Post-VCWho aka What I Don't Get

[HoosierPal]

Nobody wanted a 12 man rotation last year either.

We only had 11 scholarship players on the roster last year. Ash was #12 and he was sitting out.

There were many posters wanting more time for Crawford, Lancona and Agbeko last year.

[almaman]

Jordair

thanks that was my guess.

[SluSignGuy]

We only had 11 scholarship players on the roster last year. Ash was #12 and he was sitting out.

There were many posters wanting more time for Crawford, Lancona and Agbeko last year.

Right, because we were crushing some non-conference teams and not giving the young guys experience in mop up time. The result partially was SLU losing 4 of their last 5 before the NCAAs with seniors having so many minutes logged, and then this year the result is largely Agbeko learning as a sophomore and not a freshman (he has improve this year, but some of that could have occurred last yet I bet).

[moytoy12]

There were many posters wanting more time for Crawford, Lancona and Agbeko last year.

Which is not an unreasonable request when you have 10-12 wins blowouts.

[Pistol]

Last year we played an eight man rotation: Loe, Evans, McCall, Jett, Barnett, Glaze, Manning and McBroom. The board complained. "Why aren't the freshmen playing?" This year we are playing 12 and the board is complaining, "Why do we have to play everyone?"

OK, what is the number that most pleases this board? It has to be 9, 10, or 11. I'm curious.

No one said the freshmen should be in the rotation. People are saying they should've been inserted into games late when we were playing with a comfortable lead. This would serve the dual purpose of getting them more minutes (even if insignificant in the context of the game itself) and giving the seniors a rest.

As it played out, the freshmen - none of whom redshirted - played very few minutes and still look like freshmen this season. The seniors - all of whom played 34 games - ran out of gas and finished the season 2-5 in the last 7 games despite going 25-2 in the first 27.

You're not comparing apples to apples. The actual rotation is going much deeper this season, when the role that many of us want for some of these guys is not rotation, but garbage time.

[slu72]

We had 4 really good Seniors last year plus one SR that at least knew his role. And we didn't have that many blowout games last year that I can recall. It wasn't until the end when I think JC realized he had worn the SRs to a nub that he started giving TL more time, yet he cut back on MC's minutes. This year is totally 180 degrees from last year. No returning major contributing veteran save for AM and he disappeared late last year. Also, it appears that only one FR has really separated himself from the 6 pack, MY, hence JC's trying to give them all equal time to prove themselves or at the least get them some OJT. That's the only reasonable explanation for his unexplainable rotations.

[Billboy1]

Well if he wants everybody in the rotation he should at least make sure they know what to do when they are in the game. A lot of times it looks like they have not had very much practice in defense or offense.

[hsmith19]

No one said the freshmen should be in the rotation. People are saying they should've been inserted into games late when we were playing with a comfortable lead. This would serve the dual purpose of getting them more minutes (even if insignificant in the context of the game itself) and giving the seniors a rest.

As it played out, the freshmen - none of whom redshirted - played very few minutes and still look like freshmen this season. The seniors - all of whom played 34 games - ran out of gas and finished the season 2-5 in the last 7 games despite going 25-2 in the first 27.

You're not comparing apples to apples. The actual rotation is going much deeper this season, when the role that many of us want for some of these guys is not rotation, but garbage time.

One problem with this idea is that there were not many blowout games period. Almost all our games last year were close.

I think playing the freshmen more might have preserved the seniors a little (they really did look gassed by late February or so), but I really don't think it would've made a discernible difference in terms of getting last year's freshmen more ready to get in the game this year.

[Pistol]

One problem with this idea is that there were not many blowout games period. Almost all our games last year were close.

I think playing the freshmen more might have preserved the seniors a little (they really did look gassed by late February or so), but I really don't think it would've made a discernible difference in terms of getting last year's freshmen more ready to get in the game this year.

I don't think it would've been a huge difference but it would still have been more minutes for them, more experience together on the floor, on the road, whatever. It couldn't have hurted.

