Steve DeMeo

I dont think Anderson is the Savior. I think he was a very good hire considering who we almost got. I'm not jumping for joy over recruiting so far but I do think he will coach them up based on his record in the past. Jarvis inherited players also and that didnt pan out well but to me that stat that mase found with coaches before and after Anderson at all 3 stops is quite telling because I'm a numbers guy and like trends

Lavin had great track record at UCLA but he was also a recruiting guru back then. I dont think Anderson is a recruiting guru ( as far as landing 5 star guys ). My hope is next year 4 star guys mixed in with jucos and maybe some transfers and most importantly roster continuity because he runs a deep bench so I think maybe players stay around longer and develop which is something we didnt have with last regime

Very telling stat Michael. Numbers guys unite!

The prior success only means so much once you get here. Jarvis never had a losing season in over 20 years as a head coach at multiples drops and levels before he got here. He elevated every program he coached. He made the tournament with BU and he made multiples Sweet 16s with George Washington. Outside of a few seasons both programs have not been the same since.

His first year here he led a team that underachieved to a disgusting level for the past four years to one shot away from the Final Four.

I am being cast as an Anderson hater and Fun and I have been labeled as racist on Redmen for daring to be cynical.

Everything has to be a dichotomy with our fans. You can’t point out things that are lacking or worrisome without being stuck in one camp.

I think the Anderson hire was a damn near a miracle given the debacle that preceded it and who we could have ended up with at that stage. I think he will be a better coach than our prior two and, more importantly, I think his philosophy gels with what is needed here.

I’m concerned with the recruiting. Jarvis, Mullin, and Lavin made immediate splashes and created a ton of energy in recruiting right away.

This was the most talented grad transfer market we’ve ever seen and we are about to come up short handed.

The prior success only means so much once you get here. Jarvis never had a losing season in over 20 years as a head coach at multiples drops and levels before he got here. He elevated every program he coached. He made the tournament with BU and he made multiples Sweet 16s with George Washington. Outside of a few seasons both programs have not been the same since.

His first year here he led a team that underachieved to a disgusting level for the past four years to one shot away from the Final Four.

I am being cast as an Anderson hater and Fun and I have been labeled as racist on Redmen for daring to be cynical.

Everything has to be a dichotomy with our fans. You can’t point out things that are lacking or worrisome without being stuck in one camp.

I think the Anderson hire was a damn near a miracle given the debacle that preceded it and who we could have ended up with at that stage. I think he will be a better coach than our prior two and, more importantly, I think his philosophy gels with what is needed here.

I’m concerned with the recruiting. Jarvis, Mullin, and Lavin made immediate splashes and created a ton of energy in recruiting right away.

This was the most talented grad transfer market we’ve ever seen and we are about to come up short handed.

And how much sustained success did Mullin have due to his immediate recruiting splash? None and it took him until year 4 with that immediate splash to be the last team to make the field of 68.

Anderson is a proven, winning coach that coaches kids up regardless of how average they may have been as recruits coming out of HS. I think we'll all see that this fall and the higher rated kids will start seeing it too.

I’m concerned with the recruiting. Jarvis, Mullin, and Lavin made immediate splashes and created a ton of energy in recruiting right away.

What is this immediate splash Mullin and Lavin made you speak? They brought in many players who weren’t good enough to stick around after one year. In Lavin’s case he had only one ship. Lets see if the staff can evaluate talent. To claim CMA can’t recruit yet to have the record he has must mean he is bringing in some talent. The problem as I see it, is CMA is being judged by the recruits rankings opposed to their performance. If CMA wanted Keita, a 4* recruit, to stay I’m sure he could have kept him, but he’s not good enough.

What is this immediate splash Mullin and Lavin made you speak? They brought in many players who weren’t good enough to stick around after one year. In Lavin’s case he had only one ship. Lets see if the staff can evaluate talent. To claim CMA can’t recruit yet to have the record he has must mean he is bringing in some talent. The problem as I see it, is CMA is being judged by the recruits rankings opposed to their performance. If CMA wanted Keita, a 4* recruit, to stay I’m sure he could have kept him, but he’s not good enough.

I also don't recall any immediate splash from Mullin, and Lavin's immediate splash (I'm guessing) was landing Polee late in the signing period.

Jarvis didn't have any immediate splash, either.  His roster was already set in place.  We added no one once Jarvis took over.  His "splash" came in the fall (November) of 1999 when we nabbed a highly-rated Class of 2000 group. 

Jarvis also only had one Sweet 16 appearance at George Washington.  Not multiple.

Actually Jarvis went 15 years without a losing record as a head coach.

So you’re saying that he landed better players than Mullin’s staff did?

I think all the mentioned players are very good and particularly for the level they were recruited at in order to maximize potential.

