Clock_Tower

Of course. But I view any production from Thatch post illness as a bonus.  He is beating the odds already. And when you refer to his potential, you do factor in his illness, right?  It’s not like a broken bone in a cast for a few months, right?

Many of us didn't think Thatch would be the same player after being diagnosed with myopathy.  Some weren't sure he would be able to play at all.  Not only did he come back, he had his best season as a Billiken. This is 1) a great comeback story 2) yet more proof that players have developed under Coach Ford. 
If folks want to say that Coach gets no credit for players that develop but all the blame when they don't, then that's really the end of the discussion.

Sorry if I am throwing cold water on your questionable narrative you have been peddling these past few years. Face it. You don’t like Ford, you never like Ford, you didn’t like Crews, RM etc. 
And yes, the false narrative is Ford is such an elite recruiter that even your mother could win with such elite talent that when Ford doesn’t win, it is then bc he cannot develop or coach the elite talent he has. 
Remind me again where French and JGood will be drafted in the first round of the NBA?  And why is Perkins coming back to college if he is a lottery pick?

Yes, but as additional litmus tests. Cannot ignore the existing body of work these past 4 years. 
Can Ford recruit?  I’d say yes based on the talent brought in post Crews - and now with Okoro and Nesbit. 
Can Ford make the Tournament?  He already did and I think we had a good chance last year and were a lock this year but for COVID. 
Can Ford “in game” coach as good x’s and o’s guy? Again, I say yes. Anyone who can win with a 6’6” PF who cannot dribble, make a FT or shoot beyond 5 foot, who has wings who mostly slash/score but not shoot except for 1 Freshman who can shoot but not yet create his own shot, whose best scorer is a thin transfer who gets pushed around in tight half court games and whose PG somehow can still penetrate collapsing defenses which know exactly what we will do based upon what we can do and then make this worse when he doesn’t shoot, doesn’t draw a defender and struggles to finish - preferring to pass- when he penetrates the lane. Yeah, just putting the right combination of 5 guys on the floor is a major tactical decision and proof of being a good “in game” coach - much less substitutions. 

Because of his severe, permanent, life altering medical diagnosis. 

Yes, but as additional litmus tests. Cannot ignore the existing body of work these past 4 years. 
Can Ford recruit?  I’d say yes based on the talent brought in post Crews - and now with Okoro and Nesbit. 
Can Ford make the Tournament?  He already did and I think we had a good chance last year and were a lock this year but for COVID. 
Can Ford “in game” coach as good x’s and o’s guy? Again, I say yes. Anyone who can win with a 6’6” PF who cannot dribble, make a FT or shoot beyond 5 foot, who has wings who mostly slash/score but not shoot except for 1 Freshman who can shoot but not yet create his own shot, whose best scorer is a thin transfer who gets pushed around in tight half court games and whose PG somehow can still penetrate collapsing defenses which know exactly what we will do based upon what we can do and then make this worse when he doesn’t shoot, doesn’t draw a defender and struggles to finish - preferring to pass- when he penetrates the lane. Yeah, just putting the right combination of 5 guys on the floor is a major tactical decision and proof of being a good “in game” coach - much less substitutions. 

More back hand slams on our head coach - Coach Ford. You must really detest him. Not an original thought in that empty head of yours.  Unlike you, I think Ford has done a remarkable job of developing talent.  And while I have the highest respect for RM, he had alot of misses and gave up on players rather than develop them. RM made up for this by showing many, many players the door. Ford doesn’t. Yes, RM developed his own players (BC, KM, Jett, etc) but he did very little with Liddell and Lisch - both of whom would have flourished themselves under Brad rather than RM. 
In fact, I believe Coach Ford has been an exceptional developer of talent as I give him credit for Roby, Bess, Isabel, JGood and Perkins. And while RM would not have recruited the same players that Coach Ford recruited, I have no doubt that RM would have shown the door to Jacobs after 1 year - and yet he developed greatly under Ford. And if we are patient, we will see real development in Yuri, Hargrove and Jimerson - all 3 who are light years ahead of when they first set foot on campus. 
Like an asshxole, everyone has one - an opinion. But just like your ridiculous prediction that Ford will never win an NCAA  Tournament game, you are wrong on Ford’s ability to develop talent and you will soon be proven wrong on Ford’s ability to win an NCAA Tourney game. 
 