The difference it made last year was more crucial. The seniors appeared to be breaking down physically over the course of the season. Not injuries that would've kept them sidelined, but they were clearly sluggish. The board definitely took notice of this last season.

But it's not just garbage time; there could've been points where giving Evans, Loe, Jett, and McCall rests for a minute here, minute there heading into media timeouts would have helped. Those add up throughout the course of the game and over the season. As perplexing as Crews' roster management has been this season, it was just as baffling last season. We just had the talent and experience (and one hell of a takeover player) to compensate until the last 7 games when it all broke down.

I'm also not sure what people consider a 'blowout' but I'm counting 11 non-conference games and another 3 A10 games that we won by double digits. It could be argued that as we saw the seniors slow down over the course of the A10 season, more prudent roster management would have kept that from happening so dramatically. Just a thought.

[MB73]

(from another thread):

if crews gets hit by a truck, we have so many on this board who can step in immediately.

come on, people:

• one of the least experienced teams in D-1, but to boot, we have not jelled, a clear rotation has not emerged to the frustration of all of us
  
• 6 bigs, 3 freshmen bigs, two inexperienced sophomore bigs, and a senior big role player... and bigs are the key to success in our situation
  
• we are getting very little production from upperclassmen, always an indication of major problems (yacoubou must be leading the ncaa in blocked shots "against")
  

we all know this. we are all miffed that we are not further along.

most teams by now, hell by january, have determined their pecking order for minutes, their rotation. not us.

athletic teams can suddenly jell when the right combinations develop. hell we have arguments on here about who should play pg, putting agbeko at the 5, etcetera. frustrating that we cannot find that 8-9 man rotation and give the winners the opportunity to play together with confidence.

give crews and the kids a break, we will jell and things will be better, hopefully this year. i am not of course in any way convinced we will match the magic of our past several years... but i think the talent and coaching will turn this around, soon.

[hsmith19]

Agbeko probably played as much as he could be expected to with the injuries he dealt with. The other problem is that it was difficult to shoehorn both Crawford and Lancona into playing time at the same time. In spite of the height difference, they are similar players (not just in terms of their whiteness). They offered an outside shot, some passing ability, but not much in terms of rebounding/defense. They pretty much had to trade off playing the last man on the bench role, and I think that made sense. Lancona did get to play in OT in an NCAA tournament game, which symbolically at least meant something in terms of experience.

[moytoy12]

One problem with this idea is that there were not many blowout games period. Almost all our games last year were close.

I think playing the freshmen more might have preserved the seniors a little (they really did look gassed by late February or so), but I really don't think it would've made a discernible difference in terms of getting last year's freshmen more ready to get in the game this year.

Here are the game results for last year: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/139/year/2014/saint-louis-billikens

I count 12 blowout games. A couple of which were in conference play up until early Feb.

[Pistol]

give crews and the kids a break, we will jell and things will be better, hopefully this year. i am not of course in any way convinced we will match the magic of our past several years... but i think the talent and coaching will turn this around, soon.

Funny, because based on what I (and others) observe this season - with numbers to back it up - it appears that talent and coaching are two things this program is lacking in right now. I'm not sure how mediocre talent and sub-par coaching are going to turn around a sub-par season.

Then again, when my logic doesn't line up with MB73 logic, I know I'm doing fine.

[hsmith19]

The freshmen did play in a lot of those early blowout wins when Agbeko was healthy (he even started a few times).

Fordham, Richmond, and Saint Joe's were the only conference blowout wins. And the freshmen played a combined 12, 13, and 14 minutes in those games. So they were hardly invisible.

[Pistol]

2013-2014 (in 34 total games):

Crawford: 24 GP, 7.5 MPG

Lancona: 21 GP, 8.5 MPG

Agbeko: 17 GP, 5.6 MPG

Manning played in all but two games, averaging just under 12 MPG. Glaze played in every game, averaging just under 13 MPG.

[slufanskip]

I believe that is Jett's sophomore stat line and reflects the fact he had the ball in his hands less with the return of Mitchell.

