Youth And Development

[Pistol]

The conversation after the Fordham loss really got me thinking more about a couple related narratives that I thought deserved a new topic: first, that our losses can be explained and excused by the amount of freshmen on the roster, and second, that these losses are fine this season because we will be much better with one (then two, then three) years of experience for this class.

These are common lines of thinking lately, and appear more widely accepted than rejected. I'll take what seems to be the minority position and reject both of these premises, or at least mostly reject both because I don't think they can be 100% false (or true). I'll address each individually:

1. A Freshman-Heavy Roster is not a Valid Excuse for Losing. This is especially true in the current state of NCAA basketball, and even more true based on our schedule. I won't bother discussing Kentucky, which seems to be operating in its own system these days, but it's safe to say that freshmen are making an impact at programs throughout D-I. Look at some of our opponents so far this season:

SIUC (W, 62-59) - 6 freshmen, 4 of whom played at SLU and 3 of whom played significant minutes. Narrow win, ugly at times, though I'd say we weren't necessarily outplayed.

South Dakota State (L, 62-55) - 5 freshmen, none of whom started, but one of whom was the key player - Reed Tellinghausen - burying us with his shooting.

UT-Pan Am (W, 75-69) - 5 freshmen, 4 of whom played and one who started and dominated our bigs for 18 and 10 (Kimasa), keeping it closer than it should've been.

Vermont (W, 58-55) - 7 freshmen. 6 of them played on a roster that had 9 healthy guys that day, and they outplayed a very lucky SLU team that day.

Vanderbilt (L, 70-55) - 6 freshmen. The most painful part here was watching 2 guys SLU recruited start and dominate. Vandy also started a third freshman and brought two more off the bench for big minutes.

GW (L, 75-72) - 5 freshmen. Only 3 played, all off the bench, but once again we got torched by one - Watanabe.

Davidson (L, 89-54) - 6 freshmen. 2 started and the rest got in off the bench.

Fordham (L, 83-65) - 8 freshmen. 4 played and 2 started on a team that went 8 deep. The starting freshmen scored 44 points.

Let's also not forget that Dayton has 9 scholarship players, Wichita State rosters 8 freshmen (though they obviously aren't relied on yet), and we've played other teams that rely on underclassmen. Not to mention - our strength of schedule is really, really poor. Good freshmen shouldn't have a problem with a lot of the opponents that have beaten us or given us fits. Yes, young and inexperienced teams will take their lumps - I knew we'd have some head-scratching losses, ugly games, and even a blowout or two - but when so many other teams are young and inexperienced, it underlines the point that talent wins above all else.

Vermont, Vandy, and Fordham in particular are the ones that brought an uncomfortable fact to my attention - our freshman class isn't as good as any of theirs. There's no doubt in my mind as it stands right now, so I can only question their relative ceilings. Which brings me to the second point.

2. Will SLU's Freshman Class Pan Out? The common refrain from the optimists (what was left of them) during and after the Fordham game was, "Well, Pecora's a decent recruiter but doesn't develop anyone, so we're going to get back to dominating them next season." What this implies is that Crews is a good coach of talent and that our guys will have a higher upward trajectory than theirs. There's just one big problem...

Who has Crews actually coached up?

He inherited a very, very good roster in 2012-2013. Ellis, Mitchell, and Remekun were seniors. McCall, Loe, Jett, and Evans already were who they were going to be. So of the rest of the guys he's coached, who have we seen big improvement from? Manning? McBroom? Glaze? Lancona? Agbeko? Crawford? He doesn't seem to be maximizing the potential of his transfers, either - Yacoubou and Barnett (and McBroom) have been more disappointing than not.

It's his third full season, so I understand it's not a super long time, but I simply haven't seen any evidence that he or his staff are developing the talent they bring in. Which makes me more than a little pessimistic about this current 6-man crop based on this track record and the way this season is going.

I think Bartley-Roby-Gillmann-Yarbrough has the potential to be (and should be) a solid core. But with the sophomore class looking like a bust, a lot of question marks about the 2015 class, and question marks about the other pieces on the roster moving forward - Jolly, Reynolds, Glaze - I have a hard time seeing us return to the NCAA Tournament again in the foreseeable future.

I hope they prove me wrong.

[RiseAndGrind]

This is depressingly accurate.

[slufan13]

Youth is an excuse, but it's not an excuse for everything like some want it to be.

Point #2 is the most interesting and important question right now.

We're not any good this year. Whatever. We're worse than I expected (not necessarily record, but just what I see on the court), but we were never going to be that good.