More back hand slams on our head coach - Coach Ford. You must really detest him. Not an original thought in that empty head of yours.  Unlike you, I think Ford has done a remarkable job of developing talent.  And while I have the highest respect for RM, he had alot of misses and gave up on players rather than develop them. RM made up for this by showing many, many players the door. Ford doesn’t. Yes, RM developed his own players (BC, KM, Jett, etc) but he did very little with Liddell and Lisch - both of whom would have flourished themselves under Brad rather than RM. 
In fact, I believe Coach Ford has been an exceptional developer of talent as I give him credit for Roby, Bess, Isabel, JGood and Perkins. And while RM would not have recruited the same players that Coach Ford recruited, I have no doubt that RM would have shown the door to Jacobs after 1 year - and yet he developed greatly under Ford. And if we are patient, we will see real development in Yuri, Hargrove and Jimerson - all 3 who are light years ahead of when they first set foot on campus. 
Like an asshxole, everyone has one - an opinion. But just like your ridiculous prediction that Ford will never win an NCAA  Tournament game, you are wrong on Ford’s ability to develop talent and you will soon be proven wrong on Ford’s ability to win an NCAA Tourney game. 
 

More back hand slams on our head coach - Coach Ford. You must really detest him. Not an original thought in that empty head of yours.  Unlike you, I think Ford has done a remarkable job of developing talent.  And while I have the highest respect for RM, he had alot of misses and gave up on players rather than develop them. RM made up for this by showing many, many players the door. Ford doesn’t. Yes, RM developed his own players (BC, KM, Jett, etc) but he did very little with Liddell and Lisch - both of whom would have flourished themselves under Brad rather than RM. 
In fact, I believe Coach Ford has been an exceptional developer of talent as I give him credit for Roby, Bess, Isabel, JGood and Perkins. And while RM would not have recruited the same players that Coach Ford recruited, I have no doubt that RM would have shown the door to Jacobs after 1 year - and yet he developed greatly under Ford. And if we are patient, we will see real development in Yuri, Hargrove and Jimerson - all 3 who are light years ahead of when they first set foot on campus. 
Like an asshxole, everyone has one - an opinion. But just like your ridiculous prediction that Ford will never win an NCAA  Tournament game, you are wrong on Ford’s ability to develop talent and you will soon be proven wrong on Ford’s ability to win an NCAA Tourney game. 
 

Thank you

So if Williams is NOT a combo guard, what is he?  Maybe not the best available combo guard for our program or that is available, but isn't he still a combo guard?
I have no real idea of his skills but the reason I am talking about him, him being a combo guard, etc. is because I know that we have certain A10 teams (VCU) which like to swarm/press and having more than Yuri to handle the ball/dribble when needed is necessary.  Kwamain had McCall and Jett...  Yuri had JGood, Jacobs and Russell last year and now ______?  Williams and Nesbitt and someone else? And we have other teams (Davidson, St. Bona...) which force us into half court contests and having multiple outside shooters and a threat from all 5 spots is important.  Doesn't seem like Williams is afraid to shoot.

Yes. Good and fair point. But in response, a player does what his coach wants him to do. And I believe most players have the skills to pass if required of them. And if he has better handles than most of the rest of our guards, then he has the potential to be a play maker under coach Ford and in a different environment with different expectations. And if you look at the rest of his team, not a single player other than their point guard even had 2 assists per game. Not my style of basketball. 
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/2473

I recall Isabel changing alot, for the better, under Coach Ford. Believe Williams will as well. 
Agree w 3 Star, a combo guard, 2 guard, or guard who can dribble and shoot playing alongside Yuri will be good for Yuri and our team. 
We haven’t had that in awhile. Perkins, Thatch, Hargrove, Jimerson and Strickland could all get minutes if they spent the summer working on their dribbling. 
Have no clue where Nesbit will play. Sounds like a 3 along with others. 

Been so long. Who are the schools again?  U of A, LSU, Kansas

I already love this guy... Can't wait to see him draining threes and alleviating pressure from our professional bucket getter JP.

You may be right. At least with St. Louis recruits. Then again I am not too familiar with his recruiting. Tilmon seems to have carried the team these past 2 years. Also he seemed to get quite of few transfers or non- 4 year guys from all over. Do you know what markets he is trying to focus on.  I would assume the greater STL area and KC?  If so, Gonzaga and UCLA have some guys who could have helped them. 

