Xavier Game Thread

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 02, 2014, 02:24:31 PM

If you read this board the last couple of days and didn't know better you'ld think that Jordan was pulling splinters out his a$$ on New years eve.

He played 26 minutes.  He picked up his 3rd foul with 13 minutes remaining.  He's got to sit a bit there right?  He picked up his 4th foul with 4 1/2 remaining.  Probably should sit till the last 2/2 1/2 minute mark, right?

What the hell do you want Hollywood to do?  Jordan might have played over 30 without the foul trouble or if he isn't always in foul trouble. 

You guys are living in some sort of fantasy land. 

Not to mention that the freshmen has been suspended one game for unknown reasons and left the team another game for suspicious ( or not ) reasons.  Ever think Lavin's not starting him as some sort of teaching point regarding earning starts and minutes?  You know he's big on that.  Plus he was so obviously getting outplayed by PG4 and his shooting numbers were so anemic early that there was no way Lavs could play him more and still try to make the tournament.

Kid's minutes are going to increase now, as they should, if he can stop fouling and stop missing games and practices.  Hollywood is bringing the savior along and has managed his minutes perfectly this season.  As evidence, I offer that the kid's confidence and level of play is on a clear upswing as we enter conference play.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE LOSS YET THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A VICTORY WITH MORE JORDAN.  And if I'm wrong,  the reason Jordan didn't play more in that loss, IS JORDAN.


 

Most everyone is talking about the other point guard on the team that is not getting enough minutes because too many of the PG minutes are being given to the spherical miracle.

I know your a numbers guy so here it is

Min     fg%    3fg%    FT%    pts    asts  TO
24.8   .479     .393      .625    8.9     1.5      .5
12.2     .528     .333      .700   4.1      1.8     1.5

So since numbers are everything for you, does one player deserve to get twice the amount of minutes as the other one does? Especially out of position for a large part of them?

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 02, 2014, 02:24:31 PM

If you read this board the last couple of days and didn't know better you'ld think that Jordan was pulling splinters out his a$$ on New years eve.

He played 26 minutes.  He picked up his 3rd foul with 13 minutes remaining.  He's got to sit a bit there right?  He picked up his 4th foul with 4 1/2 remaining.  Probably should sit till the last 2/2 1/2 minute mark, right?

What the hell do you want Hollywood to do?  Jordan might have played over 30 without the foul trouble or if he isn't always in foul trouble. 

You guys are living in some sort of fantasy land. 

Not to mention that the freshmen has been suspended one game for unknown reasons and left the team another game for suspicious ( or not ) reasons.  Ever think Lavin's not starting him as some sort of teaching point regarding earning starts and minutes?  You know he's big on that.  Plus he was so obviously getting outplayed by PG4 and his shooting numbers were so anemic early that there was no way Lavs could play him more and still try to make the tournament.

Kid's minutes are going to increase now, as they should, if he can stop fouling and stop missing games and practices.  Hollywood is bringing the savior along and has managed his minutes perfectly this season.  As evidence, I offer that the kid's confidence and level of play is on a clear upswing as we enter conference play.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE LOSS YET THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A VICTORY WITH MORE JORDAN.  And if I'm wrong,  the reason Jordan didn't play more in that loss, IS JORDAN.
 

What would I like Lavin to do?

1. Pick a defense, and stick with it.
2. Pick a starting line up, and stick with it.
3. Pick a point guard, START HIM, and stick with him. In Nov, did anyone know who the PG was? I didn't. And I still don't know.

It's January 2nd, and it looks like we need to start over in practice, but the leadership really appears to be slow to figure things out that other coaches would have figured out by now. I say appears to be, because hey, this is Lavin's program, and I'd be happy to eat my words.

That said, I can't for the life of me figure out what Lavin is even trying to do. It's looks like he doesn't know himself. On Tuesday, Lavin had 4 different guards running the offense, and two forwards dribbling coast to coast, one of which probably has less than 10 assists on the entire season.

We had hoped that our sophs and juniors would have shown marked improvement by now, but they haven't, and some of them have actually regressed. It really begs the question, what is the plan here? Is there one?

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 01, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 01, 2014, 12:24:20 PM

You watched it didnt you. Xavier missed open shots, we werent exactly shutting them down because of our defense. 

I feel it's disingenuous to not give credit where it's due to our defense when an opponent is held scoreless to the second TV time out.  If we had given up 30 points in the first 8 minutes of the game would you ever make the point that our defense was great but Xavier was just making all of their well defended tightly, covered shots?  Of course not.

I feel Hollywood pulled a fast one and surprised Xavier by coming out with the 1 - 3 - 1/ 2 -3 zone.  They certainly were bothered by it and looked tentative against it.  The zone was obviously played well by the unusual lineup Lavin chose to start the conference opener.

Of course I would say that xavier, or any other team, is making tough, tightly covered shots, if they in fact are. Why wouldnt I or anyone else?

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 01, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 01, 2014, 12:24:20 PM

You watched it didnt you. Xavier missed open shots, we werent exactly shutting them down because of our defense. 

I feel it's disingenuous to not give credit where it's due to our defense when an opponent is held scoreless to the second TV time out.  If we had given up 30 points in the first 8 minutes of the game would you ever make the point that our defense was great but Xavier was just making all of their well defended tightly, covered shots?  Of course not.