But even those who want to give Crews all the credit for the last 2 years have no idea if Crews can coach this group up. They don't have to become as good as the Jett/Evans class, but they also need to have more than average improvement.

Out of the returnees (Manning, McBroom, Crawford, Lancona, and Agbeko), Crawford is the only one who has shown noticeable improvement. Agbeko gets a slight pass for being hurt, but you wonder when/if he'll put it together. That's not much to work with. Even if the frosh greatly improve from this year to next, we still need more from these other guys especially since right now it doesn't look like we have a savior on the way next year.

The pieces and potential are there for a good core from the freshmen. But potential doesn't win anything.

[hsmith19]

I would hardly say Watanabe "torched" us. He hit a couple well-timed three pointers out of six or seven total shots, and hit some free throws. And he clearly fouled Crawford on the last "block" that he has since been bragging about in interviews. And, more importantly, that was a team most expected to contend for the A-10 title. That was hardly a bunch of green freshmen not expected to go anywhere. I really can't find any valid point that stems from pretending GW is somehow in the same situation as our team this year just because they played three freshmen off the bench. Most of the rest of those non-conference clunkers really aren't in "rebuilding" mode either and aren't even coming off of success to rebuild from. We all know that we are in bad shape right now, but I don't see any reason in the above characterization of the season to believe this year's freshmen WON'T or CAN'T improve. And "making an impact?" What are you arguing here? Our freshmen haven't just made an impact; they have been nearly our entire team. So what if other non-elite programs have freshmen making an impact too? Of all the complaints to make about this season, saying our freshmen aren't making enough of an impact is probably the most unfounded.

I also don't follow the logic in assigning Crews blame for transfers being "disappointments." 1) Barnett was coached for two years by Majerus and played (a little) for him one year. He did not turn out as good at the A-10 level as Majerus claimed he would in interviews. He just wasn't as good a shooter as everyone hoped. 2) I still think everyone is way too down on Yacoubou. Unlike Barnett and McBroom, he isn't coming off seasons as a starter and go-to guy for small conference teams. He played sparingly for two years at Nova and then sat out a year. And he's still our best or second best overall player in spite of not being the shooter we hoped he would be either. 3) How has McBroom been disappointing? Even after seeing his playing time cut and after being scouted much better by conference opponents, he is still shooting 45% from three points and leading the team in assists. Did anyone really expect more than this from a 5'9" (in platform shoes) guard from an MAC school? There may be good reasons for questioning Crews' ability to "coach up" players (beyond just saying he's not Rick Majerus). But I just don't think this is a very compelling argument.

I know this thread is not intended this way, but I really think the loss to Fordham and the fizzle last night is causing some overreaction here. I don't think that should be enough to wipe away the promise shown in games like the near miss to VCU. I am still inclined to agree with the Wiz that the general arc of the season is toward progress. People keep repeating that they expected some head-scratching duds from this team, but they don't always act like it.

[Taj79]

Amen, Pistol Pete, amen.

[slufanskip]

Just keep in mind besides 6 frosh we have 4 soph's that barely played last year. Our upper classmen are really 1 decent player in Ash who is coming off a year layoff and Manning plus McBroom he is realistically a 15-20 mpg bench option. So these frosh do not have a lot of help

[RiseAndGrind]

I would hardly say Watanabe "torched" us. He hit a couple well-timed three pointers out of six or seven total shots, and hit some free throws. And he clearly fouled Crawford on the last "block" that he has since been bragging about in interviews. And, more importantly, that was a team most expected to contend for the A-10 title. That was hardly a bunch of green freshmen not expected to go anywhere. I really can't find any valid point that stems from pretending GW is somehow in the same situation as our team this year just because they played three freshmen off the bench. Most of the rest of those non-conference clunkers really aren't in "rebuilding" mode either and aren't even coming off of success to rebuild from. We all know that we are in bad shape right now, but I don't see any reason in the above characterization of the season to believe this year's freshmen WON'T or CAN'T improve.

I also don't follow the logic in assigning Crews blame for transfers being "disappointments." 1) Barnett was coached for two years by Majerus and played (a little) for him one year. He did not turn out as good at the A-10 level as Majerus claimed he would in interviews. He just wasn't as good a shooter as everyone hoped. 2) I still think everyone is way too down on Yacoubou. Unlike Barnett and McBroom, he isn't coming off seasons as a starter and go-to guy for small conference teams. He played sparingly for two years at Nova and then sat out a year. And he's still our best or second best overall player in spite of not being the shooter we hoped we would be either. 3) How has McBroom been disappointed? Even after seeing his playing time cut and after being scouted much better by conference opponents, he is still shooting 45% from three points and leading the team in assists. Did anyone really expect more than this from a 5'9" (in platform shoes) guard from an MAC school? There may be good reasons for questioning Crews' ability to "coach up" players (beyond just saying he's not Rick Majerus). But I just don't think this is a very compelling argument.

