Clock_Tower

Love the reference

Gonzaga has been able to maintain its high level following it being Cinderella in the NCAA Tourney - and has kept winning and winning and winning. Keeping its coach and reinvestment of monies earned has been critical but being able to dominate its conference and get a bid every year by qualifying for the Tourney each year has been just as big. Xavier made the NCAA Tourney each year mostly by winning the MCC and then the A-10. Butler dominated the Horizon and got its opportunity each year as well. I recall several years when Butler was simply not a good team... but somehow they won their Conference Tournament and kept the NCAA Tourney streak going. And no one goes back and re-examines how/why a team made the Tourney -- just that they went... so many times ... so many times in a row... George Mason and Davidson had their runs... and recently Chicago Loyola has had theirs. Xavier is no longer winning their conference/conference Tourney each year, but have been good enough to get "at large" bids. Butler is trying as well, has name recognition, continues to receive the prior NCAA Tourney paychecks, has re-invested its monies wisely, has mostly hired good new coaches... but Davidson and George Mason are shells of their past. Chicago Loyola will likely be the same. Nonetheless, I prefer mediocre team/program in the Midwest (and Chicago in particular) than another mediocre team/program on the East Coast. Welcome aboard Loyola!

Another pick up by Georgia. Strong recent teams at Auburn. Possibly the top basketball team next year will be Alabama. Someone forgot to tell these SEC schools that they football schools (Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee and now Alabama) - not basketball schools. Instead, they are using all the football money to improve not only their football programs - stadiums, practice facilities, weight/locker rooms...but also their general campuses (dorms, rec centers, school buildings), improve their student body (GPAs, class rank, SAT/ACT scores) and now men’s basketball programs- coaches, recruiting budgets, facilities... Rich get richer.

+1 to all prior comments. Like the rest of you, I assumed no news was good news. Tragic. Peace.

Agreed upon this year and the affects of COVID. And maybe about Jacobs. Not saying no. At the same time, he had plenty of time and chances prior. A late developer, COVID set back, alot of depth at his position, alot of teammates w similar skills... and yet he has improved every year... just not sure how much higher he can go - especially without playing alot in order to get better. He benefited from better college coaching, learned the speed of the college game, improved his skills and technique, got stronger... but he probably needs to now play, make mistakes, learn from them and have fun while getting better. Don’t see the opportunity here. Good luck at Ball State!

Agreed. This was JGood and French's team - neither deferred to anyone - not Bess, not Roby, not Foreman. Then it became the the Big 3 but Thatch had medical issues. Perkins didn't care and didn't defer to anyone. Even when he first appeared, and played lost that first semester with a deer in a headlight look, he put his shot up again and again and againg and then became our best player/scorer - even in the shadows of JGood and French. Jacobs had opportunity after opportunity - but didn't. Jacobs didn't become a part of any new Big 3. Jacobs did not become our best player/scorer. I thank Jacobs for his hard work, his efforts and wish him nothing but the best.

St Bonaventure has larger guards and we want to win the A10. So it is ok to get lit up by the good teams in your league? And every player has their strengths and weaknesses. And if they did not have weaknesses, they would not be playing for St. Louis University in the A10. But when you lack a perimeter game which results in the other team not guarding you and you also has trouble finishing in the lane, i part bc of your height which cannot change, then yes it is hard to look the other way as to your defense. And yes, when scoring must come from the other 4 players, extra pressure is placed on the other 4. If you want a 3.0 or B average for your academic semester but the best you can do in a given class is a 2.0 or C, then you cannot meet your goal with a 3.0 or B in your other 4 classes. And if you goal is a 3.5 or B+ average, then there need to be quite a few 4.0 or A’s in your other 4 classes. And IMO, this pressure was too much for a youngster like Jimerson. Upper class leadership can handle such pressure but unfortunately our upper class leaders could not shoot from the perimeter either.

So another 2 guard without a strong perimeter shot playing next to a PG without a perimeter shot?

So another 2 guard without a strong perimeter shot playing next to a PG without a perimeter shot.

French improved his first 2 years. Got stronger. Developed a spin move. Developed a 2 or 3 dribble power move. Improved ball handling. Showed us a baby hook.... but then never developed a mid range shot, became predictable and his FTs appeared worse his Junior and Senior year than his Freshman year.i place most of this on the player rather than coach all of which I said the same previously.

