Tournament Challenge Signup

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 07:40:46 PM

Quote from: Marillac on March 17, 2018, 07:13:00 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 05:23:45 PM

Quote from: Celtics11 on March 17, 2018, 05:18:24 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 05:03:00 PM

Quote from: Marillac on March 17, 2018, 04:53:46 PM

Quote from: Marco Baldi on March 17, 2018, 03:55:58 PM

Iona looked better against Duke than RI. Terrell a no show

Honestly, I'm not worried about Danny taking over at Uconn. It could very well be their respective personnel, but Bobby's teams play a better style and put up the stats that would scare me long term. Calhoun always had his guys crashing the boards. Rhode Island doesn't.

Villanova hasn’t been in the top 100 in OR% in the past 5 years. I thinks that’s worked quite well for them.

Actually, Villanova missed 1 NCAA Tournament in the past 10 years. The team that missed the tournament was their best offensive rebounding team in the past 10 years

Guess all we have to do is get even worse at offensive rebounding if that is even possible. 

Nah just pointing out how stupid of a comment saying that Danny wouldn’t scare him long term because his teams don’t crash the glass when one of the 5 best programs in the country over the past 5 years and the class of our conference doesn’t crash the glass either

First of all, I didn't say specifically just rebounds. Second, I'm tired of coaches here that don't stress rebounding while others teams live and die by it. We've had one very good season since the early 90's and we were top ten in rebounds. Coincidence? You need talent and guards as well obviously, but there is no reason any coach can't turn is team into a string rebounding group.

Nova is on another level. 14 of the top 17 teams in assists are dancing this year and two of the ones who aren't have 27 and 20 wins. Nova is top ten. They are also #3 in the nation in FG%, 13th in 3 pt %, and 20th in FT %. They don't miss a lot of shots. Rhode Island is nowhere to be found in any of those stats or any rebounding stats. Nova does everything well.

I love me some offensive rebounding as well but you have to have the right personnel for it. The reason the Dukes, UNCs, MSUs, Kentucky’s of the world dominate offensive rebounding stats is because they are able to recruit the 6-6 to 6-10 guys that can jump out of the gym so of course those guys will get rebounds.

Then you have the Villanovas and Michigans that have 5 shooters on the floor and spread you out. Rhode Island did that also playing 4 guards because that’s their personnel.

The problem with just blindly sending guys for offensive rebounds regardless of your personnel is that it leaves you very vulnerable to get beat in transition. If you send 3 guys at the glass whenever a shot goes up your offensive rebounding numbers will go up but they have to go up enough where it makes up for the times you are giving up good looks in transition on the other end

Why are Buffalo and New Mexico St. so high then? Offensive rebounding is mostly about effort and will.  Jemerrio Jones is 6'5 180 and averages 13 rebounds per game and grabbed 14 against a very good Clemson team. He just wants it more and plays for a coach that encourages that.
We don't have Nova personnel. They can cherrypick the Josh Harts and Jalen Brunsons of the world with skill, basketball IQ, and athletic ability. We have to pick kids with one or two out of three. That's why rebounding is so important to a program like St. John's. If Eric King, Anthony Glover, and Donald Emanuel can be the #1 offensive rebounding front court in the country why can't Simon, Clark, Keita, and Roberts?

For as bad as Jarvis was, he understood that there were two things you had complete control over: (1) your kids being stronger than their opponents and (2) rebounding.

For as bad as Jarvis was, jarvis was plenty good. When Jarvis was here we were much better then Villanova.

Quote from: Marillac on March 17, 2018, 07:52:59 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 07:40:46 PM

Quote from: Marillac on March 17, 2018, 07:13:00 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 05:23:45 PM

Quote from: Celtics11 on March 17, 2018, 05:18:24 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 17, 2018, 05:03:00 PM

Quote from: Marillac on March 17, 2018, 04:53:46 PM

Quote from: Marco Baldi on March 17, 2018, 03:55:58 PM

Iona looked better against Duke than RI. Terrell a no show

Honestly, I'm not worried about Danny taking over at Uconn. It could very well be their respective personnel, but Bobby's teams play a better style and put up the stats that would scare me long term. Calhoun always had his guys crashing the boards. Rhode Island doesn't.

Villanova hasn’t been in the top 100 in OR% in the past 5 years. I thinks that’s worked quite well for them.

Actually, Villanova missed 1 NCAA Tournament in the past 10 years. The team that missed the tournament was their best offensive rebounding team in the past 10 years

Guess all we have to do is get even worse at offensive rebounding if that is even possible. 

Nah just pointing out how stupid of a comment saying that Danny wouldn’t scare him long term because his teams don’t crash the glass when one of the 5 best programs in the country over the past 5 years and the class of our conference doesn’t crash the glass either

First of all, I didn't say specifically just rebounds. Second, I'm tired of coaches here that don't stress rebounding while others teams live and die by it. We've had one very good season since the early 90's and we were top ten in rebounds. Coincidence? You need talent and guards as well obviously, but there is no reason any coach can't turn is team into a string rebounding group.