I know this thread is not intended this way, but I really think the loss to Fordham and the fizzle last night is causing some overreaction here. I don't think that should be enough to wipe away the promise shown in games like the near miss to VCU. I am still inclined to agree with the Wiz that the general arc of the season is toward progress. People keep repeating that they expected some head-scratching duds from this team, but they don't always act like it.

Because he's apparently now the last guy off the bench?

Off topic: As much as Majerus saved this program, his sickness/missed recruits the last couple of years really left this program in a deep hole.

[DeSmetBilliken]

Some good points here. I've somewhat forgotten the growing pains associated with having a young team 4-5 years ago, but I don't remember those teams having this much of a struggle. Maybe in 2010-11, but in 2009-10, we had a team entirely of freshmen and sophomores, and they were a top 4 team in the A-10, had some people wondering if an at-large NCAA bid could happen, and eventually had that run in the CBI.

Not to say "I told you so", because it's way too early for that, and I hope I never get to say it on this issue, but the scenario in #2 is what my concerns were in making Crews the head coach 2 years ago. I complained about it here, but eventually came to the realization that due to Crews' success as the interim coach, it would be darn near impossible to hire someone else and look credible in doing so. Basically you had to elevate him to the head coach and just hope his success wasn't mostly attributable to being handed a team that had been so well schooled by Majerus that they were essentially on auto-pilot.

Crews impressed me with his ability to land recruits, and that those recruits appeared to bring some intriguing things to the table. I still think the freshmen and sophomores can be a good core of players, but as was mentioned, will they develop? This is probably obvious, but the development of the freshmen is the difference between this team being rather bad or good in the next few years. If they haven't already, these freshmen need to figure out that the program is in their hands, especially once this season is over. I don't know how the Jett, Evans, McCall, and Loe class went about taking ownership in the program, but whatever they did worked. Same with Mitchell, Ellis, Conklin, etc.

I hope this is just a matter of the younger players adjusting to playing in college. I think that most of this is the guys panicking and revrting back to things that worked for them in high school. Maybe Yabrough, Roby, and Bartley were able to drive on high school players at will, but they've shown that they can't do that yet in college. As I posted last night, the best thing about freshmen is that they eventually become sophomores.

[Pistol]

Out of the returnees (Manning, McBroom, Crawford, Lancona, and Agbeko), Crawford is the only one who has shown noticeable improvement.

I can't decide how much of this is improvement and how much is simply a result of playing more minutes. Crawford didn't get in a whole lot last season, but I really liked what I saw in limited floor time.

[Taj79]

Props, hwaldmansmith, props. The debate is valid and can only be resolved in the future. Two sides to every issue ......

[Pistol]

DeSmet, you reminded me of another point I keep seeing people make but that I don't think applies (not your point, but you happened to be a trigger when you mentioned it): This is not the same season or the same team as 2010-2011. I'm stealing a thought from TheChosenOne from an offline conversation, but it's lazy to make that specific analogy with the point that we'll be just fine next season because we're having a hiccup like that one.

Our two best players were lost at the 11th hour that season. There is no Kwamain Mitchell (a talented, fearless junior PG and team leader) waiting in the wings for 2015-2016. There is no Brian Conklin, no Cody Ellis, and no Cory Remekun. I like that freshman core of four, but there isn't much to supplement it with at this point.

[hsmith19]

Because he's apparently now the last guy off the bench?

I don't get McBroom's minutes being cut to 8 or 10 once every week or two either. Maybe something is going on in practice, because he played a solid 30+ minutes at VCU, only to have Crews revert back to the same pattern with his playing time.

But I also remember people saying early in the season (back when McBroom was our leading scorer) that he deserved to lose his starting spot and playing time because he was a bull hog, not a true point guard, a midget, and tweeted too many topless selfies. I'm not accusing Pistol specifically of saying those things (if he took a position on the issue at the time I don't remember it), but that does make me a little surprised to now hear people saying he's a disappointment because he's (sometimes) only being used as a complementary guy off the bench.

[slufan13]

You can't point to a couple good performances or bad performances and use those as a good indicator of our team.

We're bottomed out right now in my opinion. Nowhere to go but up. But we won't know until next year at the earliest, how high we can get.

[Pistol]

@hsmith19 - We see things much differently.

