JC Hot Seat

[slufan13]

I guess I'm wondering if Crews' coaching philosophy is to truly have each player play a specific role even if it doesn't get the most out of his skillset. It's an old school style and my biggest criticism of Crews is that he's coaching like it's 1990 (and he wasn't a great coach then either).

I don't think we have a ton of talent, but I think the talent was better than it was last year. Crews has fully implemented his system now so I think this season will be a great indicator of how he is as a coach with his players.

[Pistol]

I'm saying that there are reports out there that Crews made some fundamental mistakes in how he coached last year's team. If he eliminates those fundamental mistakes (mistakes I saw little of his two prior years in charge) then the team could be noticeably better simply by Crews making some changes. In any given year, coaches may get the most out of their team or the least. Last year Crews got the least out of the team but in the prior two he got pretty close to the most.

It fits with my long standing belief that the talent on last year's team was far better than the 11 wins would suggest. Others have suggested that we simply have no talent so it doesn't really matter if they all get a year older.

Crews did an admirable job in his interim year, not trying to fix what wasn't broken. He left Majerus' teachings in place and let the upperclassmen lead. But he made a lot of mistakes the following year and owes Jordair Jett half or more of his salary from that season. Where you think last season's team was better than it's record, I feel the 2013-2014 played worse than its record indicates. I've argued this on here a lot already, though.

Remember how that team finished 2-5? When the wheels fell off that winning streak, Crews' mistakes were exposed. He's 13-26 since that streak ended.

I think last season's team played commensurate with its level of talent - which is not good relative to other A10 teams. Which is why I think any improvement this year will be modest at best.

[Clock_Tower]

I guess I'm wondering if Crews' coaching philosophy is to truly have each player play a specific role even if it doesn't get the most out of his skillset. It's an old school style and my biggest criticism of Crews is that he's coaching like it's 1990 (and he wasn't a great coach then either).

I don't think we have a ton of talent, but I think the talent was better than it was last year. Crews has fully implemented his system now so I think this season will be a great indicator of how he is as a coach with his players.

What is your basis for comments such as labeling Crews "old school style" and that "he's coaching like it's 1990"? So having kids play roles is now, in your opinion, "old school"? Should we just roll the ball out and tell the kids to do whatever they feel is best?

And BTW, were you even old enough to watch basketball in the 1990s?

[Cowboy]

-this idea of a player having a defined role, is that per individual on the team or per spot (1-5) on the floor?

[Clock_Tower]

I'm saying that there are reports out there that Crews made some fundamental mistakes in how he coached last year's team. If he eliminates those fundamental mistakes (mistakes I saw little of his two prior years in charge) then the team could be noticeably better simply by Crews making some changes. In any given year, coaches may get the most out of their team or the least. Last year Crews got the least out of the team but in the prior two he got pretty close to the most.

It fits with my long standing belief that the talent on last year's team was far better than the 11 wins would suggest. Others have suggested that we simply have no talent so it doesn't really matter if they all get a year older.

Shoe.

I am not sure anyone is saying that Crews made fundamental mistakes last year or that he has learned from these and will be a better coach this year. Instead, I believe that Crews is a better coach today than he was when he overtook the team on an interim basis. Maybe it takes time to shake the rust off, etc. Back then, though, I (and many others) did find fault (and rightly so) that Crews did not call enough time outs or that he waited way too long; that Crews did not have a creative plan to help DE get his points/get his shots off DE's Senior year after the graduation of CR and CE; that Crews kept JB in the lineup too much and didn't give others a sufficient chance; that Crews did not utilize the bench enough to see if Crawford, Reggie and Tanner could play or not play (wish we knew about Tanner a year prior); that Crews made some serious misjudgments of talent with respect to McBroom (and possibly GG and JM); and that Crews did not "hit a homerun" with his early recruiting -- Tanner was a bust, Crawford looks good (after 2 full years though) and Reggie will hopefully come thru this year - but hasn't so far. Even if both Ash and Reggie play well this year (and Ash was not bad last year), the truth is that we really needed them last year.

I believe we will be better this year not because of better coaching by Crews but b/c we have gotten rid of bad apples, we replaced them with promising players who will be able to contribute from the start and that our talented core of Fresh will blossom if we have a reliable PG who can distribute and if we have a Center who contribute enough so that we are able to get a few rebounds and are not playing 5 against 4.

