Recruiting - 2021

[Clock_Tower]

18 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

HP, clock is setting us up with the excuse for when thatch doesnt develop it's not ford's fault.

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?

[Clock_Tower]

46 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

Okay, but that doesn't mean that Ford can't develop him further.

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?

[billiken_roy]

31 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

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?

now you are flat out lying.   go back and find where i said that i dont like ford.   i have said over and over again he is the best recruiter head coach the billikens have ever had.   he is a superb motivator.  i have said i do not want to replace him as just on his great recruiting alone he will always have us in the conference championship discussion as well as the ncaa tourney talk.   however i have never given my mother any credit for the ability to win with his roster (i did give my mother such credit when crews was coach with rickma's well developed roster that was handed to crews)  i have no idea what you are talking about with your point with french and goodwin.   neither player is an nba player, but that doesnt mean they were not good players.   and it also doesnt suggest that ford developed them past their freshmen seasons.  i also have no idea what you are talking about with your perkins comment.   please post the link where i said he is an nba level player.  and what that would have to do with your claiming ford developed him.   maybe you forget how highly acclaimed perkins came to the billikens with his incredible juco statistics.   your revisionist history posts the last year or so is very infuriating.  

[TheA_Bomb]

Some people can't understand that you can provide objective assessments that are negative but still be a fan and still hope for success.

I might have over simplified my assessment by saying "maybe not a developer of talent".  There's been some development.  Perhaps the more accurate assessment is that Ford doesn't form cohesive consistent teams.   It's really hard to quite put your finger on it. 

As a thought experiment imagine Ford vs Soderberg.  They go head to head with the same team (1 team is all clones of the other but Soderberg coached them).  Who wins?  I think Soderberg wins.

[3star_recruit]

34 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Some people can't understand that you can provide objective assessments that are negative but still be a fan and still hope for success.

I might have over simplified my assessment by saying "maybe not a developer of talent".  There's been some development.  Perhaps the more accurate assessment is that Ford doesn't form cohesive consistent teams.   It's really hard to quite put your finger on it. 

As a thought experiment imagine Ford vs Soderberg.  They go head to head with the same team (1 team is all clones of the other but Soderberg coached them).  Who wins?  I think Soderberg wins.

The most cohesive Billiken team I've seen is the one that I saw the last 5 games of 2020 and the team we saw in the 8 games prior to COVID.  Soderberg isn't beating that squad.  The team we saw after COVID a lot of NIT teams could beat.

 

[Clock_Tower]

39 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

now you are flat out lying.   go back and find where i said that i dont like ford.   i have said over and over again he is the best recruiter head coach the billikens have ever had.   he is a superb motivator.  i have said i do not want to replace him as just on his great recruiting alone he will always have us in the conference championship discussion as well as the ncaa tourney talk.   however i have never given my mother any credit for the ability to win with his roster (i did give my mother such credit when crews was coach with rickma's well developed roster that was handed to crews)  i have no idea what you are talking about with your point with french and goodwin.   neither player is an nba player, but that doesnt mean they were not good players.   and it also doesnt suggest that ford developed them past their freshmen seasons.  i also have no idea what you are talking about with your perkins comment.   please post the link where i said he is an nba level player.  and what that would have to do with your claiming ford developed him.   maybe you forget how highly acclaimed perkins came to the billikens with his incredible juco statistics.   your revisionist history posts the last year or so is very infuriating.  

Lying?  Really?  I never said anything about your opinions on Ford and recruiting, motivating - both true.  From your repeated comments about him not developing players, not playing the proper tempo, not using players properly, not being a good x's and o's guy..., your comments sure give the impression that you don't like Coach Ford generally but that you are tolerating him and that you give him limited props as to recruiting and motivating while being smart enough to know that our program likely cannot do much better than him.