Yes. DE became a more well rounded player each year for us - something that French never did. At the same time, I still contend he was not stretch anything - as you suggest. And while he had a mid range game and improved his handles each year, he still did his best work with his back to the basket. And when he had his back to the basket, our 4 (CE) and 5 (RL) were often threats lining up on the 3 point line. And when CE and RL were playing inside or when DE was guarded by a larger, less mobile big, as you mention, DE could take advantage, draw his man out and hit the mid range. And yes, if DE struggled while playing with French, it would be French's fault as opposed to DE's.. Most 6'5" guys who play the 3 are more guard than forward. They are guys can shoot can hit the 3, handle the ball and be more comfortable on the perimeter. Not DE -- he was more a traditional small forward than a wing -- more comfortable with his back to the basket.

TJ ‘s path is through becoming a guard as opposed to a forward. Will he make it? Not sure. Some improvement already though. 2 guard, 3, 4/PF? Thought modern basketball got rid of this and went to putting our your best 5?. I say otherwise. And no, Dwayne Evans was not a stretch 4 or a stretch anything. He was a traditional but undersized forward who played w his back to the basket, who had alot of success for us but who tried to improve his guard skills over his 4 years, who found open space in the lane, who took advantage of odd matchups caused by our lineup and who benefited from the stretching of our stretch 4 (Cody Ellis) and our stretch 5 (Rob Loe). DE did not stretch and IMO he would have struggled playing with similar, non-stretch players like French and JGood.

Roy. Sorry for the delay in responding. As to Hargrove in high school, let me start by saying I never saw him play in high school and I defer to you and others on this Board who actually have gone and watched Hargove and the other players play. My comments are based upon what I have read about him. Please, correct me if I have made the wrong conclusions but I understand that he was coached by multiple coaches, that the coaching he received may not have been the best, that discipline, structure and defense was not emphasized and yet he helped lead his team to a State Championship his Senior year. During that time, he seems to have relied heavily upon his amazing yet raw athletic ability. And while he appeared to have scored from every part of the court, it does not appear he had a high percentage of shooting and while he made 3 pointers in high school, I have yet to read accounts about him being a real perimeter threat, a 3 point shooter. And from reading other posters, they indicated his dribbling was not a strength. And furthermore, he appeared to have been more a small forward than a guard. Now, I have seen Hargrove play here at SLU these past two (2) years. And I agree with Taj that Hargrove is halfway up the mountain with a long way to go. The development, or change, I see in Hargrove is with his defense and embracing of coaching. I see an improvement in fundamentals and footwork. While I did not see him play defense in high school, I did see him play early on at SLU. I saw bad fundamentals, I saw him let his man pass by him to either score or sometimes see him somehow block the shot from behind with his unreal jumping and athletic ability. Now, I see his feet moving and much better technique not letting his guy pass by him easily. Also, I see an improvement on his perimeter shooting, structure and playing without the ball. Whether he is truly better or not, he is certainly more confident and his head is no longer spinning. But to me, the biggest change, and I stress the word I used "appears" to be Hargrove is becoming a guard and a 3 point threat. Sure, his percentage may be increasing, or may not, but I don't put much stock in percentages when the amount of shots is few and when there are so many variables -- was he left open? was the pass good/bad? was the shot off a screen? was the shot off a dribble? was the shot on the break? did he have a hand in his face? was the defense expecting the 3 pointer? So many factors. But to me, if you agree that midrange and perimeter shooting threats were not coming from Yuri, JGood and French, and if those 3 played alot of minutes, then mid range and perimeter had to come from Perkins and someone else. And if Hargrove ended the year having earned playing time over Jjimerson, a guard and a 3 point shooter, then that tells me that Hargrove must have impressed in practice. Of course, I am not at practice but it sure appears that a change is taking place. We will soon find out.

Alot of prior discussions about our players and coaches, player development and how hard it is to change one’s game. Doesn’t appear to have been much development of Watson by Cuonzo Martin or by Watson himself. Not seeing much development of other players in Columbia either. And when I read your comments about Watson being a 6’4”, talented, 4 star guy struggling in high level D1 with limited dribbling and perimeter skills still relying upon what worked in high school, I think of a different 6’4” talented guy of our own who appears to be excelling in high level D1 by changing himself into a completely different player than the successful one he was in high school - Terrance Hargrove.

Apparently 6 of the Cincy basketball players didn't like their head coach either and all went into the transfer portal triggering an investigation despite no allegations of abuse or a rules violation... Article says they won their championship last year with a 20-10 before this year's disaster season...