[3star_recruit]

Butler was not good the season Nolan Berry was there and he still couldn't get off the pine and Rosburg from a crappy, bottom-feeder SEC program helps prove my point. They don't make the situation better. Those guys are not in the tradition of winning Billiken players - DE, KM, MM, JJ and CE. That's what we need to get back to.

Butler had more experienced players in front of Berry, one of whom was part of the turnaround last season. Some of our recruits would have been sitting on the bench behind Butler's upperclassmen as well. If a freshman big in the Big East has two more experienced players in front of him and is still getting substantial minutes, either he's a stud or a coach has made recruiting mistakes.

I agree that Rosburg was only a marginally better option than Manning or our freshman bigs.

[Basketbill]

I actually like Bartley, but I think his future is as more of a two than as a guy running your offense.

Monte Ellis said the same thing about the bust of a point guard that Golden State Drafted.....he turned out pretty good.....Seriously not to say MB is as good as Curry, but if I were MB would pattern my game after him, continue to develop ball skills. Curry was a 2 guard his breakout NCAA tourney year, then learned to be a point guard. Practice drills, drills drills....

[brianstl]

Monte Ellis said the same thing about the bust of a point guard that Golden State Drafted.....he turned out pretty good.....Seriously not to say MB is as good as Curry, but if I were MB would pattern my game after him, continue to develop ball skills. Curry was a 2 guard his breakout NCAA tourney year, then learned to be a point guard. Practice drills, drills drills....

Are you being serious here?

Curry played the 2 because that team had Jason Richards. Richards led the country in assists that season. Richards was among the leaders the season before that. It wasn't because Curry lacked the ball skills to play the position.

[majerus mojo]

Crews did an admirable job in his interim year, not trying to fix what wasn't broken. He left Majerus' teachings in place and let the upperclassmen lead. But he made a lot of mistakes the following year and owes Jordair Jett half or more of his salary from that season. Where you think last season's team was better than it's record, I feel the 2013-2014 played worse than its record indicates. I've argued this on here a lot already, though.

Remember how that team finished 2-5? When the wheels fell off that winning streak, Crews' mistakes were exposed. He's 13-26 since that streak ended.

I think last season's team played commensurate with its level of talent - which is not good relative to other A10 teams. Which is why I think any improvement this year will be modest at best.

+1000

[MB73]

Pistol, on 31 Aug 2015 - 2:27 PM, said:

Crews did an admirable job in his interim year, not trying to fix what wasn't broken. He left Majerus' teachings in place and let the upperclassmen lead. But he made a lot of mistakes the following year and owes Jordair Jett half or more of his salary from that season. Where you think last season's team was better than it's record, I feel the 2013-2014 played worse than its record indicates. I've argued this on here a lot already, though.

Remember how that team finished 2-5? When the wheels fell off that winning streak, Crews' mistakes were exposed. He's 13-26 since that streak ended.

I think last season's team played commensurate with its level of talent - which is not good relative to other A10 teams. Which is why I think any improvement this year will be modest at best.

+1000

Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again.

Your claims are weak, unfounded. Nobody knows about the bottom line of the issues cited on this inappropriate thread started by 'lil mm.

We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season.

Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear.

I think 3 of the 6 sophomores will play very well, another one or two will contribute; Crawford will be a scorer and Reggie will have some big games scoring and be a consistent rebounder. And Ash will play good D and will contribute some points. Freshmen? I bet one of the bigs jells ASAP and provides some rim protection and garbage points.

I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread.

I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest.

We shall see.

[Clock_Tower]

Pistol, on 31 Aug 2015 - 2:27 PM, said:

Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again.

Your claims are weak, unfounded. Nobody knows about the bottom line of the issues cited on this inappropriate thread started by 'lil mm.

We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season.

Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear.

I think 3 of the 6 sophomores will play very well, another one or two will contribute; Crawford will be a scorer and Reggie will have some big games scoring and be a consistent rebounder. And Ash will play good D and will contribute some points. Freshmen? I bet one of the bigs jells ASAP and provides some rim protection and garbage points.

I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread.

I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest.

We shall see.

Did our team's play in the Bahamas not temper your optimism ? I am still concerned about our PG position.

[MB73]

Did our team's play in the Bahamas not temper your optimism ? I am still concerned about our PG position.