As to your mother, you yourself have brought her up in the past with Crews (and I agree with you on that).  The point then was that RM had built and developed such a good, sound, well-oiled machine that anyone could win with that team.  The point now is that when I hear the exhorbant praise regarding Coach Ford's recruiting, how great our players are, how much talent we have, the most talented team in Billiken history, the deepest team in Billiken history, then all that is happening is that Coach Ford is being set up for failure and to not meet such lofty expectations.  You are correct that we have no NBA talented players - even though we have had some in the past.   I contend these past few years have been extremely difficult to put a cohesive team together and to blend unusual talent (yes there has been a good amount of talent and French and JGood are part of that), to hide major flaws in players (and French and JGood are part of that), to rebuild from scratch and to rebuild twice after a kick in the teeth due to S2.  

Speaking of Perkins, sure he had some great JUCO stats.   But I recall his early days in which he did not appear to know what defense was much less to play defense.   I also recall him having a silky smooth shot but no clue how to play without the ball.   In short, the development I have seen in Perkinis has been huge -- and yet you only want to give Ford credit for recruiting him?  And in support is his good JUCO stats?  Am I mistating your position?

JGood and French were not developed past their Freshman year?  Wow.   Don't know what to say about that, so I won't.

[TheA_Bomb]

2 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The most cohesive Billiken team I've seen is the one that I saw the last 6 games of 2020 and the team we saw in the 8 games prior to COVID.  Soderberg isn't beating that squad.  The team we saw after COVID a lot of NIT teams could beat.

 

So you're saying Soderberg with those same players wouldn't win?  This is a thought experiment.   Soderberg coached them through pre-season they're playing pack-line defense and deliberate half court offense. 

 

Pack-line I think would be the bane of SLU these last few years. 

[JettFlight5]

I think that we are putting too fine a point on this issue.

Travis Ford has really recruited well and raised the talent level from that of *he who shall not be named*. That said, going to the NIT is a huge disappointment in any season (especially when Louisville and the Big East turned it down like SLU should have). let alone one where many thought this was the elusive second weekend team. So that colors my opinion a bit about Ford's game coaching....fairly or unfairly. 

[3star_recruit]

1 minute ago, TheA_Bomb said:

So you're saying Soderberg with those same players wouldn't win?  This is a thought experiment.   Soderberg coached them through pre-season they're playing pack-line defense and deliberate half court offense. 

 

Pack-line I think would be the bane of SLU these last few years. 

It's all conjecture.  Sometimes great defense wins.  Sometimes great offense wins.  That 13 game stretch I referenced was great offense. 

NC State's defense was top-notch against us but Yuri's offensive assault was able to jumpstart our offense in the second half.  We had it rolling.  You needed a bigger and longer squad at multiple positions (Minnesota) to beat us.

[Clock_Tower]

2 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The most cohesive Billiken team I've seen is the one that I saw the last 5 games of 2020 and the team we saw in the 8 games prior to COVID.  Soderberg isn't beating that squad.  The team we saw after COVID a lot of NIT teams could beat.

 

I agree but don't bother.   Minds are set in stone.  Stating that the NCAA shut down last season's conference tournaments and NCAA Tourney is an excuse.  Using COVID and a 34 day pause this year too is an excuse.  Mentioning a guy with a severe, life altering, debilitating disease is an excuse.  Mentioning gyms were closed and Spring/Summer leagues were shut down last year is an excuse. Being lied to about 4 of your players who possessed the skills which the team had been lacking before them being railroaded out of town is an excuse.   Ignore it all.   And simply say, Coach Ford's teams lack cohesion, his guys aren't developed, are poorly coached and just cannot win. 

And all on the heels of watching the likes of Okoro and Nesbitt in only 6 short months?

[RUBillsFan]

34 minutes ago, JettFlight5 said:

That said, going to the NIT is a huge disappointment in any season (especially when Louisville and the Big East turned it down like SLU should have)

This is insanity.  In the last 20 seasons (not counting the 2019-20 season in which no postseason occurred), SLU has been to the NCAA tournament 4 times (20%), the NIT 3 times (15%) and the CBI once (5%).  That means 60% of the time we have had no postseason at all.  In that context saying that ANY SLU season ending in an NIT appearance is a huge disappointment means that you have totally unrealistic expectations.

