Coach lavin

  • 131 replies
  • 22485 views
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #60 on: January 21, 2014, 11:17:24 PM »
yet Im sure the BS from Lavin will continue about what a work in progress we are.

But we are a work in progress, why does that reality sting so bad? You can get mad at coach all you want, you can criticize his coaching all you want. The bottom line is our players' need to improve and I think in time, when they are seniors, they will. It doesn't matter what the kids are ranked, what matters is how they play once they get to this level. There are other programs that struggle even though they land top recruits, stop making it seem as if its only Lavin. Look at Maryland or especially North Caroline. NC has 6-7 top 100 kids. 3 are top 25, and 1 is top 10 and they struggle, its not about the coaching all the time, and our program is no where near what those programs are.

1) Team "x" doing poorly isn't a defense for coach Lavin and these particular circumstances.   The facts are that he is making illogical starting lineups; he is calling inopportune timeouts; he is substituting in an entirely unhelpful manner; and his players haven't developed.   
That has nothing to do with Roy Williams.   If your point is that even talented teams sometimes don't win, then I agree.  Otherwise it's a nonsensical excuse. 
And it's a ridiculous comparison in the first place.  Those teams aren't failing at anywhere near the rate that Lavin's team is.   UNC has had a bad stretch, they've also beaten Louisville, Michigan State, and Kentucky.   We're 1-9 against teams from major conferences. 

2) You simply cannot throw the rankings out the window, say the players aren't good enough, and not mention that Lavin is the one who scouted and recruited these players!   It would be one thing if you said his recruiting is above reproach because according to these independent standards he got some of the best players around.
But you're admitting the rankings aren't everything, and have little to do with success once the guys get to college.   If true, then there seems there is a direct correlation between Lavin evaluating and selecting players x,y, and z; and the results we're now experiencing.   You can't have it both ways.   

Freaking great post desco
*wipes ketchup from his eyes* - I guess Heinz sight isn’t 20/20.

SJUFAN

  • *****
  • 2280
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #61 on: January 22, 2014, 12:12:02 AM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #62 on: January 22, 2014, 01:43:40 AM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

CC

  • **
  • 224
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #63 on: January 22, 2014, 10:53:42 AM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

paultzman

  • *****
  • 16981
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #64 on: January 22, 2014, 11:37:04 AM »
@StJohnsBBall: @SJUCoachLavin on the @BIGEAST Teleconference with the league's media right now. #SJUBB

Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #65 on: January 22, 2014, 11:42:50 AM »

Norman R retweeted
1m

Reid Forgrave @ReidForgrave
St. John's Steve Lavin brings up Euro influence in discussing @BluejayMBB's style & why see 5 shooters on floor more often in hoops.
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
More options
7m

Norman R @ECoastBias
"We have played competitively in the last 3 BE games, but come up short.... we feel the team is competing hard but coming up short." - Lavin

paultzman

  • *****
  • 16981
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #66 on: January 22, 2014, 11:46:42 AM »
Local media meeting with StJ after this conference call I believe.


@ECoastBias: BTW, Lavin got no questions on job status, team identity, etc - mostly about the Big East, league strength, and varying styles of play.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 11:53:41 AM by paultzman »

desco80

  • *****
  • 5072
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #67 on: January 22, 2014, 01:23:18 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

If by "talented" you mean a player with well developed skills in all areas of the game, then no - most of the team isn't talented.   But how many players in college basketball are well-rounded?   If they are - they're elite, or they're very good seniors.

CC

  • **
  • 224
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #68 on: January 22, 2014, 02:09:53 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

If by "talented" you mean a player with well developed skills in all areas of the game, then no - most of the team isn't talented.   But how many players in college basketball are well-rounded?   If they are - they're elite, or they're very good seniors.


My point is these players aren't as talented as people make them out to be. How can Dom and Sampson come out of HS as "talented basketball players " with jumpers like they have. Jumpers and dunkers yes.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #69 on: January 22, 2014, 02:11:29 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

CO is the best shot blocker we've ever had. In over 100 years of college basketball no one in 2, 3 or 4 years has as many blocked shots as CO. He has no go to move offensively. He doesn't box out, or hit the glass when a teammate puts a shot up. In short, he has a very rare skill, and the rest of game hasn't developed.

Branch is very talented. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but just about all of them were last season. To be effective, he has to be given a chance to play. Lavin pulls him after one turnover. So, okay, Steve, we have the lowest turnover margin in the conference, but we are dead last in assists. What has that accomplished?