We thought McBroom would be the PG, leader, and one of the leading scorers this season. Instead, he's proven to be an undersized SG who can't run the offense and has been buried on the bench in many games.

Yacoubou was the New York HS player of the year as a senior. Villanova wasn't a good fit, but he's been really inconsistent here.

Barnett was billed as a pure shooter and scorer. His percentages and averages tell another story.

Maybe 'torched' is too strong a word for Watanabe. But his shots were incredibly well-timed and we had no answer for him. GW and a few others I list don't rely on their freshmen to the degree we do, but my point was to highlight the teams where freshmen are contributing significantly in minutes and production.

And finally- in no way, shape, or form is my post an overreaction to Fordham and Dayton. I've been shaping this and mulling it over for a long time. Fordham just happened the game that inspired me to mold it into something cohesive and put it out there (as their two freshmen starters legitimately torched us, and then some).

[hsmith19]

DeSmet, you reminded me of another point I keep seeing people make but that I don't think applies (not your point, but you happened to be a trigger when you mentioned it): This is not the same season or the same team as 2010-2011. I'm stealing a thought from TheChosenOne from an offline conversation, but it's lazy to make that specific analogy with the point that we'll be just fine next season because we're having a hiccup like that one.

Our two best players were lost at the 11th hour that season. There is no Kwamain Mitchell (a talented, fearless junior PG and team leader) waiting in the wings for 2015-2016. There is no Brian Conklin, no Cody Ellis, and no Cory Remekun. I like that freshman core of four, but there isn't much to supplement it with at this point.

Okay, trying really hard not to be an a-hole here, but...

It's been at least 10 minutes since someone posted this on here. I swear, the 2010 retort is moving beyond the level of straw man argument to Derek Jeter "so-overrated-it's-underrated" territory. People just can't stop talking about how we aren't talking enough about how the 2010 team A) faced different circumstances, played a tougher schedule, C) had a better coach, and D) had more talented freshmen (still not sure how people are so sure on this last point, but I assume it's because they borrowed Doc Brown's Delorean).

We all know the 2010 team's situation was different. The people who bring up 2010 to make a point about what this team faces going forward are not ignoring any of the above. It's all occurred to us before, and it's all been pointed out to us before on this message board. I promise.

[slufan13]

This board has been, is now, and always will be quick to overreact. I know I'm a big culprit there. But it's also naive to chalk up everything to youth or to say we're not as bad as we look. Almost every computer ranking has us ranked 230+. That puts us in the bottom third of all teams. No matter how much we lose, I don't think we should ever be there when you consider how recent success, facilities, etc.

Still, I think the pieces are in place to be good. We may never reach the success we've had over the last 3 years, but we won't be this bad again.

[DeSmetBilliken]

DeSmet, you reminded me of another point I keep seeing people make but that I don't think applies (not your point, but you happened to be a trigger when you mentioned it): This is not the same season or the same team as 2010-2011. I'm stealing a thought from TheChosenOne from an offline conversation, but it's lazy to make that specific analogy with the point that we'll be just fine next season because we're having a hiccup like that one.

Our two best players were lost at the 11th hour that season. There is no Kwamain Mitchell (a talented, fearless junior PG and team leader) waiting in the wings for 2015-2016. There is no Brian Conklin, no Cody Ellis, and no Cory Remekun. I like that freshman core of four, but there isn't much to supplement it with at this point.

Agreed. I've made the same comment myself. That's exactly why I think that some people are setting themselves up for huge disappointment if they think that this season = 2010-11 and therefore, next season will = 2011-12, with the NCAA berth. As you said, this team doesn't have Kwamain Mitchell returning next year or Cody Ellis playing healthy for the first time in his career. I suppose a player on this current team could have the famous "Conklin Summer", but that may even be unlikely.

[hsmith19]

This board has been, is now, and always will be quick to overreact. I know I'm a big culprit there. But it's also naive to chalk up everything to youth or to say we're not as bad as we look. Almost every computer ranking has us ranked 230+. That puts us in the bottom third of all teams. No matter how much we lose, I don't think we should ever be there when you consider how recent success, facilities, etc.

Still, I think the pieces are in place to be good. We may never reach the success we've had over the last 3 years, but we won't be this bad again.

I agree you never want it to happen to you, but teams with recent success and good facilities and stuff do have seasons in the crapper. I'm a little surprised what's going on 120 miles to the west isn't helping soothe the frustration more. Yeah, I know that's a different situation as well, but there are some similarities too (one coach died; one coach left for the bright lights of Tulsa). Their rankings aren't as bad, but it's looking like they might not win another game all season, and if so they will be lucky to end up in the top 200 RPI too, and that's after playing one of the toughest schedules in the nation by most metrics.

