Baylor - Game Discussion

You're about as objective as Phil Rizzuto calling a Yankee World Series Game on Mickey Mantle's birthday.

Well Fun in fairness to Lloyd it was the closest 19 point loss in history. I do agree with him in that you can't simply implement a different zone mid game. But that Baylor game screamed for them to go man and if the kids don't know how to play man than we have a much bigger problem.

BTW I also enjoyed him calling people out about playing sports like he is supposed to be Deion Sanders???

BTW, BTW I replied to your post because it is my loophole for promising myself not to respond to any of Dumb and Dumber's future posts.

Quote from: MCNPA on November 19, 2012, 02:57:01 PM

I think I'm being quite objective here

You're about as objective as Phil Rizzuto calling a Yankee World Series Game on Mickey Mantle's birthday.

Mantle and The Scooter are both dead, lot you know about baseball....

Marcus, you are making yourself out to be Jim Thorpe or Jim Brown. Playing lacrosse competitively does make you an expert at anything. However,  your spin prowess may entitle you to the handle, "Maytag Man"! just breaking chops!

See I am not sure Lacrosse is a sport. Personally I did not know it existed until I went to college. But again is something really a sport if it is only televised on ESPN OCHO at 4 in the morning? I think it is an age old question like if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound. If people play a sport no one watches is it  really a sport?

They're talented, but young. They need practice. Can we all just move on?

What defense do you think should have been installed between the Murray State and Baylor game? Or do you think Lavin should have brought Gift into the game to make up for being outrebounded by 20+? 

Truth is that the ones who are least objective are the ones that think some miraculous coaching fix is the answer to why we lost those games.  Anybody who has ever played a competitive sport realizes that it is the players execution that first and foremost wins games.

I wasn't commenting on zones or gifts, but on your belief in your own rectitude. If Lavin were Jesus you'd be Peter of the Lavpostle upon whom he built his church. YOu are the homer of homers. There's nothing wrong with that but its foolish to deny it and even more foolish to present yourself as Doubting Thomas.

They're talented, but young. They need practice. Can we all just move on?

And fun to watch! If they stunk no one would care what defense they played. I think they have enough talent to sneak into the tourney. I do think a big part of that will fall on Lavin. And for the record I think we still lose if we played man the whole game. It was just very frustrating to watch and was somewhat worrisome for the future if Lav can make in game adjustments.

i thought we didn't need sanchez.  guess i was wrong.  definitely need another big body.  if we get sanchez, can't help but feel good about this team in march.

 We went toe to toe with Baylor for 34 minutes.  Unfortunately the game is 40.  Final score definitely not indicative of how the team played.

We went toe to toe with Baylor for 34 minutes.  Unfortunately the game is 40.  Final score definitely not indicative of how the team played.

Knowing to close out a game or "end game" comes with experience. We simply don't have enough of it, and we are not talented enough to overcome our inexperience.

Jefferson was something else.  A clear mismatch, but he absolutely owned Garrett.  This team has a month and a half to grow and I think a whooping like this was just what they needed. 

At least we all know that STJ can play with anyone when things are clicking.

Also, it sure is amazing to watch Phil Greene's development.  We are blessed to have that kid.

Quote from: MCNPA on November 19, 2012, 03:07:13 PM

What defense do you think should have been installed between the Murray State and Baylor game? Or do you think Lavin should have brought Gift into the game to make up for being outrebounded by 20+? 

Truth is that the ones who are least objective are the ones that think some miraculous coaching fix is the answer to why we lost those games.  Anybody who has ever played a competitive sport realizes that it is the players execution that first and foremost wins games.

I wasn't commenting on zones or gifts, but on your belief in your own rectitude. If Lavin were Jesus you'd be Peter of the Lavpostle upon whom he built his church. YOu are the homer of homers. There's nothing wrong with that but its foolish to deny it and even more foolish to present yourself as Doubting Thomas.

Sure I'm a SJU homer.  I never denied that.  I just said that looking at a sports team as a person that has never played, it is easy to be an armchair quarterback and blame coaching.  This has nothing to do with Lavin's game adjustments,  anybody who has actually played a sport knows that.  Like I said, Boeheim would never have switched out of his 2-3.  At this point though, he has earned accolades that allow him to escape criticism and deservedly so.

As far as my sports career, I wasn't pro at anything, trust me on that.  I played a few sports and quickly chose academics over sports. I just know that our losses were not due to some non-adjustments by Lavin.  Only people who really believe that are ones that have not played. 

And Foad, you know I've always believed that execution as well as game prep in practice are the two most important factors, not game coaching.  Haven't changed my stance on that and it has nothing to do with Lavin either.  I don't think he's John Wooden, but I don't think anything he failed to do is the reason we lost. 