I'm not really sure how or why to compare players from different time periods and conferences serves.

The prior success only means so much once you get here. Jarvis never had a losing season in over 20 years as a head coach at multiples drops and levels before he got here. He elevated every program he coached. He made the tournament with BU and he made multiples Sweet 16s with George Washington. Outside of a few seasons both programs have not been the same since.

His first year here he led a team that underachieved to a disgusting level for the past four years to one shot away from the Final Four.

I am being cast as an Anderson hater and Fun and I have been labeled as racist on Redmen for daring to be cynical.

Everything has to be a dichotomy with our fans. You can’t point out things that are lacking or worrisome without being stuck in one camp.

I think the Anderson hire was a damn near a miracle given the debacle that preceded it and who we could have ended up with at that stage. I think he will be a better coach than our prior two and, more importantly, I think his philosophy gels with what is needed here.

I’m concerned with the recruiting. Jarvis, Mullin, and Lavin made immediate splashes and created a ton of energy in recruiting right away.

This was the most talented grad transfer market we’ve ever seen and we are about to come up short handed.

I really think everything said here is fair.

To be critical or skeptical doesn't mean you aren't supportive or a hater. It's ok to like some things and dislike others.

And how much sustained success did Mullin have due to his immediate recruiting splash? None and it took him until year 4 with that immediate splash to be the last team to make the field of 68.

Anderson is a proven, winning coach that coaches kids up regardless of how average they may have been as recruits coming out of HS. I think we'll all see that this fall and the higher rated kids will start seeing it too.

I think some of the thinking here is flawed. Mullin had some shortcomings and missteps. There is a really fine line between success and failure. From JaKarr Sampson not dunking a ball in BET Lavin missed what could have been 3rd NCAA tourney appearance. Lovett quitting on the team ruined what would have been a successful season. Mullin not making some moves on staff and keeping players the team fell short.

We've been like Jack and Jill going up the hill.

Now to the flawed thinking. Saying we don't need recruiting splashes or big time players because we'll develop and coach up kids is not a good recipe. We need really good players AND coach them up. You can get away with the play harder than you systems at lower levels but we need talent in Big East. You need guys who can physically compete. Look at DePaul. They had guys like Cain, Strus, etc they developed over time and they were last in conference.

I dont think Anderson is the Savior. I think he was a very good hire considering who we almost got. I'm not jumping for joy over recruiting so far but I do think he will coach them up based on his record in the past.

I didn't mean to accuse you of having drunk the kool aid and agree that we could have done much worse and almost did. There's though an element of kool aid drinking among certain members of the fan base, which considering SJ history seems a bit of willfull blindness.

to me that stat that mase found with coaches before and after Anderson at all 3 stops is quite telling because I'm a numbers guy and like trends

Okay, but a couple of things. First, three is a pretty same sample size and it gets smaller when you consider that Frank Haith did better his first year at Missouri than Anderson his last and he did it having been left by Anderson with only seven scholarship players, none of which is a credit to Anderson. Which leads to the other point: the stat you rely on is open to interpretation. Because it could be that the two coaches who followed Anderson and did worse than he did did worse because Anderson didn't leave them with anything to better with. And it could be that the guys he followed stunk. I'm not saying that's true and I can't be arsed to look that closely but those stats are only telling without context. One bit of context I found interesting is that at his first two stops Anderson followed the guy who followed the man. That is, at UAB he followed Murray Bartow, who replaced Gene Bartow who'd been there 20 years. And at Missouri he followed Quinn Synder, who followed Norm Stewart, who'd coached at Missouri since dinosaurs walked they earth. And both those guys went in the shitter pretty quickly. So he was by way of analogy Fran, who followed Mahoney, who followed Louie and being Fran is better than being Mahoney, because following a legend is a hard act.

One stat I find telling that mase didn't mention is that in his first nine years MA won 67 percent of his games and made 6 NCAA tournaments. In the eight years since he won 62 percent of his games and made three NCAA tournaments. That's nearly a significant drop off. On the other hand winning 60 percent of your games is nothing to sneer at, especially at St John's, but 3 tournaments in eight years is nothing to write home about.

Lavin had great track record at UCLA but he was also a recruiting guru back then. I dont think Anderson is a recruiting guru ( as far as landing 5 star guys ). My hope is next year 4 star guys mixed in with jucos and maybe some transfers and most importantly roster continuity because he runs a deep bench so I think maybe players stay around longer and develop which is something we didnt have with last regime

Acording to Arkansas fans Arkansas had under MA a bunch of roster churn and going 10 deep means that your best players aren't on the floor as much as best players should be. (And I don't fault Anderson for merely grabbing bodies at this point. I do though object to the gettin' 'er done hyperbole regarding two star recruits.) Maybe the system overcomes the lack of ratings talent, but I don't know that superior coaching minds like Jay Wright and Doug McDermott's father are going to lose sleep at the thought of facing a full court press. I guess we'll see.