My bad ... it was. The frosh line per 40 isn't much different.

[hsmith19]

2013-2014 (in 34 total games):

Crawford: 24 GP, 7.5 MPG

Lancona: 21 GP, 8.5 MPG

Agbeko: 17 GP, 5.6 MPG

Manning played in all but two games, averaging just under 12 MPG. Glaze played in every game, averaging just under 13 MPG.

Would've been tough to subtract PT from Glaze and Manning and give it to Lancona, who is a very different type of player from either of those guys. I think it's safe to say Manning and especially Glaze would have played less if Agbeko had been healthy all year, but then again Glaze's minutes had been cut pretty drastically by the end of the season anyway.

[slufan13]

The staff could've given a handful of minutes here and there, but I don't fault this one too much. If the staff truly felt like those guys weren't ready, then I'm fine with it. I would've liked to add a 9th to the rotation. Crawford vs guard heavy teams. Lancona vs big teams. I also think MC could have gotten some of Barnett's minutes, but it is what it is.

[majerus mojo]

I think the biggest gripe towards the end of the season was the distribution of minutes between Barnett and Crawford, as 13 noted. Was about 4-1 in favor of the former.. who wasn't exactly the lights out shooter we hoped for.

[kmbilliken]

Here are the game results for last year: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/139/year/2014/saint-louis-billikens

I count 12 blowout games. A couple of which were in conference play up until early Feb.

What is your definition of a blowout? I see 8 twenty point wins. Only 2 of those were over 25 with the biggest being 27. 20 points isn't a blow out until less than 4 minutes stretching it. 3 minutes to be safe. The women were up by 20 last night with 11 minutes to go and lost. Crews was trying to win the league and get in the tournament. I've got no problem how he managed his talent thin bench last year.

[Pistol]

What is your definition of a blowout? I see 8 twenty point wins. Only 2 of those were over 25 with the biggest being 27. 20 points isn't a blow out until less than 4 minutes stretching it. 3 minutes to be safe. The women were up by 20 last night with 11 minutes to go and lost. Crews was trying to win the league and get in the tournament. I've got no problem how he managed his talent thin bench last year.

So when Fordham beat us by 18, that didn't feel like a blowout to you?

[Bills By 40]

What is your definition of a blowout? I see 8 twenty point wins. Only 2 of those were over 25 with the biggest being 27. 20 points isn't a blow out until less than 4 minutes stretching it. 3 minutes to be safe. The women were up by 20 last night with 11 minutes to go and lost. Crews was trying to win the league and get in the tournament. I've got no problem how he managed his talent thin bench last year.

Sure, it's a subjective definition, but if you don't feel a level of comfort when up 20 points you are unreasonable.

So when Fordham beat us by 18, that didn't feel like a blowout to you?

+1

A blowout doesn't have to be margin of victory but simply overwhelming success in the majority of varieties.

[MB73]

coaches keep their best team rotation in the game even when up 12 points with a minute to go, and it goes up as the opponent misses their 3's and the leader hits it's ft's, so a lot of these so called blowouts are not valid arguments against our staff.

and sometimes a team is up just 8 points or so with a minute to go and it goes to a blowout sometimes. it depends. so going by final scores does not constitute a valid argument.

and sometimes, especially in the early season, a team might be up 18 but the coach has things that he wants the best rotation to still work on for the future. and / or the freshmen are not ready to execute, have not earned the minutes by executing adequately in practice and that has to be clear to them, they need to earn the minutes.

sure, i especially wish crawford had more minutes last year, so he could have better learned to be a factor as a 3 point shooter. lancona, i don't know. and agbeko was hurt a lot. mcbroom got some good minutes. so why the big stink?

this lame whining about last year's substitution patterns is for low tolerance fans. drop it. sure it could have been improved upon, but we also wanted to win "now" and that is fine with most of us.

[jbizzle09]

One of the issues regarding this season and the growing pains that I think is getting glossed over is that SLU under Majerus essentially whiffed on two straight recruiting classes. After the lauded class of 2010-11, Majerus came up empty two straight years, and that has nothing to do with Crews' development of players. In those two years, the best player Majerus signed was McBroom, a MAC transfer.