Pointer is a junior. He came here with incredible athletic ability, and no jumper whatsoever. He still has no jumper. What exactly does he do in practice? I'm not blaming the kid, but come on. How does the kid not have one offensive move?

Sampson is an incredible athlete. He reminds me of a PF version of Zendon Hamilton with his raw jerkiness. He's very athletic, and he gets his fair share of boards, but for a guy that won the BE ROY, and many expected to jump to the pros after this season, his game has regressed, significantly. He plays with his head down. Give him the ball, and he approaches the possession like it's his job to score the ball himself. Harrison does the same thing. Jordan as well. All of these guys are very talented, but if the other team knows that your game plan is to take all 5 opposing players off the dribble by yourself, they'll have very little trouble stopping you.

Jordan specifically, is incredibly talented. A 6'4 PG. How lucky we thought we were. He can beat the zone some of the time by getting in the lane, and drawing a foul. Most of the time, opposing teams know that's his 1 move. He's excellent in transition. He can bounce it on the move, or he can launch it down court with great accuracy. Branch can, too. But we don't get these opportunities often enough.

We have more top 100 recruits than any BE program. It's shameful that Lavin hasn't figured out a way to establish an identity. For those who think he'll grab top recruits in the 2015 class, I'd like to ask you this: Why would they be coming to STJ to play for Lavin? What kind of basketball would they be signing up for? I still have no idea what kind of offense and defense we play. 

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #70 on: January 22, 2014, 02:16:25 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

If by "talented" you mean a player with well developed skills in all areas of the game, then no - most of the team isn't talented.   But how many players in college basketball are well-rounded?   If they are - they're elite, or they're very good seniors.


My point is these players aren't as talented as people make them out to be. How can Dom and Sampson come out of HS as "talented basketball players " with jumpers like they have. Jumpers and dunkers yes.

All we can do is look at the collective opinion of high school BB analysts and assume that if they think a player is the 25th best player in the class, that their opinion is accurate. Is it as perfect system? Of course not. But are we supposed to assume that just about all of Lavin's recruits are overrated?

Norm used to pull that crap. He once told a room full of RW members, "sometimes a kid comes here, and they say they're gonna work hard, and then they don't." Well, YOU picked YOUR players. 

SJUFAN

  • *****
  • 2280
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #71 on: January 22, 2014, 02:17:09 PM »
Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Its easy to simply say we have more talent, but please quantify that. Creighton has the best player in the BE but we're more talented? I don't care about comparing players 6-10. I'm looking at 1-5.

Let's look at a team that we just played and could have beaten, Providence. Do we have a better guard than Cotton? Who could shot, dribble penetrate, pass, defend, and rebound. Do we have a better big than Batts or Henton? They could defend, rebound, pass, and score. 

I think the problem is many of you struggle assessing the talent of the players on our team. I just listed three players' on Providence who preforms at least four aspects of the game very well. Who are on our team does at least two things very well? I see Jordan and that's it. If you do that simple exercise, you will discover that we have a team full of one dimensional players who do different things. We are deeper, but only five play at a time. That's how i'm looking at it which is why I believe Providence, GT, and Nova's starting five is more talented than our starting five. Creighton I think we may be better than but they has the best player in the BE so it's a push.

Convince me that we have more talent than Nova, GT, and Xavier.

CC

  • **
  • 224
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #72 on: January 22, 2014, 02:20:57 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

CO is the best shot blocker we've ever had. In over 100 years of college basketball no one in 2, 3 or 4 years has as many blocked shots as CO. He has no go to move offensively. He doesn't box out, or hit the glass when a teammate puts a shot up. In short, he has a very rare skill, and the rest of game hasn't developed.

Branch is very talented. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but just about all of them were last season. To be effective, he has to be given a chance to play. Lavin pulls him after one turnover. So, okay, Steve, we have the lowest turnover margin in the conference, but we are dead last in assists. What has that accomplished?

Pointer is a junior. He came here with incredible athletic ability, and no jumper whatsoever. He still has no jumper. What exactly does he do in practice? I'm not blaming the kid, but come on. How does the kid not have one offensive move?

Sampson is an incredible athlete. He reminds me of a PF version of Zendon Hamilton with his raw jerkiness. He's very athletic, and he gets his fair share of boards, but for a guy that won the BE ROY, and many expected to jump to the pros after this season, his game has regressed, significantly. He plays with his head down. Give him the ball, and he approaches the possession like it's his job to score the ball himself. Harrison does the same thing. Jordan as well. All of these guys are very talented, but if the other team knows that your game plan is to take all 5 opposing players off the dribble by yourself, they'll have very little trouble stopping you.