For the people who were pondering earlier in the year how a team in rebuilding mode should schedule (is it better to win a few more games against terrible opponents or have a truly godawful record against decent opponents?), take a look at Mizzou and ask yourself if you'd really feel better about getting to play more elite teams and even beating a good opponent or two when you end up with a season like they're having. I don't think beating Valpo or getting the honor of being crushed by Oklahoma and Arizona does much to assuage the embarrassment of still losing to UMKC, personally.

[Bills By 40]

I don't get McBroom's minutes being cut to 8 or 10 once every week or two either. Maybe something is going on in practice, because he played a solid 30+ minutes at VCU, only to have Crews revert back to the same pattern with his playing time.

But I also remember people saying early in the season (back when McBroom was our leading scorer) that he deserved to lose his starting spot and playing time because he was a bull hog, not a true point guard, a midget, and tweeted too many topless selfies. I'm not accusing Pistol specifically of saying those things (if he took a position on the issue at the time I don't remember it), but that does make me a little surprised to now hear people saying he's a disappointment because he's (sometimes) only being used as a complementary guy off the bench.

After last night he should definitely absorb some of Sharkus' minutes, and he's god awful on any media outlet. I unfollowed him on everything, and this is coming from someone who is also god awful on the internet. He has no self-awareness it seems.

but we won't be this bad again.

+10

[ACE]

One area where we have gotten a lot better is on the defensive end. We can't compare to team's from the recent past when it comes to defense - we still give up too many good looks from 3 and rebound poorly, but the defense is a LOT better. In fact, the defense has been good enough to put us into position to win some games. Our offense is dreadful.

[kmbilliken]

Because he's apparently now the last guy off the bench?

Off topic: As much as Majerus saved this program, his sickness/missed recruits the last couple of years really left this program in a deep hole.

True on Majerus, but well worth the trade-off. Majerus showed us what we could be. Now we just have to figure out how to get back there. Majerus always said of his first class, we'll be good when these guys are juniors. That's the most we can hope for here.

Player development is the key, but how much of that is on the player? It's up to the players to work over the off season to improve. The coaching staff needs to point out the areas to work on, but it's up to the player to do the work necessary to improve. Crews has shown he can coach good players. Can the players improve enough to be difference makers? That will depend on each player's work ethic. A good example is a couple of players under Grawer, Douglas and Bonner. I always thought Douglas was best the second semester of his freshman year. He was good, but Grawer would say he regressed every summer and they would have to start over and work on the same things. Bonner was legendary for his off season work and improved every year. Hopefully these guys are all Bonners when it comes to work ethic, but that would be a surprise to hit 6 out of 6.

[SLU_Nick]

Let's not forget either that for some reason Dayton was missing WIDE open threes to the tune of 2/13 I believe at one time. These were not contested in the least. We were just lucky. If Dayton would have shot 30% from three we would have lost by 15-20.

I've said this before but Tatum would be one special kid to come here over the sure thing.

[Deutschkind]

Agreed. I've made the same comment myself. That's exactly why I think that some people are setting themselves up for huge disappointment if they think that this season = 2010-11 and therefore, next season will = 2011-12, with the NCAA berth. As you said, this team doesn't have Kwamain Mitchell returning next year or Cody Ellis playing healthy for the first time in his career. I suppose a player on this current team could have the famous "Conklin Summer", but that may even be unlikely.

The whole freshman class is going to have a Conklin Summer. Except for Roby who's obviously going to transfer to make room for Grandy to come back.

[hsmith19]

Let's not forget either that for some reason Dayton was missing WIDE open threes to the tune of 2/13 I believe at one time. These were not contested in the least. We were just lucky. If Dayton would have shot 30% from three we would have lost by 15-20.

I've said this before but Tatum would be one special kid to come here over the sure thing.

Beyond Davis they are not a good three point shooting team. Sibert is basically Cody Ellis when it comes to three point shooting (other aspects of their game and hair color notwithstanding).

If we had shot our usual 34% instead of 1-11, we would have won the game, so it's always tough to put too much stock in these scenarios.

[SLU_Nick]

Beyond Davis they are not a good three point shooting team. Sibert is basically Cody Ellis when it comes to three point shooting (other aspects of their game and hair color notwithstanding).

If we had shot our usual 34% instead of 1-11, we would have won the game, so it's always tough to put too much stock in these scenarios.

Normally I agree with this, but they were missing wide open. Gillman missed wide open late in the 2nd half...other than that, All the bills' threes were contested or rushed at the end of the shot clock.