I feel Hollywood pulled a fast one and surprised Xavier by coming out with the 1 - 3 - 1/ 2 -3 zone.  They certainly were bothered by it and looked tentative against it.  The zone was obviously played well by the unusual lineup Lavin chose to start the conference opener.

Of course I would say that xavier, or any other team, is making tough, tightly covered shots, if they in fact are. Why wouldnt I or anyone else?

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 02, 2014, 02:50:16 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 01, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 01, 2014, 12:24:20 PM

You watched it didnt you. Xavier missed open shots, we werent exactly shutting them down because of our defense. 

I feel it's disingenuous to not give credit where it's due to our defense when an opponent is held scoreless to the second TV time out.  If we had given up 30 points in the first 8 minutes of the game would you ever make the point that our defense was great but Xavier was just making all of their well defended tightly, covered shots?  Of course not.

I feel Hollywood pulled a fast one and surprised Xavier by coming out with the 1 - 3 - 1/ 2 -3 zone.  They certainly were bothered by it and looked tentative against it.  The zone was obviously played well by the unusual lineup Lavin chose to start the conference opener.

Of course I would say that xavier, or any other team, is making tough, tightly covered shots, if they in fact are. Why wouldnt I or anyone else?

I've been posting on SJ message boards since FF.  I've read thousands of post complaining about our lack of defense and/or playing the wrong defense following games in which we gave up a zillion points.  Don't recall ever reading one exonerating our defense saying we were playing great defense, they were just making tough, tightly covered shots.

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 03, 2014, 02:06:58 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 02, 2014, 02:50:16 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 01, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 01, 2014, 12:24:20 PM

You watched it didnt you. Xavier missed open shots, we werent exactly shutting them down because of our defense. 

I feel it's disingenuous to not give credit where it's due to our defense when an opponent is held scoreless to the second TV time out.  If we had given up 30 points in the first 8 minutes of the game would you ever make the point that our defense was great but Xavier was just making all of their well defended tightly, covered shots?  Of course not.

I feel Hollywood pulled a fast one and surprised Xavier by coming out with the 1 - 3 - 1/ 2 -3 zone.  They certainly were bothered by it and looked tentative against it.  The zone was obviously played well by the unusual lineup Lavin chose to start the conference opener.

Of course I would say that xavier, or any other team, is making tough, tightly covered shots, if they in fact are. Why wouldnt I or anyone else?

I've been posting on SJ message boards since FF.  I've read thousands of post complaining about our lack of defense and/or playing the wrong defense following games in which we gave up a zillion points.  Don't recall ever reading one exonerating our defense saying we were playing great defense, they were just making tough, tightly covered shots.

Because its a lot easier to give criticism as opposed to admitting a positive that still yielded defeat.

Quote from: Moose on January 03, 2014, 02:12:26 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 03, 2014, 02:06:58 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 02, 2014, 02:50:16 PM

Quote from: carmineabbatiello on January 01, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: Amaseinyourface2 on January 01, 2014, 12:24:20 PM

You watched it didnt you. Xavier missed open shots, we werent exactly shutting them down because of our defense. 

I feel it's disingenuous to not give credit where it's due to our defense when an opponent is held scoreless to the second TV time out.  If we had given up 30 points in the first 8 minutes of the game would you ever make the point that our defense was great but Xavier was just making all of their well defended tightly, covered shots?  Of course not.

I feel Hollywood pulled a fast one and surprised Xavier by coming out with the 1 - 3 - 1/ 2 -3 zone.  They certainly were bothered by it and looked tentative against it.  The zone was obviously played well by the unusual lineup Lavin chose to start the conference opener.

Of course I would say that xavier, or any other team, is making tough, tightly covered shots, if they in fact are. Why wouldnt I or anyone else?

I've been posting on SJ message boards since FF.  I've read thousands of post complaining about our lack of defense and/or playing the wrong defense following games in which we gave up a zillion points.  Don't recall ever reading one exonerating our defense saying we were playing great defense, they were just making tough, tightly covered shots.

Because its a lot easier to give criticism as opposed to admitting a positive that still yielded defeat.

Tru Dat.

By the way, my brother works with television ratings, and said the SJU-Xavier game was by far the most watched game of Foxsports New Year's Eve marathon.  And in general our game with xavier and our game with Cuse are two of Fox's best ratings since they started in August.   FWIW

Quote from: desco80 on January 02, 2014, 04:50:10 PM

By the way, my brother works with television ratings, and said the SJU-Xavier game was by far the most watched game of Foxsports New Year's Eve marathon.  And in general our game with xavier and our game with Cuse are two of Fox's best ratings since they started in August.   FWIW

Glad u posted that. I had a bad feeling if we didn't have a good season that fox sports would stop giving us so much exposure. Just assumed not many people were watching

Fox sports is giving us so much coverage. St. John's and the big east. If we are not good they make less money . If they don't make money. No more national games. In mind this is a huge year for us. Think we are fxcking it up

Fox sports is giving us so much coverage. St. John's and the big east. If we are not good they make less money . If they don't make money. No more national games. In mind this is a huge year for us. Think we are fxcking it up