Yes, the 3 Bahamas performances are of concern and yes a bigger worry is the PG spot. But I believe a serviceable or even good PG or two will emerge this year, one will make a big jump, one or two will move up and contribute.

[Cowboy]

Pistol, on 31 Aug 2015 - 2:27 PM, said:

Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again.

Your claims are weak, unfounded. Nobody knows about the bottom line of the issues cited on this inappropriate thread started by 'lil mm.

We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season.

Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear.

I think 3 of the 6 sophomores will play very well, another one or two will contribute; Crawford will be a scorer and Reggie will have some big games scoring and be a consistent rebounder. And Ash will play good D and will contribute some points. Freshmen? I bet one of the bigs jells ASAP and provides some rim protection and garbage points.

I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread.

I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest.

We shall see.

-isn't "the bottom line" the record?

[cheeseman]

Those who pin a great hope on the purging of a "the bad apples" always make be think of the very good Yankee teams that Reggie Jackson played on. He was as bad of an apple as they come. He once did not score during the last game of the season because the guy who would have driven him in would have tied him for the most RBIs on the team and he could not have that happen. He even admitted so in public. When the team wins the bad apples never seem so bad as when the team loses.

[Scoop]

Austin McBroom is prolly as good as Reggie Jackson.

[JMM28]

Austin McBroom is prolly as good as Reggie Jackson.

He was Mr. October of the last few Billiken teams too.

[ACE]

Butler had more experienced players in front of Berry, one of whom was part of the turnaround last season. Some of our recruits would have been sitting on the bench behind Butler's upperclassmen as well. If a freshman big in the Big East has two more experienced players in front of him and is still getting substantial minutes, either he's a stud or a coach has made recruiting mistakes.

I agree that Rosburg was only a marginally better option than Manning or our freshman bigs.

I think your timeline on Butler and Berry is a little off. During his one season at Butler, they were 13-17 with an rpi around 150 and he still couldn't get off the bench. Meanwhile, we were a Top 25 team that season. Berry wasn't going to make an impact that season and the fact that he wound up UC-Davis raises questions about whether he ever would have made an impact here. The kid would have had a chance to come to SLU (if SLU wanted him) after he transferred from Butler, but it didn't happen. Maybe the kid simply didn't want to come here and be in the shadow of his legendary grandfather. Either way, doesn't seem like the type of player we should be lamenting not having.

[TheChosenOne]

most all had flashes of brilliance

Really?

[3star_recruit]

I think your timeline on Butler and Berry is a little off. During his one season at Butler, they were 13-17 with an rpi around 150 and he still couldn't get off the bench. Meanwhile, we were a Top 25 team that season. Berry wasn't going to make an impact that season and the fact that he wound up UC-Davis raises questions about whether he ever would have made an impact here.

It's the 13-17 team I was referring to. Yes, even on 13-17 Big East teams, it's hard for skinny freshmen post players to get off the bench when there are more experienced players in front of them. I think Berry made a good decision to transfer to a good mid major team where he could play right away.

[Pistol]

-isn't "the bottom line" the record?

Yes. Yes, it is.

MB73's post, in keeping with his (somehow not fake) character, is sheer lunacy. I only saw it because others quoted it; the Ignore list, as always, is a nice feature. Regardless, I'll bite:

"Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again."

Are you seriously counting the people who post negatively about Crews? That's insane behavior.

"Your claims are weak, unfounded."

No, they're founded in reality. I guess you must've been in a coma during this past season, because SLU finished 11-21, 328th in Division I in scoring, 328th in offensive rating, and 222nd in defensive rating against the 109th toughest schedule. We didn't finish in the top 100 of any basic statistical category (unless you count fouls; we were 94th in personal fouls), and finished in the high-200s and low-300s in most stats. We went 3-15 against a relatively weak A10, finishing last. We went 2-1 in close games against horrible exhibition teams in the Bahamas who routinely lose to D-1 teams by 30-70 points. We have two possible starters battling nagging injuries. We have virtual unknowns as our incoming recruits for 2015 and 2016. Calling my claims "unfounded" is to ignore literally everything that happened last season into this one.

"We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season."