I'll concede that an NIT appearance instead of an NCAA appearance this past season was a disappointment relative to pre-season expectations, but to suggest we should have turned down an NIT appearance is crazy.

[JettFlight5]

5 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

This is insanity.  In the last 20 seasons (not counting the 2019-20 season in which no postseason occurred), SLU has been to the NCAA tournament 4 times (20%), the NIT 3 times (15%) and the CBI once (5%).  That means 60% of the time we have had no postseason at all.  In that context saying that ANY SLU season ending in an NIT appearance is a huge disappointment means that you have totally unrealistic expectations.

I'll concede that an NIT appearance instead of an NCAA appearance this past season was a disappointment relative to pre-season expectations, but to suggest we should have turned down an NIT appearance is crazy.

I just don't put any value on the NIT at all. 

[RUBillsFan]

1 minute ago, JettFlight5 said:

I just don't put any value on the NIT at all. 

To each his own. 

IMO more Billiken basketball is always a good thing.  More games on national TV is always a good thing.  As long as we make the NCAAs occasionally, NIT trips are fine with me until we're making the NCAAs 60% of the time or more.

[JettFlight5]

1 minute ago, RUBillsFan said:

To each his own. 

IMO more Billiken basketball is always a good thing.  More games on national TV is always a good thing.  As long as we make the NCAAs occasionally, NIT trips are fine with me until we're making the NCAAs 60% of the time or more.

I respect your answer here. 

[willie]

2 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

To each his own. 

IMO more Billiken basketball is always a good thing.  More games on national TV is always a good thing.  As long as we make the NCAAs occasionally, NIT trips are fine with me until we're making the NCAAs 60% of the time or more.

I am not trying to be cute but I think we need to make the tournament every year. 

[NH]

My only confusion with the Ford criticism is I can never figure out what the actual critiques are. Some on this board seem to think he's not a tactically adept coach, but I have never heard specifically what they don't like. Our 2018-2019 team that was switching between multiple defenses mid-possession was, in my opinion, very well coached defensively. Our offensive efficiency this year was the best it's been since 2011-2012 and has improved every year under Ford. We have never struck me as an undisciplined team under Ford and we almost always play hard. 

Do I think Ford is perfect? Absolutely not. I have complaints about his substitutions, his sideline demeanor, his handling of late-game time management (not getting 2-for-1 against VCU was inexcusable; boggled end of game against UMass last year). But I also think that this narrative that he only recruits, or that he can't develop players, or that he just rolls the ball out and lets the team play, is only from pre-conceived notions of what Travis Ford represents as a coach and isn't actually based on what happens on the court. 

[Reinert310]

1 minute ago, willie said:

I am not trying to be cute but I think we need to make the tournament every year. 

That’s a fantastic goal. But you don’t go from making making the tournament 20% of the time, to making it 100% of the time, overnight. You don’t make that leap in 5 years. If that’s your goal, I highly suggest you lower your bar. We’ve gotten a double-bye 2 years in a row. The year before that, we won the A10 tournament. We’re obviously light years a head of where we’re we’re before Ford got here. But if anybody really expected when Ford got hired that by this time, our NCAA tournament bids would be automatic year in and year out, I really don’t even know what to tell you. In terms of the NIT, it gave all the guys who are actually on the roster a chance to play another game. That, by itself, has value, whether and fans watch it or not. They decided to go to the NIT because they wanted to play at least 1 more game. Who are we to say that’s not ok? They don’t owe us anything as fans. They’re the ones working their a$$es off. If they choose to accept an NIT bid, I’m going support that decision 100%. To be perfectly honest, I’d probably be more upset if we turned it down, turned down nationally televised games, because we wanted to pout because we didn’t get into the Dance.