Jordan specifically, is incredibly talented. A 6'4 PG. How lucky we thought we were. He can beat the zone some of the time by getting in the lane, and drawing a foul. Most of the time, opposing teams know that's his 1 move. He's excellent in transition. He can bounce it on the move, or he can launch it down court with great accuracy. Branch can, too. But we don't get these opportunities often enough.

We have more top 100 recruits than any BE program. It's shameful that Lavin hasn't figured out a way to establish an identity. For those who think he'll grab top recruits in the 2015 class, I'd like to ask you this: Why would they be coming to STJ to play for Lavin? What kind of basketball would they be signing up for? I still have no idea what kind of offense and defense we play. 

I agree we have no offensive system at all. Our best offense if off a steal from our defense. And our defense is puzzling to say the least, in his first year it was the match up zone, this year we have pressed, zone, man to man and sometimes I dont even think the players know what D they are playing. It's almost like they sometimes let their man get by so they can go for the block . In terms of the talent I think it has been over stated.

CC

  • **
  • 224
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #73 on: January 22, 2014, 02:22:49 PM »
Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Its easy to simply say we have more talent, but please quantify that. Creighton has the best player in the BE but we're more talented? I don't care about comparing players 6-10. I'm looking at 1-5.

Let's look at a team that we just played and could have beaten, Providence. Do we have a better guard than Cotton? Who could shot, dribble penetrate, pass, defend, and rebound. Do we have a better big than Batts or Henton? They could defend, rebound, pass, and score. 

I think the problem is many of you struggle assessing the talent of the players on our team. I just listed three players' on Providence who preforms at least four aspects of the game very well. Who are on our team does at least two things very well? I see Jordan and that's it. If you do that simple exercise, you will discover that we have a team full of one dimensional players who do different things. We are deeper, but only five play at a time. That's how i'm looking at it which is why I believe Providence, GT, and Nova's starting five is more talented than our starting five. Creighton I think we may be better than but they has the best player in the BE so it's a push.

Convince me that we have more talent than Nova, GT, and Xavier.

Cotton and Batts are better than anyone wearing red and white.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #74 on: January 22, 2014, 02:28:53 PM »
Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Its easy to simply say we have more talent, but please quantify that. Creighton has the best player in the BE but we're more talented? I don't care about comparing players 6-10. I'm looking at 1-5.

Let's look at a team that we just played and could have beaten, Providence. Do we have a better guard than Cotton? Who could shot, dribble penetrate, pass, defend, and rebound. Do we have a better big than Batts or Henton? They could defend, rebound, pass, and score. 

I think the problem is many of you struggle assessing the talent of the players on our team. I just listed three players' on Providence who preforms at least four aspects of the game very well. Who are on our team does at least two things very well? I see Jordan and that's it. If you do that simple exercise, you will discover that we have a team full of one dimensional players who do different things. We are deeper, but only five play at a time. That's how i'm looking at it which is why I believe Providence, GT, and Nova's starting five is more talented than our starting five. Creighton I think we may be better than but they has the best player in the BE so it's a push.

Convince me that we have more talent than Nova, GT, and Xavier.

We have the best shot blocker in the BE since Dikembe Mutombo. Obekpa came here with that natural talent. What else has the staff taught him? Cooley develops players. Last year, and this year, he's shown us that. Who the heck was Cotton before Providence? Who was Henton?

We have a 6'4 PG who is more talented than any guard in the conference. When opposing teams zone us, he has one answer for that zone. Dribble right through it. Since we both know that doesn't work, why doesn't Lavin try something like, oh, IDK, draw up a F'n play? The reason why Providence was able to beat us in addition to Lavin's awful substitution patterns was their ball movement. If you practice with the same group of guys over a period of time, you should have an understanding of how they play. How they like to receive the ball for example.

Lavin has had more time than Cooley to work out the kinks. No one is injured. We aren't playing with walk ons. We aren't playing with 6 or 7 new players. I understand that not every player can do it all. Fine. Then why the F are you bringing Max Hooper in to play defense on Henton? WTF is wrong with Lavin? Is he even paying attention to what he's doing? I honestly don't think he is.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #75 on: January 22, 2014, 02:31:54 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

CO is the best shot blocker we've ever had. In over 100 years of college basketball no one in 2, 3 or 4 years has as many blocked shots as CO. He has no go to move offensively. He doesn't box out, or hit the glass when a teammate puts a shot up. In short, he has a very rare skill, and the rest of game hasn't developed.