I can't wait to reevaluate this one mid-season. How long is reasonable to give players before acknowledging how good they are? There are freshmen everywhere in college basketball right now making an instant impact. Not just the one-and-dones at Duke and Kentucky, but everywhere. Some of them torched our freshmen this past season. You're right in that they showed little consistency, and that we'll know a lot more halfway through this season - but we already know a lot, those of us actually watching the games. This talent pool is shallow. "Flashes of brilliance" made me laugh. I'd have been happy with flashes of competence out of a few of them, let alone brilliance.

"Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear."

I've seen your political rants on here, and it's others who are "weak men who live in fear"? What a joke. My posts questioning the state of the program are not attacks, by the way. They're informed obvservations. I don't know any of these guys personally. I only comment upon what I see, about what they do publicly for our entertainment - which is 100% fair game. They're not children. There's nothing personal, nothing that could reasonably called an attack. Not even close to what you say about other posters, for instance.

"I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread."

Again, can't wait to revisit this mid-season. I want to be wrong and hope you're right - but don't have the ability to lie to myself.

"I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest."

I say Crews was and is more comfortable in retirement.

"We shall see."

That we will.

[majerus mojo]

Pistol, on 31 Aug 2015 - 2:27 PM, said:

Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again.

Your claims are weak, unfounded. Nobody knows about the bottom line of the issues cited on this inappropriate thread started by 'lil mm.

We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season.

Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear.

I think 3 of the 6 sophomores will play very well, another one or two will contribute; Crawford will be a scorer and Reggie will have some big games scoring and be a consistent rebounder. And Ash will play good D and will contribute some points. Freshmen? I bet one of the bigs jells ASAP and provides some rim protection and garbage points.

I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread.

I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest.

We shall see.

I thought his post mainly addressed how awful the end of the '13-14 season was. How anyone can vouch for that is beyond me, but it looks like you didn't try to, anyways. Nice. You do kind of sound like a dopey caricature now that it's mentioned, and I for one always appreciate the effort. The odd paragraph structuring really works for you. Also I enjoy the air quotes or italics when used -- you have a knack for knowing when to add that little extra bit of emphasis. "The product of weak men who live in fear," is a bit much for a college basketball message board where we are all fans of the same school (lol), but I was into it

[moytoy12]

Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again.

They start on the JV team, moose breath.

[Clock_Tower]

Those who pin a great hope on the purging of a "the bad apples" always make be think of the very good Yankee teams that Reggie Jackson played on. He was as bad of an apple as they come. He once did not score during the last game of the season because the guy who would have driven him in would have tied him for the most RBIs on the team and he could not have that happen. He even admitted so in public. When the team wins the bad apples never seem so bad as when the team loses.

Cheese.

Reread my posts. Each time I said it was a combination of items which should lead to improvement and, yes, one of these items was the purging of bad apples. Not once did I say the purging of bad apples, by itself, would be sufficient.

Also, since you brought up baseball, I would suggest that while team chemistry in the clubhouse (baseball) and team chemistry in the lockroom (basketball) might be similar I would suggest that play on the field (baseball) and on the court (basketball) is totally different. In baseball, the play of your teammates is immaterial to each of your at bats and, for the most part, the same applies with defense. Therefore, even if his teammates hated him, Reggie Jackson could still go out and have 4 quality at bats and play good defense in the outfield without assistance from his teammates. In contrast, if Austin McBroom is a selfish PG who doesn't pass, draw defenses to him prior to distributing or penetrate the lane to open play for our bigs, then the rest of the team directly suffers. A center is almost exclusively dependent on his teammates to get him the ball at the right time and in the right place in order to score. Add to this the fact that we had more than one bad apple and the fact that we had 18 and 19 year old boys versus 30 year old plus men and I see little comparisons but enjoyed being reminded of Reggie Jackson's antics.

[Clock_Tower]

Yes. Yes, it is.

MB73's post, in keeping with his (somehow not fake) character, is sheer lunacy. I only saw it because others quoted it; the Ignore list, as always, is a nice feature. Regardless, I'll bite:

"Two starting posters on the Crews-hating 9 man "rotation" slime the coach and the team again."

Are you seriously counting the people who post negatively about Crews? That's insane behavior.

"Your claims are weak, unfounded."