Jim Roder graduated high school (DeSmet) in 1982 and went to K-State for 2 years before transferring and coming home. Ted Mimlitz SLUH) I believe graduated in 1983 and went to Mizzou for 1 year. Both joined the guys you mentioned as well as 2 other locals - Reditt Hudson (U City) and Dale Renkin (Howell) 

Same. Typical arrogance. Still having issues determining facts vs opinions I see.

Yes, it is always an uphill battle for a non-P5 team. No, I am not disputing stats or acting like our record was something different.  What was different, though, was that the A10 actually had maybe the top team in the country last year - UD.  When you beat the best - the normal rules don’t apply. Drake had a good year AND lost to a quality program - and got in. 
Say what you want about the P5 schools and how their average teams are overrated - but what they have in common is that they actually play the best schools, their RPIs reflect this and they get multiple opportunities to shine. And if they beat the best schools, or lose in double overtime, then the weight of the losses and the optics are far different for them than they are with the rest of the NCAA schools. 

Same. Typical arrogance. Still having issues determining facts vs opinions I see.

Yes, it is always an uphill battle for a non-P5 team. No, I am not disputing stats or acting like our record was something different.  What was different, though, was that the A10 actually had maybe the top team in the country last year - UD.  When you beat the best - the normal rules don’t apply. Drake had a good year AND lost to a quality program - and got in. 
Say what you want about the P5 schools and how their average teams are overrated - but what they have in common is that they actually play the best schools, their RPIs reflect this and they get multiple opportunities to shine. And if they beat the best schools, or lose in double overtime, then the weight of the losses and the optics are far different for them than they are with the rest of the NCAA schools. 

You may be right. At least with St. Louis recruits. Then again I am not too familiar with his recruiting. Tilmon seems to have carried the team these past 2 years. Also he seemed to get quite of few transfers or non- 4 year guys from all over. Do you know what markets he is trying to focus on.  I would assume the greater STL area and KC?  If so, Gonzaga and UCLA have some guys who could have helped them. 