I think some of the thinking here is flawed. Mullin had some shortcomings and missteps. There is a really fine line between success and failure. From JaKarr Sampson not dunking a ball in BET Lavin missed what could have been 3rd NCAA tourney appearance. Lovett quitting on the team ruined what would have been a successful season. Mullin not making some moves on staff and keeping players the team fell short.

We've been like Jack and Jill going up the hill.

Now to the flawed thinking. Saying we don't need recruiting splashes or big time players because we'll develop and coach up kids is not a good recipe. We need really good players AND coach them up. You can get away with the play harder than you systems at lower levels but we need talent in Big East. You need guys who can physically compete. Look at DePaul. They had guys like Cain, Strus, etc they developed over time and they were last in conference.

I only meant that we could very well see Anderson exceed expectations with some lesser rated guys out of the gate next year. As a result of this I think we'll start getting serious looks from those really good players. I totally agree that we need those better players to sustain any real success.

staff did need a white guy. Welcome Steve

staff did need a white guy. Welcome Steve

Are Italians white? I always considered myself off-color.

I didn't mean to accuse you of having drunk the kool aid and agree that we could have done much worse and almost did. There's though an element of kool aid drinking among certain members of the fan base, which considering SJ history seems a bit of willfull blindness.

Okay, but a couple of things. First, three is a pretty same sample size and it gets smaller when you consider that Frank Haith did better his first year at Missouri than Anderson his last and he did it having been left by Anderson with only seven scholarship players, none of which is a credit to Anderson. Which leads to the other point: the stat you rely on is open to interpretation. Because it could be that the two coaches who followed Anderson and did worse than he did did worse because Anderson didn't leave them with anything to better with. And it could be that the guys he followed stunk. I'm not saying that's true and I can't be arsed to look that closely but those stats are only telling without context. One bit of context I found interesting is that at his first two stops Anderson followed the guy who followed the man. That is, at UAB he followed Murray Bartow, who replaced Gene Bartow who'd been there 20 years. And at Missouri he followed Quinn Synder, who followed Norm Stewart, who'd coached at Missouri since dinosaurs walked they earth. And both those guys went in the shitter pretty quickly. So he was by way of analogy Fran, who followed Mahoney, who followed Louie and being Fran is better than being Mahoney, because following a legend is a hard act.

One stat I find telling that mase didn't mention is that in his first nine years MA won 67 percent of his games and made 6 NCAA tournaments. In the eight years since he won 62 percent of his games and made three NCAA tournaments. That's nearly a significant drop off. On the other hand winning 60 percent of your games is nothing to sneer at, especially at St John's, but 3 tournaments in eight years is nothing to write home about.


Acording to Arkansas fans Arkansas had under MA a bunch of roster churn and going 10 deep means that your best players aren't on the floor as much as best players should be. (And I don't fault Anderson for merely grabbing bodies at this point. I do though object to the gettin' 'er done hyperbole regarding two star recruits.) Maybe the system overcomes the lack of ratings talent, but I don't know that superior coaching minds like Jay Wright and Doug McDermott's father are going to lose sleep at the thought of facing a full court press. I guess we'll see.

I actually dont think we disagree too much ( I could be wrong ). In regards to his last year at Mizzou and Haith I honestly haven't looked at what he inherited but if those 7 guys were his main guys then to me at least the point is moot because a lot of knucklehead coaches Mullin Lavin etc do better with short bench so if those 7 guys were the main guys then well that is that.

Anyway onward and upward hopefully. For me personally I love the hire considering we almost got Yale and I was about to cancel my season tix. Dont know if Anderson works out I think he will ( hope he will like his coaches a lot compared to what we have had ) for the first time in a long time I'm not gonna sweat recruiting etc for now. Not that I wouldn't love 5 star guys or 4 star guys but I just think he is a better coach than what we have had. For the record I'd consider recruiting so far to what Norm did. I'm not thrilled but I'm not angry.

Also I'm getting older (49) so just care less about this shit but I honestly think I'm going to like our style of play the most since Lavins first year

Now to the flawed thinking. Saying we don't need recruiting splashes or big time players because we'll develop and coach up kids is not a good recipe. We need really good players AND coach them up. You can get away with the play harder than you systems at lower levels but we need talent in Big East. You need guys who can physically compete. Look at DePaul. They had guys like Cain, Strus, etc they developed over time and they were last in conference.

Your thinking is odd. You make it sound like MA coached at Iona these past several years. Of course you want talented players, but let’s not insult CMA as if his “system” is gimmicky and is beneath the BE. His level of recruiting has translated to NCAA tournament wins. We haven’t won an NCAA tournament game in 18 years. I can’t stress this enough.