No, they're founded in reality. I guess you must've been in a coma during this past season, because SLU finished 11-21, 328th in Division I in scoring, 328th in offensive rating, and 222nd in defensive rating against the 109th toughest schedule. We didn't finish in the top 100 of any basic statistical category (unless you count fouls; we were 94th in personal fouls), and finished in the high-200s and low-300s in most stats. We went 3-15 against a relatively weak A10, finishing last. We went 2-1 in close games against horrible exhibition teams in the Bahamas who routinely lose to D-1 teams by 30-70 points. We have two possible starters battling nagging injuries. We have virtual unknowns as our incoming recruits for 2015 and 2016. Calling my claims "unfounded" is to ignore literally everything that happened last season into this one.

"We do not know the talent level for sure of the 6 freshmen, they are all 3* and 2* and most all had flashes of brilliance, though very little consistency.

We will know a lot more, maybe be able to make intelligent assessments mid late season."

I can't wait to reevaluate this one mid-season. How long is reasonable to give players before acknowledging how good they are? There are freshmen everywhere in college basketball right now making an instant impact. Not just the one-and-dones at Duke and Kentucky, but everywhere. Some of them torched our freshmen this past season. You're right in that they showed little consistency, and that we'll know a lot more halfway through this season - but we already know a lot, those of us actually watching the games. This talent pool is shallow. "Flashes of brilliance" made me laugh. I'd have been happy with flashes of competence out of a few of them, let alone brilliance.

"Until then attacks like this are balderdash. Unfounded. The product of weak men who live in fear."

I've seen your political rants on here, and it's others who are "weak men who live in fear"? What a joke. My posts questioning the state of the program are not attacks, by the way. They're informed obvservations. I don't know any of these guys personally. I only comment upon what I see, about what they do publicly for our entertainment - which is 100% fair game. They're not children. There's nothing personal, nothing that could reasonably called an attack. Not even close to what you say about other posters, for instance.

"I say 18 wins, very possibly 20, I'll firm that up on the prediction thread."

Again, can't wait to revisit this mid-season. I want to be wrong and hope you're right - but don't have the ability to lie to myself.

"I say Crews is a much better coach than the 9 trolls suggest."

I say Crews was and is more comfortable in retirement.

"We shall see."

That we will.

Pistol.

Are you not a little strong on your comments? What is a virtual unknown? Yes, we have no recruit/player who is well known like Tatum but come on.... Neufeld played on high profile teams and appears widely known in basketball circles. Welmer was recruited by others/us out of high school before going to prep school. Bishop earned praise and honor in NY City. And a local who was one of the local area's top scorers last year also should not be considered a virtual unknown. And regarding last year's Frosh, Roby seemed to start at the beginning of the season because of his defense and then turned into an all-around player. MB played very little early but then appeared to beat out the competition and earn the PG job half way thru the year while having many good games and parts of games. Malik appeared to play most of the minutes as the 4 last year, appeared to peak half way thru the year when he was a dominant force for us and then struggled down the stretch to make the necessary adjustments as other teams game planned against him. In short, can you not make your points to MB without trashing our recruits and players?

[cheeseman]

Cheese.

Reread my posts. Each time I said it was a combination of items which should lead to improvement and, yes, one of these items was the purging of bad apples. Not once did I say the purging of bad apples, by itself, would be sufficient.

Also, since you brought up baseball, I would suggest that while team chemistry in the clubhouse (baseball) and team chemistry in the lockroom (basketball) might be similar I would suggest that play on the field (baseball) and on the court (basketball) is totally different. In baseball, the play of your teammates is immaterial to each of your at bats and, for the most part, the same applies with defense. Therefore, even if his teammates hated him, Reggie Jackson could still go out and have 4 quality at bats and play good defense in the outfield without assistance from his teammates. In contrast, if Austin McBroom is a selfish PG who doesn't pass, draw defenses to him prior to distributing or penetrate the lane to open play for our bigs, then the rest of the team directly suffers. A center is almost exclusively dependent on his teammates to get him the ball at the right time and in the right place in order to score. Add to this the fact that we had more than one bad apple and the fact that we had 18 and 19 year old boys versus 30 year old plus men and I see little comparisons but enjoyed being reminded of Reggie Jackson's antics.

My post was not specific to any one other post - there has been several on the board who have expressed this "bad apple" thought. Also my comment was meant to be general - I used the baseball example only because at the time that was what I thought of. We can look at the Jets this summer camp - their quarterback gets his jaw broken because he refused to pay up for to another player who felt he owed him money - now time will tell if that locker room is dysfunctional enough to be bad. Mike Greenberg is very concerned about their "chemistry".