 I believe we haven't had enough prep time for tons of freshmen and sophs to win 4 in a row against good teams.  Our kids haven't gotten enough reps and enough time to have multiple defenses for every opponent.  We made the switch to man defense and got just as burnt.  Poor execution, and it was obvious.   What isn't objective in reference to this viewpoint? 

Also, it is sure is amaxing to watch Phil Greene's development.  We are blessed to have that kid.

Praise.

At least we all know that STJ can play with anyone when things are clicking.

That's essentially what I got out of the tournament.  This team needs some time to gel but I like what I've seen especially from Phil Greene.

I taped the game, just watched it. Plenty of positives out of charelston. Phil green is going to be real good. I believe we will play defense- even though not so much aginst Baylor . Good tounament will get us ready for big east.
Where was god's gift-absolutely could and should have used here.-sorry if it was discussed already - this game was almost conceded playing without him. Red shirt makes no sense to me. Still saw plenty of positives from the 3 games.

We have a talented group of young men. With time, they will learn to close out games against tough competition. We are as athletic as anyone in the nation, but our short comings will not change overnight. We don't have anyone to throw the ball to on the low block or get to the rim with dribble penetration. Opposing teams' defenses are not forced to collapse on us which would then allow some open looks to our perimeter players. That's why players like Heslip gets to shoot wide open threes. We could do a better job in our defensive rotations, and I believe we will as the season progresses. But until we find some players that can create open shots for others, we will have periods of offensive ineptitude. Branch and Sanchez will help.     

What isn't objective in reference to this viewpoint?

Obviously if you have the opportunity to restate your positions in a considered manner it's not going to sound unreasonable as "The losses were a lot more narrow than many making it seem" or "97 points is a bit misleading."

We lost by 20 points, that's a thrashing, not a narrow loss. Baylor scored 100, about as many points as a college basketball team not coached by Paul Westhead could score. That's not misleading.

"We just played a few excellent teams have had narrow losses" 

In fact, we played pretty good teams, one of them a mid major, comprising a two-game losing streak. In the mid major game we blew a 15 point lead and looked lost doing so. The Baylor game was close for a bit until they stomped on our head. An apt comparison might be Secretariat's Belmont. He and Sham were stride for stride for half a mile and then Secretariat won by 30 lengths. Let's watch, shall we?

Secretariat - Belmont Stakes 1973

That was Sham suffering a narrow loss.

If you were objective when poster Paltzman says "the staff did not have a good tourney," you would agree. Saint John's was .500. That is not "good." They blew a 15 point lead. That is not "good." They gave up 100 points relying on a junk defense that was clearly not working without trying anything different except randomly shuffling players in and out. Not good. They managed to allow the center to foul out twice and coach is still having issues with his star player. Not good.

It's reasonble to regard Saint John's long terms prospects with optimism, at least until the Big East falls apart and TGAPL deserts the sinking ship for the Knicks. Hopefully Cluess is still available when that happens. But I digress. It is however possible to criticize the great and powerful shortcomings despite the long term outlook. Personally I think Lavin is an airhead and sometimes he gets a look in his eyes like a deer staring at flood light that I find extremely troubling - I found Norm's blank vacuous stare less worrisome. But that's my subjective viewpoint and anyway I was in band in high school so what the hell do I know. Anyway, personally I think you should embrace your inner irrational fandom while you still can. If you remain a Saint John's fan you'll be bitter soon enough.

Foad always bringin the reality check wit a good dose of the lulz.

That said, I will always luv MCNPA's unbridle optimism.

Marcus, I respect your passion, but objectivity is not one of your strengths. I am not crazed by the two losses and realize this is a young team that needs tinkering. That said, I also feel the staff did not have a good tourney, failing to make defensive adjustments and develop structured game plans. Yes, Branch and hopefully Sanchez will add a lot to the mix, but I expect the staff to improve on the strategic end of things as well. All in all, I appreciate the great recruiting job and the caliber of player we are attracting, but feel compelled to express some constructive criticism. Never hurts!

Staff didn't have a great tournament but perhaps the personnel led them to the decisions they made.

I have a feeling the offense is a lot different in practice than it is in games at this point. Sanchez would be at the top of the key as the third passer. In addition although Greene has played extremely well, he just doesn't seem to distribute on the drive. He and DLo are going to put it up themselves when driving to the hoop.

Lets see teh team get the bugs out over the next 8 games. This is a nice team and could be very dangerous come February.

I am not down on anything with this program after watching the three CofC games.     

If Sham hadn't tossed a shoe in the backstretch and bled he would have won.