Branch is very talented. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but just about all of them were last season. To be effective, he has to be given a chance to play. Lavin pulls him after one turnover. So, okay, Steve, we have the lowest turnover margin in the conference, but we are dead last in assists. What has that accomplished?

Pointer is a junior. He came here with incredible athletic ability, and no jumper whatsoever. He still has no jumper. What exactly does he do in practice? I'm not blaming the kid, but come on. How does the kid not have one offensive move?

Sampson is an incredible athlete. He reminds me of a PF version of Zendon Hamilton with his raw jerkiness. He's very athletic, and he gets his fair share of boards, but for a guy that won the BE ROY, and many expected to jump to the pros after this season, his game has regressed, significantly. He plays with his head down. Give him the ball, and he approaches the possession like it's his job to score the ball himself. Harrison does the same thing. Jordan as well. All of these guys are very talented, but if the other team knows that your game plan is to take all 5 opposing players off the dribble by yourself, they'll have very little trouble stopping you.

Jordan specifically, is incredibly talented. A 6'4 PG. How lucky we thought we were. He can beat the zone some of the time by getting in the lane, and drawing a foul. Most of the time, opposing teams know that's his 1 move. He's excellent in transition. He can bounce it on the move, or he can launch it down court with great accuracy. Branch can, too. But we don't get these opportunities often enough.

We have more top 100 recruits than any BE program. It's shameful that Lavin hasn't figured out a way to establish an identity. For those who think he'll grab top recruits in the 2015 class, I'd like to ask you this: Why would they be coming to STJ to play for Lavin? What kind of basketball would they be signing up for? I still have no idea what kind of offense and defense we play. 

I agree we have no offensive system at all. Our best offense if off a steal from our defense. And our defense is puzzling to say the least, in his first year it was the match up zone, this year we have pressed, zone, man to man and sometimes I dont even think the players know what D they are playing. It's almost like they sometimes let their man get by so they can go for the block . In terms of the talent I think it has been over stated.

It isn't almost like they don't know what defense we're playing, they straight up don't know. I think that's the issue with Obekpa and Sampson. They are the most confused on defense. Obekpa's defense was great last year. What the heck did they do to him this year? My guess: Lavin has a better idea. And he has them often.

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #76 on: January 22, 2014, 02:36:35 PM »
Just one persons opinion. We are better than 0-5. I think coaches decision to sit Jordan in the second half and overtime cost us the Providence game. His decision to insert Hooper late in the DePaul game cost us a win. By no means am I defending Lavin as a good coach. However, that being said, I look at the talent on the team and don't believe they are much better than 2-3 in a watered down BE. If people believe we are more talented than that tell me were that talent is and how many teams in the BE are we more talented than? I say 3 teams. DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. That puts us in seventh place. whoopee. So were complaining about not being in 7th place. That is also on the Coach. I like Lavin because I believe he will bring in the talent. I'm concerned about not signing anyone of merit thus far in 14'. But if he could land some top players in 15' then I would like to see what he could do with a balanced roster.     

Here are the BE teams that we are more talented than:

Nova, Creighton, Butler, Seton Hall, Xavier, Georgetown, Providence, DePaul and Marquette.
The difference is that most of these programs have a coach with a clear POV.

Lavin doesn't know what he's going to do next. That's why I've had enough of him. I'm not interested in a let's see what the future brings attitude because he doesn't know what it will bring. If he returns, the University can go F itself. Sell tickets to some other a hole.

Who do you think on the STJ roster is talented? Jordan 100%, Harrison yes but he is more a grinder who can score, CO? he is a talented shot blocker and that's it. Dom? No- he is just an athlete.  Sanchez? he has some talent . Sampson? Another athlete . Green, Branch, GG - I wouldnt consider talented.

CO is the best shot blocker we've ever had. In over 100 years of college basketball no one in 2, 3 or 4 years has as many blocked shots as CO. He has no go to move offensively. He doesn't box out, or hit the glass when a teammate puts a shot up. In short, he has a very rare skill, and the rest of game hasn't developed.

Branch is very talented. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but just about all of them were last season. To be effective, he has to be given a chance to play. Lavin pulls him after one turnover. So, okay, Steve, we have the lowest turnover margin in the conference, but we are dead last in assists. What has that accomplished?

