Reggie Agbeko

[WVBilliken]

Jolly being a year removed from HS, will hopefully be able to contribute right away.

Would be nice for the team to be able to take a foreign trip next summer like they did to Canada a few years ago assuming the new frosh can participate. That would be invaluable extra practice for the 2014-15 team.

[Tonka]

Jolly being a year removed from HS, will hopefully be able to contribute right away.

Would be nice for the team to be able to take a foreign trip next summer like they did to Canada a few years ago assuming the new frosh can participate. That would be invaluable extra practice for the 2014-15 team.

I hope you are right, but I have serious concerns with Manning, Jolly, and Gilmann. The thing Manning brings is experience over the other two. Like many other questions for next years team, our big situation is very concerning. We all thought Glaze had a Conklin summer and early indications of his play was that he did. He has since not shown a ton. He and Manning are going to need to have big summers.

In regards to my earlier post, I know there are concerns about Glaze and Manning and their fouls. Once again though, you can only really judge a player and their fouling based on per minute performance when you have players not seeing a ton of time.

If you look at stats based on 40 minutes of play, Manning is the worst on the team at 5.8 fouls. That is definitely a legitimate concern, but Lancona is second at 4.9 fouls, Loe at 4.2, Glaze at 4.1, and Agbeko at 3.8. So, to think Lancona and Agbeko are going to be much better is pure speculation.

[slu72]

I want a JUCO big. I don't want to see a 3 playing 4. 6'8" 245 built like an M1 tank and as quick as an F35. Is that asking too much?

[slufan13]

I want a JUCO big. I don't want to see a 3 playing 4. 6'8" 245 built like an M1 tank and as quick as an F35. Is that asking too much?

No I think we should be able to find that easily. Lots of those types of guys out there.

[Clock_Tower]

Wow. A lot of short term memory problems in this thread. In response:

1. I like DE as much as anyone but he simply has no guard skills and cannot play the 3. Forget about those 15 and 18 footers from last year. With a stretch 4 (CE) and 5 (RL), DE exploited the other team's 3, and without/pressure/being left open, sure DE made a few baskets. If other team's switched and put their larger 4 on DE, then it wasn't DE burning him from the perimeter as much as it was CE posting up their 3 down low. This year, we tried a host of players at the 4 and all that it did was clog the lane for DE and render him less effective than he is now. We lack a stretch 4 but we also lack enough stretch (outside shooting) from our 1, 2 and 3 as well. A not so effective 3 pointer shooter and average defender (JB) does not make a good pairing with an undersized, interior only skill set forward (DE). We are getting killed on defense at both the 3 and the 4.

2. DE is in foul trouble and cannot stop the other team's 6"8" athletes b/c he is too small, the other teams now know this and they are targeting/game planning to do this against DE. If JB were to hit 3 to 4 three (3) pointers each game, then other team's wouldn't be able to take such liberties. Frankly, DE is doing the best he can, he may also be injured, but his foul trouble is b/c he is struggling to stop the other side!!

3. At some point, we cannot keep blaming our starting Seniors but have to ask, why is GG not challenging DE for playing time at the 4? Why is JM not stepping up his game to play the 4 at times? or to allow RL to occasionally (not always) play the 4 and let JM play the 5? I knew replacing CE would be tough but I'd suggest that neither GG nor JM have stepped up to replace CR's minutes!! We aren't trying to replace DE this year -- just to help him, to take some pressure off, to get some rebounds, to switch and handle the other team's 4 (and these 4's/power forwards are nowhere close to Lebron James or Kevin Durrant, are not even the other team's best players but we are sure making them into stars with season/career highs when they play us!!).

4. I guess we have all mostly come to grips that GG and JM are not really big-time contributors and therefore we shouldn't have given them so much time and opportunity. Instead, we should have sat them and gone straight to our Freshmen. If so, then let's be honest and blame the Seniors/starters for not playing well together at the start of the season and not just put the blame on Jim Crews. Yes, we lost KM, CE and CR, but the rest of our squad had a ton of leadership/experience so we should have come out at the beginning of the season playing better than we did. Sure, we won most of our earlier games, and many of these by larger margins, but at the same time, weren't we losing by 1 at halftime to one of them? to SEMO? Did we have some tense first half moments against Yale? Initially, Crews did play 10 or 11 players, Crews did try to give the Frosh some minutes, but frankly, our veterans/Seniors did not play well until AFTER we shortened the bench, got them more time, let them get more comfortable... And even then, we didn't really ever blowout teams like we did last year.