There sure is a lot of inconsistency on this Board.
Either the 34 day mid-season COVID-19 shut down hurt or did not?  I have yet to read a post from anyone who says that we returned to our pre-shut down form afterwards.  Instead, I read posts about (insert any key player's name here) shooting percentage decreased, steals decreased, assists per game decreased and just did not look the same. Objectively, the entire team seemed to struggle, good shooters suddenly "lost" their shot, turnovers increased, rebounding dominance lessened and we lost some key games - several of which blowout losses in which we flat out looked bad.  Stamina issues and tired legs appeared prevalent.  During this stretch, we played some guys more (Hargrove), we went with newcomers (Linssen) over proven veterans (French), we tried to shorten the bench, we went back to the proven veterans, we looked like we turned the corner but then not.  In short, nothing fully worked.  We looked horrible against a bad LaSalle team, an average Dayton team and lost to a depleted and average VCU team.  The same "experts" who crowned Jim Crews "National Coach of the Year" ingnored the real effects of COVID and `1 guy apparently told us that players should resume to 100% after 2 games.  It did not happen, and this promising NCAA Tournament year evaporated right in front of our eyes, just like last year, anger and disappointment mounted and someone had to be blamed.  Surely it could not be something out of our control, such as COVID 19, which took away last year's postseason and I suggest this year's as well.  And look no further than our own conference rival, Dayton, which was to be an NCAA #1 seed last year - and instead did not play an NCAA Tourney game last year or this year.  Assume their coach is on the "hot seat" as well.
No, 40,000 Frenchmen cannot be wrong, and likewise, this Board and its conventional wisdom that this year's team was the most talented team in Billiken history, that this year's roster is proof that Coach Ford is a great recruiter and that this season's lack of success is proof that Coach Ford is a bad "x's and o's" coach, a bad "in game" coach, cannot win an NCAA Tournament game - and even further - Coach Ford won't win an NCAA Tournament game.  Some are the same clowns (A Bomb) spreading such nonsense two years ago.  Instead of responding back with facts or arguments, just more repeated "back hand" shots at Coach Ford and a "bad post" to me no matter what I write - a badge of honor.  Also, there are other posters who never supported Coach Ford in the first place and are now intent on taking "back hand" shots at him and the program whenever the team loses a game, struggles... while acting like the biggest and best Billiken fan.  Fake.
Has Coach Ford made some mistakes? Of course. Should Coach Ford be questioned and second-guessed? Of course.  But again, put me in the small minority who questions this Board's conventional wisdom.  And at the risk of providing any type of response, and being taken out of context to questions such as "which of your children do you like best?", how "great" of a recruiter are you if you recruit a wing who is not a very good shooter and even worse at the free-throw line? How "great" of a recruiter are you If you recruit a 6' 7" forward who cannot shoot beyond 5 foot or make a free-throw?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if your PG these past two years doesn't score, isn't very good at free throws and doesn't draw a defender?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if none of your 3 "bigs" can stretch defenses? How "great" of a recruiter are you if your wings cannot create their own shot off the dribble?   How realistic is it to expect a college coaching staff to "develop" players at the upper D1 level -- meaning to become "a shooter", to become a "scorer", to become a guy "with good handles", to learn how to dribble like a guard?  Despite the wisdom of a respected poster on this Board who tried to remind us that players generally are who they are when they arrive on campus - with a few exceptions, and yet improvement of who they are is probable, this Board's conventional wisdom is that our players are all "elite" , presumably because they chose us over our competition, and that the major deficiencies in their games are the result of proper "player development" by the coaching staff and poor "x's and o's" by the coaching staff.  I say false. 
Has anyone thought about how difficult it is to assemble a team with so many "unique" players?   if "match ups" are so important and critical (and they are) against opposing teams, has anyone thought about "matchups" among our own players.  For instance if we have too many players that bring skill A but not enough players that bring skill B, isn't this a recruiting issue as opposed to a "player development" and an "x's and o's" deficiency?  
I say that a coaching staff can only do so much.  Coaches can improve a player's footwork, spacing, technique, knowledge of the game and put them In a position to succeed.  Also, a coaching staff can put them through a good off-season strength and conditioning programs to increase their size ( or decrease in the case of Bell), strength, shooting range (outside shooting is greatly dependent upon leg strength), quickness, agility and jumping ability; however, there are limits as to what a player can do and not do. Polishing up a player is far different than creating a player. Just because our team has a need for a certain player to possess a certain skill does not mean that the coaching staff failed if the player does not develop this skill.   To say otherwise is false.
And further, who determines which player must have a complete game from day 1 and which player does not? Why is it okay for our Freshman PG to only pass and not score, play defense or rebound and yet our freshman wing not be allowed to only be a three point shooter?   Why, as a Freshman, does he need to create his own shot, shoot off the dribble and shut down the other team's wing?  I too can point to national championship teams who had role players as a three-point specialist.  Maybe because the team lacks someone else to stretch the defense because our "bigs" cannot?  and because our wings can score but cannot shoot? Because our PG has some skills but not others?  And why are we missing such players with such skills?  More lack of player development?  Or "x''s and o's" ?  bad recruiting?  And let's not bring up S2 again.

You are an idiot. Are you really that dumb or is this an act?

Good to see the list of those you read with pictures in lieu of words. 