[Reinert310]

2 minutes ago, NH said:

My only confusion with the Ford criticism is I can never figure out what the actual critiques are. Some on this board seem to think he's not a tactically adept coach, but I have never heard specifically what they don't like. Our 2018-2019 team that was switching between multiple defenses mid-possession was, in my opinion, very well coached defensively. Our offensive efficiency this year was the best it's been since 2011-2012 and has improved every year under Ford. We have never struck me as an undisciplined team under Ford and we almost always play hard. 

Do I think Ford is perfect? Absolutely not. I have complaints about his substitutions, his sideline demeanor, his handling of late-game time management (not getting 2-for-1 against VCU was inexcusable; boggled end of game against UMass last year). But I also think that this narrative that he only recruits, or that he can't develop players, or that he just rolls the ball out and lets the team play, is only from pre-conceived notions of what Travis Ford represents as a coach and isn't actually based on what happens on the court. 

My biggest complaint with Ford is his lack of adjustments, specifically offensively, and I think he gives best players WAY TOO MUCH of a leash, in game. The amount of times our offense would become stagnant, guys standing around, no ball movement, and we’d just have possession after possession of wasting the shot clock until Goodwin or Perkins or whoever else realized the shot clock was getting low and either plowed into the lane 1-on-3 or settled for a contested 17+ footer, was mind-boggling to me. There is absolutely no way you could watch the tape of our games and think that those sort of isolation plays are our best offense. It’s impossible. The looks we got when we’re cutting and moving the ball quickly is night and day different. But every single game, we’d have at least 5 minute stretches of nothing but hero ball. And Ford doesn’t even call a timeout. He just lets them keep pounding their heads against the wall. But if Hargrove, or Jacobs or Jimmy Bell tried to make any of those same hero ball plays, you can bet they’d be sitting right back down on the bench after the next whistle. That’s by far my biggest issue with Ford.

[brianstl]

2 minutes ago, NH said:

My only confusion with the Ford criticism is I can never figure out what the actual critiques are. Some on this board seem to think he's not a tactically adept coach, but I have never heard specifically what they don't like. Our 2018-2019 team that was switching between multiple defenses mid-possession was, in my opinion, very well coached defensively. Our offensive efficiency this year was the best it's been since 2011-2012 and has improved every year under Ford. We have never struck me as an undisciplined team under Ford and we almost always play hard. 

Do I think Ford is perfect? Absolutely not. I have complaints about his substitutions, his sideline demeanor, his handling of late-game time management (not getting 2-for-1 against VCU was inexcusable; boggled end of game against UMass last year). But I also think that this narrative that he only recruits, or that he can't develop players, or that he just rolls the ball out and lets the team play, is only from pre-conceived notions of what Travis Ford represents as a coach and isn't actually based on what happens on the court. 

My main problem this year is that our guards kept playing overly aggressive defensively looking to force turnovers all season.  Taking those chances worked earlier in the season.  We got a bunch of steals that really allowed us to play more up tempo.  That made up for the occasional wide open looks opponents got often from 3 when we didn't get the steal.  Our opponents saw what we were doing and adjusted as the season went on, but our guards never adjusted defensively.  So the steals dwindled and the wide open looks for our opponents only increased as we kept taking those same chances.

Previous seasons the staff did a good job matching the adjustments opponents made to what we were doing defensively. I thought every previous season under Ford that we improved defensively as the season progressed. This season that didn't happen.

[3star_recruit]

8 minutes ago, NH said:

My only confusion with the Ford criticism is I can never figure out what the actual critiques are. Some on this board seem to think he's not a tactically adept coach, but I have never heard specifically what they don't like. Our 2018-2019 team that was switching between multiple defenses mid-possession was, in my opinion, very well coached defensively. Our offensive efficiency this year was the best it's been since 2011-2012 and has improved every year under Ford. We have never struck me as an undisciplined team under Ford and we almost always play hard. 