This is a results oriented business and you want to stick your chest out over landing 4/5 star recruits? Who cares about that if we hardly can make the tournament let alone get a NCAA tournament win. His teams have been beating teams that we can’t. He clearly has the players.

I believe this staff understands the level of talent he needs to win. I believe in time he will be able to bring in higher ranked local players because of his personality.

I think some of the thinking here is flawed. Mullin had some shortcomings and missteps. There is a really fine line between success and failure. From JaKarr Sampson not dunking a ball in BET Lavin missed what could have been 3rd NCAA tourney appearance. Lovett quitting on the team ruined what would have been a successful season. Mullin not making some moves on staff and keeping players the team fell short.

We've been like Jack and Jill going up the hill.

Now to the flawed thinking. Saying we don't need recruiting splashes or big time players because we'll develop and coach up kids is not a good recipe. We need really good players AND coach them up. You can get away with the play harder than you systems at lower levels but we need talent in Big East. You need guys who can physically compete. Look at DePaul. They had guys like Cain, Strus, etc they developed over time and they were last in conference.

Cain was better as a freshman than he was as a senior. He had an awful senior year.

We will need a combination of 4 star recruits and projects. The difference that we’ve been waiting for can be a coach who helps more kids get better than not.

Let’s see if CMA can stop the trend of the press conference being the most exciting moment for a St.John’s player.

Your thinking is odd. You make it sound like MA coached at Iona these past several years. Of course you want talented players, but let’s not insult CMA as if his “system” is gimmicky and is beneath the BE. His level of recruiting has translated to NCAA tournament wins. We haven’t won an NCAA tournament game in 18 years. I can’t stress this enough.

This is a results oriented business and you want to stick your chest out over landing 4/5 star recruits? Who cares about that if we hardly can make the tournament let alone get a NCAA tournament win. His teams have been beating teams that we can’t. He clearly has the players.

I believe this staff understands the level of talent he needs to win. I believe in time he will be able to bring in higher ranked local players because of his personality.

You’re going to break your back bending over backward for Anderson.

You need to recruit well and to coach well to have sustained success. We aren’t even involved with any top 75 players.

You’re going to break your back bending over backward for Anderson.

You need to recruit well and to coach well to have sustained success. We aren’t even involved with any top 75 players.

I believe many on this board need a reality check and understand who we actually are and not what you would like us to be. We are St. John’s. A program that hasn’t won a NCAA tournament game in 18 years having a handful of invitations. During that same span, CMA has won at 3 different programs. Programs that are located not in the MAAC or C-USA, but the Big 12 and SEC. If he only lands 2* and 3* recruits he will still bring us more success than we have had since the turn of the millennium.

I want us to be competitive, I’m hoping for relevancy. We are a dead program. We need some success in the tournament. He’s shown that he can do that. Let’s not focus of the rankings of players he’s brought in, we need bodies. In 2-3 years if we aren’t competing on the floor and off for better players then it will be fair to criticize his recruits. Not a couple of months in.

My hope is he can bring us the same success he’s demonstrated throughout his career, not more, because that is what dead programs like ours should aspire to, not NCAA championships. Not now. We need to learn to crawl before we can walk, I believe CMA can bring us there. He’s shown us that he can.

Cain was better as a freshman than he was as a senior. He had an awful senior year.

We will need a combination of 4 star recruits and projects. The difference that we’ve been waiting for can be a coach who helps more kids get better than not.

Let’s see if CMA can stop the trend of the press conference being the most exciting moment for a St.John’s player.

He definitely didn't win the press conference by calling the school St. James.

I believe many on this board need a reality check and understand who we actually are and not what you would like us to be. We are St. John’s. A program that hasn’t won a NCAA tournament game in 18 years having a handful of invitations. During that same span, CMA has won at 3 different programs. Programs that are located not in the MAAC or C-USA, but the Big 12 and SEC. If he only lands 2* and 3* recruits he will still bring us more success than we have had since the turn of the millennium.

I want us to be competitive, I’m hoping for relevancy. We are a dead program. We need some success in the tournament. He’s shown that he can do that. Let’s not focus of the rankings of players he’s brought in, we need bodies. In 2-3 years if we aren’t competing on the floor and off for better players then it will be fair to criticize his recruits. Not a couple of months in.

My hope is he can bring us the same success he’s demonstrated throughout his career, not more, because that is what dead programs like ours should aspire to, not NCAA championships. Not now. We need to learn to crawl before we can walk, I believe CMA can bring us there. He’s shown us that he can.

Agreed.  The naysayers abound but we have to sit back and watch and hopefully see good things.  Too early to worry about recruits. Im optimistic as usual.