There sure is a lot of inconsistency on this Board.
Either the 34 day mid-season COVID-19 shut down hurt or did not?  I have yet to read a post from anyone who says that we returned to our pre-shut down form afterwards.  Instead, I read posts about (insert any key player's name here) shooting percentage decreased, steals decreased, assists per game decreased and just did not look the same. Objectively, the entire team seemed to struggle, good shooters suddenly "lost" their shot, turnovers increased, rebounding dominance lessened and we lost some key games - several of which blowout losses in which we flat out looked bad.  Stamina issues and tired legs appeared prevalent.  During this stretch, we played some guys more (Hargrove), we went with newcomers (Linssen) over proven veterans (French), we tried to shorten the bench, we went back to the proven veterans, we looked like we turned the corner but then not.  In short, nothing fully worked.  We looked horrible against a bad LaSalle team, an average Dayton team and lost to a depleted and average VCU team.  The same "experts" who crowned Jim Crews "National Coach of the Year" ingnored the real effects of COVID and `1 guy apparently told us that players should resume to 100% after 2 games.  It did not happen, and this promising NCAA Tournament year evaporated right in front of our eyes, just like last year, anger and disappointment mounted and someone had to be blamed.  Surely it could not be something out of our control, such as COVID 19, which took away last year's postseason and I suggest this year's as well.  And look no further than our own conference rival, Dayton, which was to be an NCAA #1 seed last year - and instead did not play an NCAA Tourney game last year or this year.  Assume their coach is on the "hot seat" as well.
No, 40,000 Frenchmen cannot be wrong, and likewise, this Board and its conventional wisdom that this year's team was the most talented team in Billiken history, that this year's roster is proof that Coach Ford is a great recruiter and that this season's lack of success is proof that Coach Ford is a bad "x's and o's" coach, a bad "in game" coach, cannot win an NCAA Tournament game - and even further - Coach Ford won't win an NCAA Tournament game.  Some are the same clowns (A Bomb) spreading such nonsense two years ago.  Instead of responding back with facts or arguments, just more repeated "back hand" shots at Coach Ford and a "bad post" to me no matter what I write - a badge of honor.  Also, there are other posters who never supported Coach Ford in the first place and are now intent on taking "back hand" shots at him and the program whenever the team loses a game, struggles... while acting like the biggest and best Billiken fan.  Fake.
Has Coach Ford made some mistakes? Of course. Should Coach Ford be questioned and second-guessed? Of course.  But again, put me in the small minority who questions this Board's conventional wisdom.  And at the risk of providing any type of response, and being taken out of context to questions such as "which of your children do you like best?", how "great" of a recruiter are you if you recruit a wing who is not a very good shooter and even worse at the free-throw line? How "great" of a recruiter are you If you recruit a 6' 7" forward who cannot shoot beyond 5 foot or make a free-throw?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if your PG these past two years doesn't score, isn't very good at free throws and doesn't draw a defender?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if none of your 3 "bigs" can stretch defenses? How "great" of a recruiter are you if your wings cannot create their own shot off the dribble?   How realistic is it to expect a college coaching staff to "develop" players at the upper D1 level -- meaning to become "a shooter", to become a "scorer", to become a guy "with good handles", to learn how to dribble like a guard?  Despite the wisdom of a respected poster on this Board who tried to remind us that players generally are who they are when they arrive on campus - with a few exceptions, and yet improvement of who they are is probable, this Board's conventional wisdom is that our players are all "elite" , presumably because they chose us over our competition, and that the major deficiencies in their games are the result of proper "player development" by the coaching staff and poor "x's and o's" by the coaching staff.  I say false. 
Has anyone thought about how difficult it is to assemble a team with so many "unique" players?   if "match ups" are so important and critical (and they are) against opposing teams, has anyone thought about "matchups" among our own players.  For instance if we have too many players that bring skill A but not enough players that bring skill B, isn't this a recruiting issue as opposed to a "player development" and an "x's and o's" deficiency?  
I say that a coaching staff can only do so much.  Coaches can improve a player's footwork, spacing, technique, knowledge of the game and put them In a position to succeed.  Also, a coaching staff can put them through a good off-season strength and conditioning programs to increase their size ( or decrease in the case of Bell), strength, shooting range (outside shooting is greatly dependent upon leg strength), quickness, agility and jumping ability; however, there are limits as to what a player can do and not do. Polishing up a player is far different than creating a player. Just because our team has a need for a certain player to possess a certain skill does not mean that the coaching staff failed if the player does not develop this skill.   To say otherwise is false.
And further, who determines which player must have a complete game from day 1 and which player does not? Why is it okay for our Freshman PG to only pass and not score, play defense or rebound and yet our freshman wing not be allowed to only be a three point shooter?   Why, as a Freshman, does he need to create his own shot, shoot off the dribble and shut down the other team's wing?  I too can point to national championship teams who had role players as a three-point specialist.  Maybe because the team lacks someone else to stretch the defense because our "bigs" cannot?  and because our wings can score but cannot shoot? Because our PG has some skills but not others?  And why are we missing such players with such skills?  More lack of player development?  Or "x''s and o's" ?  bad recruiting?  And let's not bring up S2 again.