Do I think Ford is perfect? Absolutely not. I have complaints about his substitutions, his sideline demeanor, his handling of late-game time management (not getting 2-for-1 against VCU was inexcusable; boggled end of game against UMass last year). But I also think that this narrative that he only recruits, or that he can't develop players, or that he just rolls the ball out and lets the team play, is only from pre-conceived notions of what Travis Ford represents as a coach and isn't actually based on what happens on the court. 

If our roster was full of 3 star 40% three point shooters who can create their own shot instead of 3 star bully ballers and high fliers, I don't think we would be having this discussion.  It takes just as much coaching, IMO, to make the second scenario work as it does the first.

[ACE]

This notion that Sodie would do better with a deep roster is odd, because he could never put that type of team together. But when he did have his most talented team featuring Lisch, Liddell and Ian, it was Sodie's most disappointing season and turned out to be his last. There were high hopes entering that season with talk about contending for the conference title and an NCAA tourney bid. It didn't turn out well and that team didn't even make the NIT.

[willie]

48 minutes ago, Reinert310 said:

That’s a fantastic goal. But you don’t go from making making the tournament 20% of the time, to making it 100% of the time, overnight. You don’t make that leap in 5 years. If that’s your goal, I highly suggest you lower your bar. We’ve gotten a double-bye 2 years in a row. The year before that, we won the A10 tournament. We’re obviously light years a head of where we’re we’re before Ford got here. But if anybody really expected when Ford got hired that by this time, our NCAA tournament bids would be automatic year in and year out, I really don’t even know what to tell you. In terms of the NIT, it gave all the guys who are actually on the roster a chance to play another game. That, by itself, has value, whether and fans watch it or not. They decided to go to the NIT because they wanted to play at least 1 more game. Who are we to say that’s not ok? They don’t owe us anything as fans. They’re the ones working their a$$es off. If they choose to accept an NIT bid, I’m going support that decision 100%. To be perfectly honest, I’d probably be more upset if we turned it down, turned down nationally televised games, because we wanted to pout because we didn’t get into the Dance.

I don't agree that you can't make it every year. Rick talked about building a program. Before he got ill he was doing that. You reload every year. We want to become a Gonzaga ,a Nova,a Xavier. Sure you might have a bad year every now and then but if you build program you should be there every year. 

[Reinert310]

Just now, willie said:

I don't agree that you can't make it every year. Rick talked about building a program. Before he got ill he was doing that. You reload every year. We want to become a Gonzaga ,a Nova,a Xavier. Sure you might have a bad year every now and then but if you build program you should be there every year. 

You’re completely missing my point. Should our goal eventually be to make the tournament every year? Absolutely. But we’re not there yet. Again, you don’t go from 20% to 100% overnight. Travis Ford inherited a dumpster fire from Jim Crews. If you thought he was going to have us in the tournament on an annual basis 5 years later, again, I just don’t know what to tell you. That stuff takes time. It takes time to build that caliber of program. If you honestly believe Ford or anybody else could just snap their fingers and we’d magically be in the tournament every year, then you and I apparently live in 2 completely different realities.

[3star_recruit]

8 minutes ago, willie said:

I don't agree that you can't make it every year. Rick talked about building a program. Before he got ill he was doing that. You reload every year. We want to become a Gonzaga ,a Nova,a Xavier. Sure you might have a bad year every now and then but if you build program you should be there every year. 

First ballot Hall of Fame coaches make it to the tournament practically every year.  The other 99% of coaches, not so much.

[willie]

6 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

First ballot Hall of Fame coaches make it to the tournament practically every year.  The other 99% of coaches, not so much.

My unresearched guess is that about 30 teams make it just about every year. If you kick out the bottom 100 teams that would only make it they win their championship that leaves your 99% a tad high. Yes we could be a top 30 program every year. We should have made it 3 years in a row looking at the 4th.