5. Dayton lacks the lineup to really take advantage of our defensive weakness at the 3 and 4. When other teams are threatening, though, I'd strongly reconsider and put RL at the 4 and put JM at the 5. If that means that we sit DE for stretches, then so be it and we go with smaller/guard lineup in MM, JJ and McBroom. All we need is one more win (Dayton), play decent in the Conference Tourney and then head for our third straight NCAA Tourney. Winning the A10 Tourney won't help us that much.

I would be practicing it now, when the NCAA Tourney begins, I would start the game with our new lineup: MM, JJ, McBroom, RL and JM. Then, I'd bring DE after the first 4 minutes and play him a lot so he still gets close to his 30 mpg but we need a different look. We need opposing teams to change their game plans. Going forward, headstrong, with JB at the 3 and DE at the 4 will not be good for us.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Kwamain Mitchell was one of SLU's all-time greats.

But I think as this season has developed, as opposing A10 coaches have game planned SLU, the player that is most missed and that has not been replaced is Cody Ellis.

I do not agree with the asessments that Dwayne Evans did not play the 3 last season. Evans clearly played the 3 on defense, with Cody Ellis at the 4 and Rob Loe and Cory Remekun at the 5.

On offense, the 6'8" Ellis often drew that opponent's power forward. SLU presented a pick your poison dilemma for the opposition. If they put their 6'8" power forward types on Cody, he would take them away from the basket, become the de facto 3, but drawing the opponent's 4. If the opposition tried to guard Cody with its 3, then Cody would post up that guy and score down low.

In the meantime, Evans was doing the opposite. When Cody played on the perimeter, the opposition had to respect his 3 point shooting ability, and then Evans was able to post up often smaller opponent 3's. Evans had a field day primarily down low in the A10 Tournament and the 1st (NCAA calls it 2nd) Round game against New Mexico State in San Jose.

The problem is that this season Jake Barnett draws the opponents' 3, which allows the opponent to put its power forward, often 6'8" types, on Evans, who is definitely playing the 4 this season.

There appears to be no good solution. Even though this team is 25-4, 12-2 in the A10, we can all see the issue. There are 3 change options as I see them:

1. Play Grandy Glaze at the 4, Evans at the 3. But as noted by elswhere, Glaze does not draw his man away from the basket, which clogs up the block further for Evans.

2. Play freshman Tanner Lancona in the former Cody Ellis role at the mobile 4, have him hopefully migrate to the perimeter at times and shoot 3's, using the same Cody/Dwayne approach as last year. As noted elsewhere, there have been some concerns about Lancona's freshman year defense.

3. Play Rob Loe at the fluid 4, ala Cody Ellis, with John Manning at the 5, with Evans at the 3. Loe would surely draw the opponent's power forward. Foul trouble would be an issue because these A10 refs are especially adroit at calling ticky tack fouls on all 3 of these players, and retaliation, last man standing, A10 ref special- missed the 1st one, caught the 2nd, on these three, especially Evans, but also Loe. John Manning raises his arms, and some A10 zebra blows a whistle on him.

Option 4 is status quo. But I just don't think Option 4 is working any longer, and Evans is taking a pounding. I think adjustments are in order, and it is not too late to make them.

Oregon threw that zone at SLU in the NCAA Tournament in '13. Duquesne threw a 1-2-2 zone at SLU in the 2nd Half last Thursday night.

SLU was ready for GW's 1-3-1 zone, having seen it last year in D.C.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Answering my own question, I would like to see SLU give Option 2 (Lancona) a shot.

If SLU had just beaten Duquesne last Thursday night, as it should have, we probably would not be having this discussion. But even so, the warning signs have been there for some time.

I suspect there is not enough time to change the lineup for Wed. night. But this change could be implemented after that.