There sure is a lot of inconsistency on this Board.
Either the 34 day mid-season COVID-19 shut down hurt or did not?  I have yet to read a post from anyone who says that we returned to our pre-shut down form afterwards.  Instead, I read posts about (insert any key player's name here) shooting percentage decreased, steals decreased, assists per game decreased and just did not look the same. Objectively, the entire team seemed to struggle, good shooters suddenly "lost" their shot, turnovers increased, rebounding dominance lessened and we lost some key games - several of which blowout losses in which we flat out looked bad.  Stamina issues and tired legs appeared prevalent.  During this stretch, we played some guys more (Hargrove), we went with newcomers (Linssen) over proven veterans (French), we tried to shorten the bench, we went back to the proven veterans, we looked like we turned the corner but then not.  In short, nothing fully worked.  We looked horrible against a bad LaSalle team, an average Dayton team and lost to a depleted and average VCU team.  The same "experts" who crowned Jim Crews "National Coach of the Year" ingnored the real effects of COVID and `1 guy apparently told us that players should resume to 100% after 2 games.  It did not happen, and this promising NCAA Tournament year evaporated right in front of our eyes, just like last year, anger and disappointment mounted and someone had to be blamed.  Surely it could not be something out of our control, such as COVID 19, which took away last year's postseason and I suggest this year's as well.  And look no further than our own conference rival, Dayton, which was to be an NCAA #1 seed last year - and instead did not play an NCAA Tourney game last year or this year.  Assume their coach is on the "hot seat" as well.
No, 40,000 Frenchmen cannot be wrong, and likewise, this Board and its conventional wisdom that this year's team was the most talented team in Billiken history, that this year's roster is proof that Coach Ford is a great recruiter and that this season's lack of success is proof that Coach Ford is a bad "x's and o's" coach, a bad "in game" coach, cannot win an NCAA Tournament game - and even further - Coach Ford won't win an NCAA Tournament game.  Some are the same clowns (A Bomb) spreading such nonsense two years ago.  Instead of responding back with facts or arguments, just more repeated "back hand" shots at Coach Ford and a "bad post" to me no matter what I write - a badge of honor.  Also, there are other posters who never supported Coach Ford in the first place and are now intent on taking "back hand" shots at him and the program whenever the team loses a game, struggles... while acting like the biggest and best Billiken fan.  Fake.
Has Coach Ford made some mistakes? Of course. Should Coach Ford be questioned and second-guessed? Of course.  But again, put me in the small minority who questions this Board's conventional wisdom.  And at the risk of providing any type of response, and being taken out of context to questions such as "which of your children do you like best?", how "great" of a recruiter are you if you recruit a wing who is not a very good shooter and even worse at the free-throw line? How "great" of a recruiter are you If you recruit a 6' 7" forward who cannot shoot beyond 5 foot or make a free-throw?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if your PG these past two years doesn't score, isn't very good at free throws and doesn't draw a defender?  How "great" of a recruiter are you if none of your 3 "bigs" can stretch defenses? How "great" of a recruiter are you if your wings cannot create their own shot off the dribble?   How realistic is it to expect a college coaching staff to "develop" players at the upper D1 level -- meaning to become "a shooter", to become a "scorer", to become a guy "with good handles", to learn how to dribble like a guard?  Despite the wisdom of a respected poster on this Board who tried to remind us that players generally are who they are when they arrive on campus - with a few exceptions, and yet improvement of who they are is probable, this Board's conventional wisdom is that our players are all "elite" , presumably because they chose us over our competition, and that the major deficiencies in their games are the result of proper "player development" by the coaching staff and poor "x's and o's" by the coaching staff.  I say false. 
Has anyone thought about how difficult it is to assemble a team with so many "unique" players?   if "match ups" are so important and critical (and they are) against opposing teams, has anyone thought about "matchups" among our own players.  For instance if we have too many players that bring skill A but not enough players that bring skill B, isn't this a recruiting issue as opposed to a "player development" and an "x's and o's" deficiency?  
I say that a coaching staff can only do so much.  Coaches can improve a player's footwork, spacing, technique, knowledge of the game and put them In a position to succeed.  Also, a coaching staff can put them through a good off-season strength and conditioning programs to increase their size ( or decrease in the case of Bell), strength, shooting range (outside shooting is greatly dependent upon leg strength), quickness, agility and jumping ability; however, there are limits as to what a player can do and not do. Polishing up a player is far different than creating a player. Just because our team has a need for a certain player to possess a certain skill does not mean that the coaching staff failed if the player does not develop this skill.   To say otherwise is false.
And further, who determines which player must have a complete game from day 1 and which player does not? Why is it okay for our Freshman PG to only pass and not score, play defense or rebound and yet our freshman wing not be allowed to only be a three point shooter?   Why, as a Freshman, does he need to create his own shot, shoot off the dribble and shut down the other team's wing?  I too can point to national championship teams who had role players as a three-point specialist.  Maybe because the team lacks someone else to stretch the defense because our "bigs" cannot?  and because our wings can score but cannot shoot? Because our PG has some skills but not others?  And why are we missing such players with such skills?  More lack of player development?  Or "x''s and o's" ?  bad recruiting?  And let's not bring up S2 again.