Your logical reasoning

I see now that you are working with an IQ in the Marcus Lovett Sr. realm. I guess that explains all the commas. I really hope you just had too much to drink tonight.

Not even close to having any drinks.  Nah, you're just a full of shit know-it-all.  That about sums it up. 

Quote from: Marillac on January 16, 2018, 01:37:57 AM

Quote from: mjdinkins on January 15, 2018, 11:23:27 PM

Quote from: Marillac on January 15, 2018, 11:17:08 PM

Dude, are you all there? I said when your fire a coach the consequences can be felt for years after unless you hire someone like Jamie Dixon. You turned that into "by your belief there is never a good reason to fire a coach." Do you not see how those two statements are worlds apart? Jesus Christ. There are plenty of good reasons to fire a coach:  if he molested or assaulted players, if he doesn't get top recruits, if he can't demonstrate a reasonable pattern of imorovement, etc. Please show me where I eliminated those possibilities for firing a coach in my very brief posts. For your truly absurd statement to be true, you must be able to prove that.

Man, don't attempt to play me.  That is what you said in many ways.  You've retracted what you said, fabricator.  Manipulating what you stated. 

You don't know whether you have Jamie Dixon or not, unless you've hired a mannequin.  Even if it's dumb or blind luck, you won't know until after a handful of seasons. 

So, stop BS, dude.  The only one absurd is you, bullshitter.  Besides, no one knew what Jamie Dixon could do until he got a moved out of the assistant seat to the head coach seat.  Pitt would've never known what they had if they didn't hire him.  The only thing you likely knew about Jamie Dixon that he was an assistant with Pitt.  Heck!  You might've not known that until he was hired to be the head coach.

You stick to your guns, and I'll stick to mine.

Amar's defense > Your logical reasoning

I see now that you are working with an IQ in the Marcus Lovett Sr. realm. I guess that explains all the commas. I really hope you just had too much to drink tonight.

Not even close to having any drinks.  Nah, you're just a full of shit know-it-all.  That about sums it up. 

Good talk. Have a nice night -- and by that I don't mean to imply that I believe there should be never be day again.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 15, 2018, 12:30:23 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 15, 2018, 12:58:19 AM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 15, 2018, 12:33:30 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 14, 2018, 10:02:55 PM

Why should he be retained as coach? 

Because Norm Roberts got 6 years.

Ok, so we should draw hope from the 6 terrible seasons we had with Norm Roberts?

No.  But we should remain loyal to Chris Mullin.  For after all...well he's Chris Mullin.

Yea that's a real solid line of thinking

Loyalty is seen as a positive attribute the world over.  It's not in question.  If ever loyalty was deserved - it's in this case.  I'm proud to be a loyal individual.

Quote from: we are sju on January 15, 2018, 07:24:29 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 15, 2018, 11:51:47 AM

And since when is someone abilities in high school not used to judge their abilities at the next level? Get over yourself

All the time. You can go on Staten Island and find a 6-3 Center averaging 30 points a game who will not play D 1 anywhere.
Ponds can't shoot. If you don't want to take my word for it take my friend Stat Sheet's word for it.
Ponds is a really good player. But you simply can't argue 18%. Even if you don't like my breakdown of his shooting, you can't argue 18%.
And I like Simon as the primary or secondary ball handler. Like he has been. Don't get wrapped up in Marillac blaming Simon for Ponds being a bad outside shooter.

This Ponds can't shoot thing is ridiculous. His form is good and his release is as pure as it gets. We're talking about a kid that shoots almost 90% from the FT line! He shot 37.5% from three last year on an absurd 6.1 attempts. Most of those were set shots. It's easy to forget that when he hits a bomb every so often or pulls up in transition. His $ shot last year was that impossibly fast corner trey off ball reversal or a drive and kick.

His shot selection sucks this year, I'll admit that, but how else is he going to get an open look? The staff is jamming an NBA iso system down these kids throats and we don't have the personnel to play that way. We can pass....do that. All they do for Ponds is give him high ball screens so he has to shoot off the bounce. Why not run him off a cross screen to post up his man down low a few times to keep his man honest and then off some screens in the lane or baseline to get him a set shot from the corner?

And when I talk about putting Simon in the post, it's as a passer and face-up. He can do some damage there with his skill set and length. You have to respect his ability to get a shot off there against a four, so help has to come off our shooters. That's when you go inside-out. It will improve spacing drastically.

18%

That was fun

That was fun

It was also foad. Getting back to the title of this thread NEED PLAYERS I agree.In fact IMO we need 4-5 NBA players for Mullin to be competitive. If he stays around hopefully with the players he does have he can win enough games to attract that many talented players to have on his roster. Think the Brooks kid may be a start unless there is some hidden (at least to us) problem with this kid that always seems to dog this program (ie. Pelle, Zach Brown).

Quote from: Moose on January 16, 2018, 08:53:05 PM

That was fun

It was also foad. Getting back to the title of this thread NEED PLAYERS I agree.In fact IMO we need 4-5 NBA players for Mullin to be competitive. If he stays around hopefully with the players he does have he can win enough games to attract that many talented players to have on his roster. Think the Brooks kid may be a start unless there is some hidden (at least to us) problem with this kid that always seems to dog this program (ie. Pelle, Zach Brown).

Do you think we have an nba player on the current roster?

Quote from: Celtics11 on January 16, 2018, 09:00:40 PM

Quote from: Moose on January 16, 2018, 08:53:05 PM

That was fun

It was also foad. Getting back to the title of this thread NEED PLAYERS I agree.In fact IMO we need 4-5 NBA players for Mullin to be competitive. If he stays around hopefully with the players he does have he can win enough games to attract that many talented players to have on his roster. Think the Brooks kid may be a start unless there is some hidden (at least to us) problem with this kid that always seems to dog this program (ie. Pelle, Zach Brown).

Do you think we have an nba player on the current roster?

Besides Mullin and Richmond and maybe Matt, no not right now. Think Ponds if he becomes a true point guard has the potential as well as Simon if he improves his shot and tightens up his ball handling. Also think if there is an apocalypse and AliB is the last human on earth then maybe him too.