Manning has shown himself to be a total stiff, and I don't think there was any amount of 'coaching up' that could have changed who he is in any major way. Maybe others will disagree (I would have up through last year, as I kept expecting him to develop), but it appears Crews got stuck with a lemon in Manning. As for Glaze, again not sure what more Crews could have done with him. He is an undersized, injury-prone power forward with no real offensive skillset whose biggest asset is energy. For three straight years he had injury issues that held him back. He showed flashes, and his rebounding ability and boundless energy would have been helpful this year, but again, not sure how much more Crews could have gotten out of him.

The following class yielded absolutely nothing in terms of freshmen. Drew was redshirted and then shown the door, apparently due to issues of his own making. Meanwhile, Carter, a talented point guard, decided to transfer because Majerus wasn't going to coach him. Carter has shown that he could have been a valuable part of this team in his time at Valpo, but there really wasn't anything Crews could do to keep him at SLU. As for McBroom, he's shown himself to be a good scorer off the bench with an excellent three-point stroke. In the end, McBroom was the best that was left for Crews out of two scholarship classes.

The thing is, if you strike out on two straight classes, it will eventually catch up with you, which is what we are seeing now. At this point, it is Crews' team and he is pretty much starting from scratch. Now, one of the complaints has been that he should have played Lancona, Crawford and Agbeko more last season to have them better prepared for this season so as to help avoid this scenario. Perhaps valid, but how many more minutes would have given them a huge leg up for this season? I've read that they should have played more in blowouts. So, maybe getting 20-30 more minutes a piece over the course of last season in run-the-clock-out situations would have created a lot more seasoning? I've also read that Crawford should have eaten more into Barnett's minutes. Again, a valid point. But isn't Crawford already shooting at a high clip this season? Would having a few more minutes a game last year have made him demonstrably better?

In my opinion, Crews has a lot of talent at his disposal in the sophs and freshmen, which is why I am extremely bullish on the next two years. It is also the reason May is going to give him not just next season, but the season after, to prove himself and show that he can lead the team back to the tourney. With that in mind, constantly reiterating the same negative points and banging ones head against the wall about Crews during a rebuilding season is just going to lead to frustration that can't be shaken. I am not saying take a Pollyanna-ish approach or even be optimistic. My thought is to just be tolerant of this year, look for the positives, and wait until next season to start with the overt criticism.

[moytoy12]

coaches keep their best team rotation in the game even when up 12 points with a minute to go, and it goes up as the opponent misses their 3's and the leader hits it's ft's, so a lot of these so called blowouts are not valid arguments against our staff.

and sometimes a team is up just 8 points or so with a minute to go and it goes to a blowout sometimes. it depends. so going by final scores does not constitute a valid argument.

and sometimes, especially in the early season, a team might be up 18 but the coach has things that he wants the best rotation to still work on for the future. and / or the freshmen are not ready to execute, have not earned the minutes by executing adequately in practice and that has to be clear to them, they need to earn the minutes.

sure, i especially wish crawford had more minutes last year, so he could have better learned to be a factor as a 3 point shooter. lancona, i don't know. and agbeko was hurt a lot. mcbroom got some good minutes. so why the big stink?

this lame whining about last year's substitution patterns is for low tolerance fans. drop it. sure it could have been improved upon, but we also wanted to win "now" and that is fine with most of us.

I intentionally left out the games where we were up by 8 w/1-2 min left. Your analysis, as you love to do, is not supported by facts or research. What did our 5 seniors need to work on up 14 w1 min left? Also, crews could have done a better job filtering in the freshman when were up big in a game (e.g. Late in the 1st half, mid 2nd half, etc.). JC and the staff have shown little ability to effectively sub players the last 2 years.

I know JC can do no wrong in your "expert" opinion, but there are substantive issues on which to criticize him. He's done good too and I've tried to applaud him on those occasions.