[slufan13]

Manning, Glaze, and Crawford all played double digit minutes against Dayton the first time. McBroom played 28 minutes. Barnett 17 mins. No one more than 35 mins. Would like to see something similar Wednesday. With maybe a slight change of Manning and Glaze losing some minutes in favor of Lancona and Agbeko. Thought Dayton was one of our better games.

[AnkielBreakers]

Bay Area, here is my choice: option 5.

Cut down on the turnovers. Our whole team is based around smart basketball, but we have had a lot of turnovers. Improve that area and we are fine.

We are not a team built to win it all. If somehow we do, it will be because we catch fire at the right time. I think our best shot is to focus on what we have done, and get the players to play better basketball.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Bay Area, here is my choice: option 5.

Cut down on the turnovers. Our whole team is based around smart basketball, but we have had a lot of turnovers. Improve that area and we are fine.

We are not a team built to win it all. If somehow we do, it will be because we catch fire at the right time. I think our best shot is to focus on what we have done, and get the players to play better basketball.

Option 5 is accepted here.

Your point is well taken.

[WVBilliken]

Go with the guys who got us 25 wins. Too late to screw with the winning formula.

[Billiken75]

Amazing the reaction to two losses. Cut down on our turnovers and block out better on offensive rebounding and we win one of those games.

After a long winning streak gets snapped, a lull often happens (see Wisconsin). Let's start bring our A defense, stay fundamentally sound, and let's make a run in the Tourney.

Way to much over-reaction to a great season and an outstanding team.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Amazing the reaction to two losses. Cut down on our turnovers and block out better on offensive rebounding and we win one of those games.

After a long winning streak gets snapped, a lull often happens (see Wisconsin). Let's start bring our A defense, stay fundamentally sound, and let's make a run in the Tourney.

Way to much over-reaction to a great season and an outstanding team.

OK, we stay with the same lineup, even though Evans is getting hammered. I will agree to stay with the same lineup mostly because there are no feasible alternatives.

This is a very important year for this program, realistically and without conceding anything, the last good shot for a while at making the elusive Sweet 16.

However, some game planning, some adjustments are essential. We simply cannot have another game like Duquesne, in which a 1-2-2 zone neutralized our 2 best players, Evans and Jett.

[eastsidejoe]

Amazing the reaction to two losses. Cut down on our turnovers and block out better on offensive rebounding and we win one of those games.

After a long winning streak gets snapped, a lull often happens (see Wisconsin). Let's start bring our A defense, stay fundamentally sound, and let's make a run in the Tourney.

Way to much over-reaction to a great season and an outstanding team.

+100

[jbizzle09]

OK, we stay with the same lineup, even though Evans is getting hammered. I will agree to stay with the same lineup mostly because there are no feasible alternatives.

This is a very important year for this program, realistically and without conceding anything, the last good shot for a while at making the elusive Sweet 16.

However, some game planning, some adjustments are essential. We simply cannot have another game like Duquesne, in which a 1-2-2 zone neutralized our 2 best players, Evans and Jett.

Sorry to pick on you, BAB, but this is a huge pet peeve of mine and I've just seen it way too much lately.

I am fine with fans using 'we' when referring to their team, especially with it being an alma mater or a pro team of a city they've lived in their entire life. However, I really, really get annoyed when a fan uses 'we' as if they are a part of the team or part of the decision making. BAB, when you say 'I agree to stay with the same lineup' right after saying' we stay with the same lineup' almost makes it seem like you feel like you have some say in all of this. I figure you aren't so delusional to think that, but the way a lot of these posts are framed (many others do the exact same thing as you), it always just gets on my last nerve.

WE HAVE NO SAY IN ANY OF THIS! We can whine and p!ss and moan, and make our own little suggestions on here, but in the end we are only debating among ourselves. Jim Crews doesn't give a rat's ass about bauman's hindsight about playing freshmen early in the season or BAB's lineup strategies or someone else's suggestion for the team to heed Majerus' mantra of 'To win: Defend, Rebound.' WE aren't out there shooting the ball. WE aren't out there rebounding. WE aren't out there playing defense. WE aren't drawing up plays or calling (or not calling) timeouts. WE are watching and cheering. That's it.