Nova is on another level. 14 of the top 17 teams in assists are dancing this year and two of the ones who aren't have 27 and 20 wins. Nova is top ten. They are also #3 in the nation in FG%, 13th in 3 pt %, and 20th in FT %. They don't miss a lot of shots. Rhode Island is nowhere to be found in any of those stats or any rebounding stats. Nova does everything well.

I love me some offensive rebounding as well but you have to have the right personnel for it. The reason the Dukes, UNCs, MSUs, Kentucky’s of the world dominate offensive rebounding stats is because they are able to recruit the 6-6 to 6-10 guys that can jump out of the gym so of course those guys will get rebounds.

Then you have the Villanovas and Michigans that have 5 shooters on the floor and spread you out. Rhode Island did that also playing 4 guards because that’s their personnel.

The problem with just blindly sending guys for offensive rebounds regardless of your personnel is that it leaves you very vulnerable to get beat in transition. If you send 3 guys at the glass whenever a shot goes up your offensive rebounding numbers will go up but they have to go up enough where it makes up for the times you are giving up good looks in transition on the other end

Why are Buffalo and New Mexico St. so high then? Offensive rebounding is mostly about effort and will.  Jemerrio Jones is 6'5 180 and averages 13 rebounds per game and grabbed 14 against a very good Clemson team. He just wants it more and plays for a coach that encourages that.
We don't have Nova personnel. They can cherrypick the Josh Harts and Jalen Brunsons of the world with skill, basketball IQ, and athletic ability. We have to pick kids with one or two out of three. That's why rebounding is so important to a program like St. John's. If Eric King, Anthony Glover, and Donald Emanuel can be the #1 offensive rebounding front court in the country why can't Simon, Clark, Keita, and Roberts?

For as bad as Jarvis was, he understood that there were two things you had complete control over: (1) your kids being stronger than their opponents and (2) rebounding.

For as bad as Jarvis was, jarvis was plenty good. When Jarvis was here we were much better then Villanova.

Jarvis didn't know X's and O's. His best offensive play was a sixth grade weave, but he mitigated a lot of his shortcomings by recruiting and developing physically strong kids and living and dying on the glass. Go back and watch the Posell teams play Duke. Duke would score of a great set and then we'd answer with some garbage loose ball or offensive board just resulted in an open three or layup.

Lavin actually said offensive rebounds weren't important and Mullin comes from the NBA were it has been deemphasized due to the high shooting #s, dangerous transition offenses, and an overall emphasis on not overworking players to keep them fresh for the playoffs and longer careers.

Jarvis’s teams played amazing defense. Maybe his better teams hid his offensive shortcomings. If Jarvis was bad at anything this current staff is beyond worse.
Personally, I don’t care about sets. If you are getting good shots, I am fine with the offense.
I also really liked Jarvis as a game coach.
My buddy saw a practice of his, and was amazed how elementary it was.

After Week 1, Braintrust in first place.

Jarvis’s teams played amazing defense. Maybe his better teams hid his offensive shortcomings. If Jarvis was bad at anything this current staff is beyond worse.
Personally, I don’t care about sets. If you are getting good shots, I am fine with the offense.
I also really liked Jarvis as a game coach.
My buddy saw a practice of his, and was amazed how elementary it was.

I watched every alumni hall practice during my time at St. John's. He obsessed over fundamentals like bigs catching the ball, boxing out, pounding the offensive glass, and defense.
Our offense was extremely basic. Mullin and staff are far better with X's and O's, but why can't we have both? It's frustrating to see four guys running back with the shot the last 8 years instead of crashing the glass and creating possessions. You can't just stress defense and rebounding, you have to obsess over every detail.

Quote from: TONYD3 on March 17, 2018, 09:37:31 PM

Jarvis’s teams played amazing defense. Maybe his better teams hid his offensive shortcomings. If Jarvis was bad at anything this current staff is beyond worse.
Personally, I don’t care about sets. If you are getting good shots, I am fine with the offense.
I also really liked Jarvis as a game coach.
My buddy saw a practice of his, and was amazed how elementary it was.

I watched every alumni hall practice during my time at St. John's. He obsessed over fundamentals like bigs catching the ball, boxing out, pounding the offensive glass, and defense.
Our offense was extremely basic. Mullin and staff are far better with X's and O's, but why can't we have both? It's frustrating to see four guys running back with the shot the last 8 years instead of crashing the glass and creating possessions. You can't just stress defense and rebounding, you have to obsess over every detail.

I agree with you. Our offense scheme wasn't so amazing vs Duke. Our best player took plenty of shots and our big guys crashed. ahemed and ownens did well that day. The Lavin offense wasn't great, But Harrison got his shots and their were guys trying to get rebounds. When we were bad this year, we sometimes had 5 guys behind the 3 point line.
I would rather ponds shoot more, figure he makes at least 3/10. Maybe we get 2/7 . When our forwards miss from deep, we never get the rebound and it often turns into an easy basket for the other team.
Less 3's, better shot selection (especially for the forwards) would improve things by a lot. The defense was better or the most part. If we are going to play some zone. Coaches need to do a much better job. That 2/3 was awful.