Pointer is a junior. He came here with incredible athletic ability, and no jumper whatsoever. He still has no jumper. What exactly does he do in practice? I'm not blaming the kid, but come on. How does the kid not have one offensive move?

Sampson is an incredible athlete. He reminds me of a PF version of Zendon Hamilton with his raw jerkiness. He's very athletic, and he gets his fair share of boards, but for a guy that won the BE ROY, and many expected to jump to the pros after this season, his game has regressed, significantly. He plays with his head down. Give him the ball, and he approaches the possession like it's his job to score the ball himself. Harrison does the same thing. Jordan as well. All of these guys are very talented, but if the other team knows that your game plan is to take all 5 opposing players off the dribble by yourself, they'll have very little trouble stopping you.

Jordan specifically, is incredibly talented. A 6'4 PG. How lucky we thought we were. He can beat the zone some of the time by getting in the lane, and drawing a foul. Most of the time, opposing teams know that's his 1 move. He's excellent in transition. He can bounce it on the move, or he can launch it down court with great accuracy. Branch can, too. But we don't get these opportunities often enough.

We have more top 100 recruits than any BE program. It's shameful that Lavin hasn't figured out a way to establish an identity. For those who think he'll grab top recruits in the 2015 class, I'd like to ask you this: Why would they be coming to STJ to play for Lavin? What kind of basketball would they be signing up for? I still have no idea what kind of offense and defense we play. 

I agree we have no offensive system at all. Our best offense if off a steal from our defense. And our defense is puzzling to say the least, in his first year it was the match up zone, this year we have pressed, zone, man to man and sometimes I dont even think the players know what D they are playing. It's almost like they sometimes let their man get by so they can go for the block . In terms of the talent I think it has been over stated.

It isn't almost like they don't know what defense we're playing, they straight up don't know. I think that's the issue with Obekpa and Sampson. They are the most confused on defense. Obekpa's defense was great last year. What the heck did they do to him this year? My guess: Lavin has a better idea. And he has them often.

Lavin believes if our guys dont know what defense we're in then theres no way the opponent will and somehow that gives us an advantage

desco80

  • *****
  • 5072
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #77 on: January 22, 2014, 02:45:41 PM »

Branch is very talented. He's shown flashes of brilliance, but just about all of them were last season. To be effective, he has to be given a chance to play. Lavin pulls him after one turnover. So, okay, Steve, we have the lowest turnover margin in the conference, but we are dead last in assists. What has that accomplished?


Excellent point Posion.

CC, my argument isn't that they're great shooters.  I know those two guys aren't.  But they do have basketball skills.  They can attack the basket.  Believe it or not, not everybody can.   Dom specifically has a euro step through the lane that most players could never attempt. 
They can create extra possessions, and tip in offensive rebounds that most players can't.
Are they well rounded or perfect? no.    The talent may not be as great as initial recruiting experts made it out to be, but the talent far exceeds 0-5 in the BE and 1-9 against real competition.   

Plenty of teams have poor shooters or talent less than this and they find a way to win games.   There is real talent here CC, overwhelming talent? ehh maybe not.   But certainly .500 or better in conference play type talent.   

jr49

  • ****
  • 755
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #78 on: January 22, 2014, 03:51:21 PM »
Steve was recruiting for a naked program. Not his or the players fault. Guys who should have been playing 8-10-12 minutes a game were playing 30+. What the kids did not see was that they were given a present they did not earn. They were the kings of the campus so they must have already knew it all. Had this team been recruiting these guys to a roster that had a foundation, and after a bad practice did not play, they might have looked at things differently. Steve probably used playing time as his ace card, so he also not blameless. He likes to talk up the kids because he recruits off being the good guy. Right off the bat young players think they are hot s and NBA ready. Steve going to build Sanchez up because he hung around. So did Branch after sitting out, and I'm surprised he did not get the queen for a day treatment. Got to cut it off. This team was hurt by players getting 30 instead of 12. It's to bad they were not recruited to a team with 5 upper class men.   I think things would have turned out differently. My worry is on the recruiting front. I would like to see Steve given more time because starting over all the time is like spinning wheels. No need to call me brainless because I have already been informed. 

boo3

  • *****
  • 6816
Re: Coach lavin
« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2014, 03:57:46 PM »
"No need to call me brainless because I have already been informed. "

 because you don't waste everyone's time regurgitating the same old Lavin needs To(2) go motiff over and over again doesn't make you brainless, it's actually the opposite.  Pay the nutjobs no mind.