I just think perspective gets lost on a message board a lot. This is a place for us to have passionate discussions about the team, its players, the coaches and the games. Also, a place to maybe get a little bit more information where you wouldn't have had it before. Is it cool to disagree with a coach's strategy or criticize the team's or individual player's performance? HELL YES! Absolutely! BUT, lets not allow ourselves to get deluded enough to think that we have any further impact than showing up, rooting on and supporting the team. WE aren't part of the team. WE are just fans. And this is just a place to talk about the team.

Sorry to blow up on you, BAB. It is just something that's been eating at me all season and I had to let it out.

[JohnnyJumpUp]

Sorry to pick on you, BAB, but this is a huge pet peeve of mine and I've just seen it way too much lately.

I am fine with fans using 'we' when referring to their team, especially with it being an alma mater or a pro team of a city they've lived in their entire life. However, I really, really get annoyed when a fan uses 'we' as if they are a part of the team or part of the decision making. BAB, when you say 'I agree to stay with the same lineup' right after saying' we stay with the same lineup' almost makes it seem like you feel like you have some say in all of this. I figure you aren't so delusional to think that, but the way a lot of these posts are framed (many others do the exact same thing as you), it always just gets on my last nerve.

WE HAVE NO SAY IN ANY OF THIS! We can whine and p!ss and moan, and make our own little suggestions on here, but in the end we are only debating among ourselves. Jim Crews doesn't give a rat's ass about bauman's hindsight about playing freshmen early in the season or BAB's lineup strategies or someone else's suggestion for the team to heed Majerus' mantra of 'To win: Defend, Rebound.' WE aren't out there shooting the ball. WE aren't out there rebounding. WE aren't out there playing defense. WE aren't drawing up plays or calling (or not calling) timeouts. WE are watching and cheering. That's it.

I just think perspective gets lost on a message board a lot. This is a place for us to have passionate discussions about the team, its players, the coaches and the games. Also, a place to maybe get a little bit more information where you wouldn't have had it before. Is it cool to disagree with a coach's strategy or criticize the team's or individual player's performance? HELL YES! Absolutely! BUT, lets not allow ourselves to get deluded enough to think that we have any further impact than showing up, rooting on and supporting the team. WE aren't part of the team. WE are just fans. And this is just a place to talk about the team.

Sorry to blow up on you, BAB. It is just something that's been eating at me all season and I had to let it out.

What a waste of time for anyone who read that lousy, piece of shyt post.

[majerus mojo]

What a waste of time for anyone who read that lousy, piece of shyt post.

Not easy on the brain, either.

[jbizzle09]

Apparently this message board thing isn't for me anymore. It was fun guys.

[thetorch]

Apparently this message board thing isn't for me anymore. It was fun guys.

But WE really want you to continue posting.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Sorry, but when one spends 7 years of his life at a University, earning 2 degrees from that institution, when one restored the Billiken mascot during his Senior year (Year 4 of the 7) at that school, and when one has been a fan and supporter of that school and its team for 36+ years, one is allowed to call his alma mater's team "we."

We are on the same side. We speak the same language, perhaps in different ways. There are generational differences on this Board, which is a good thing.

There is no disrespect intended whatsoever by my use of the word "we." And I am aware of my status as a fan and alumnus.

Trust and believe me- my heart is in the right place.

Win Wednesday, and all will be well, all will be well.

[GOSLU68]

Too bad RA spent the entire season hurt we could have used is quickness, rebounding and shooting percentage. I hope DE was just bruised or cramped up being dehydrated.

Beating Dayton to capture the A-10 title is mandatory. I blame Crews for not being out coached but instead of subbing at 5 minutes in the Duqesne game he started at 3 minutes by 5 minutes he had three subs in the game. Our team never got in the flow. Yes, if we were ahead by 15 I would have cleared the bench. This is D1 basketball where SIUE had a couple of runs on our team.

TL should come instead of GG or JM when we need in out movement Majerus envisioned with Rob Loe and Cody Ellis.-also TL gives another left side threat besides JJ they can be the in and out from the Left. I wish someone on board had stats on Loe from right or left side it seems to me he likes top of key first not sure if he is better left or right. Blocking out is only part of rebounding problem our players go up once and quit except for JJ and I have seen times where Manning was facing the opponent basket seven feet out and a three point shot bounces from rim and he is not expecting a carom. This team needs more of that Scott Highmark nose for the ball. Mm and JB get good rebounds. I think MM needs to keep asserting himself. There is nothing wrong with the work of JJ,RL, MM earlier in season we were approaching the 7-8 eight man rotation Majerus believed in. Our 4-8 eight guys have to step up. I have never in 4 years seen DE throw the ball somewhere near the basket hoping for a foul call. Many of the games we played the refs let our guys get beat physically with hacking and I have seen DE elbow people he was passing when away from the ball. It has always been a rough sport with no pads unlike football and hockey. If DE is beat up let's get Tanner Lancona and GG some minutes. GG has his moments if we protect the ball better after rebounds and pass closer not cross court or behind someone. If he gets 10 points he gives up six in easy turnovers. I hope they got some time off we have been lucky to have few injuries this season and I can't believe how Loe and GG hustle to get down court. I think Loe gives us 100 percent.

[JohnnyJumpUp]

Apparently this message board thing isn't for me anymore. It was fun guys.

[bauman]

Sorry to pick on you, BAB, but this is a huge pet peeve of mine and I've just seen it way too much lately.

I am fine with fans using 'we' when referring to their team, especially with it being an alma mater or a pro team of a city they've lived in their entire life. However, I really, really get annoyed when a fan uses 'we' as if they are a part of the team or part of the decision making. BAB, when you say 'I agree to stay with the same lineup' right after saying' we stay with the same lineup' almost makes it seem like you feel like you have some say in all of this. I figure you aren't so delusional to think that, but the way a lot of these posts are framed (many others do the exact same thing as you), it always just gets on my last nerve.

WE HAVE NO SAY IN ANY OF THIS! We can whine and p!ss and moan, and make our own little suggestions on here, but in the end we are only debating among ourselves. Jim Crews doesn't give a rat's ass about bauman's hindsight about playing freshmen early in the season or BAB's lineup strategies or someone else's suggestion for the team to heed Majerus' mantra of 'To win: Defend, Rebound.' WE aren't out there shooting the ball. WE aren't out there rebounding. WE aren't out there playing defense. WE aren't drawing up plays or calling (or not calling) timeouts. WE are watching and cheering. That's it.

I just think perspective gets lost on a message board a lot. This is a place for us to have passionate discussions about the team, its players, the coaches and the games. Also, a place to maybe get a little bit more information where you wouldn't have had it before. Is it cool to disagree with a coach's strategy or criticize the team's or individual player's performance? HELL YES! Absolutely! BUT, lets not allow ourselves to get deluded enough to think that we have any further impact than showing up, rooting on and supporting the team. WE aren't part of the team. WE are just fans. And this is just a place to talk about the team.

Sorry to blow up on you, BAB. It is just something that's been eating at me all season and I had to let it out.

Besides being one of the most stupid posts on the Board in quite a while, I will also take exception to your calling my "play the Fr more" stance as hindsight. I don't expect you to go back to the early season posts, but I have been saying this since the beginning of the year, so that excludes it from the hindsight category. I think WE can finish well if WE eliminate so many turnovers, rebound better, shoot better and play TL and MC more and GG and JB less. I hope WE pull it together so WE can advance into the round of 16 in the Tournament. If WE do that then WE can all be proud and happy!

[JMM28]

I'm in agreement with bizzle. Saying "we" drives me nuts and I try to avoid it as much as possible.

[jbizzle09]

I am sorry for my post. It came across way differently than I intended. Basically, when re-reading it makes me sound like a self-important gasbag, a preachy a-hole, a pretentious d-bag. My intent when posting it was more about fans finding the right level of perspective and realizing they aren't actually part of the team. What I should have done is just kept my thoughts to myself. Obviously my thoughts were definitely not appreciated nor constructive to the conversation on this board.

Like I said before, posting to a message board just isn't my thing anymore. Somewhere along the line it just stopped being enjoyable and became too confrontational and personal. I am sure that is entirely on me. Hopefully that's not the case for most of you and you all still enjoy playing in Steve's sandbox.