Recruiting - 2022

[DOC]

41 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

Yet half their team is in the transfer portal. Playing the majority of your roster come conference time just doesn’t happen. And the only thing it does is keep you from getting kids, cuz nobody wants to play 15-20 minutes a night. 

[3star_recruit]

11 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

if you truly have the athletes use them.   particularly if you have plans for them.   why let them get disgruntled.   yes, you want your top players on the court as much as possible, but if they do get temporarily fatigued, their quality of play will suffer until they get a chance to have a quick rest.   i'm not saying take them out the rest of the half or for a long stretch.   

second, there is no doubt playing fast is a far better watch for the fans.    a team scoring lots of points and giving the fans lots of action will put butts in the seats.   

i do agree that the vast majority of teams in college basketball dont do this and st bona is proof that a short bench works as well.  but if we continue to bring in fantastic athletes and then bury them on the bench we are going to see big turnovers every year.   hey maybe that will work out great.   no one really gets what is trending with the stupid rules that are now in effect.   myself, i dont like an ever changing roster.   no chance to develop those fan relationships that make college basketball fun (assuming the players are producing good players).   the days of "next year...." will be over.  as we wont know year to year what next year will resemble.   

but i have said recently a lot, i've now given up on that dream.   i will accept that the billikens are never going to be the likes of the playing fast teams like texas tech or west virginia.  ford is what he is.  it could be a hell of a lot worse.   crewsplatt and ekkertime are still embedded in my brain and i would prefer to take ford with whatever weaknesses i see than ever experience those bad days again.   you all have to admit, ford has done well with this roster fill dilemna it appears.  not many coaches can do that.  

Even the programs that play 10 players have an ever changing roster.  There's nothing you can do about that.  

If you look at the teams that are averaging 80 points a game, maybe two of them are playing 10 deep.

Your argument seems to be rooted in what you think should happen not what actually happens.

 

[slufanskip]

3 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I was solely pointing out that there are teams that play with more depth. 

 

Texas Tech was Number 2 in defensive efficiency... anyway not the point of the post. 

Yes of course there are.

Not in response to you but 

#1 scoring team Gonzaga. 8th guy got 13 mpg. 
#3 Arizona 9 th guy got 13 mpg. 
 

Not skipping 2 but not looking up South Dakota State. 

Not even the highest scoring teams play 10 players real minutes in general. 
 

We were 48th in the country in scoring in a year that we list our top scorer for the season a few days before the 1st real game. Darn Coach Ford WTF

[Gremio14]

27 minutes ago, SLUMedBilliken15 said:

Honestly, I'm not opposed to losing prospects such as Andre L and M Strickland.

The ONLY loss that bothers me is Nesbitt.  He was plain and simply electric.  Fun to watch.  Every time he got the ball.  Period.  I’ll miss him this season.

[billiken_roy]

44 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Just because you think Ford should do something different his not doing isn’t automatically a weakness. 

when slowing done the pace loses us games like it did last year and likely cost us a tourney slot, imo it  is a weakness.  

[billiken_roy]

41 minutes ago, SLUMedBilliken15 said:

Honestly, I'm not opposed to losing prospects such as Andre L and M Strickland.

why were they projects?  why did we not improve them in the offseason after one season to at least garner a few more minutes?   player development is a huge part of a coach's job imo.   the best coaches will develop players.   

[AnkielBreakers]

Just now, billiken_roy said:

why were they projects?  why did we not improve them in the offseason after one season to at least garner a few more minutes?   player development is a huge part of a coach's job imo.   the best coaches will develop players.   

There is no pleasing you, Roy.

[TheA_Bomb]

Simple solution to getting guys ar the end of the bench more PT....blow more teams out.

[3star_recruit]

8 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

why were they projects?  why did we not improve them in the offseason after one season to at least garner a few more minutes?   player development is a huge part of a coach's job imo.   the best coaches will develop players.   

Who is the best coach in the A10?  Why isn't that guy developing the 11-13 players on his roster instead of letting them languish?

[ACE]

42 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

why were they projects?  why did we not improve them in the offseason after one season to at least garner a few more minutes?   player development is a huge part of a coach's job imo.   the best coaches will develop players.   

Just because Andre and Strickland did not play much, doesn't mean they were not being developed. The players ahead of them in the rotation are also being "developed" - GJ, Okoro, Thatch, Yuri, etc. all were improving as well and they were simply better than Andre and Strickland.

It's good to have players competing for playing time - not everybody is going to get, so they move on. Not a big deal. 

[Box and Won]

I don't get the fascination with Andre.  

[wgstl]

5 minutes ago, Box and Won said:

I don't get the fascination with Andre.  

I mean, 6'9 sharp shooters don't grow on tree's. 

[brianstl]

Do some good teams only go 8 deep when everyone is healthy?  Yes, some do, but most go deeper.  16 of top 25 teams in the final AP top 25 went at least nine deep with double digit minutes when healthy last season.  6 of those went 10 deep.  I don't think Strickland or Andre were double digit minute players, but SLU's rotation of only 8 guys getting double digit minutes would have been in the minority if they were a top 25 team last season.

[CBFan]

4 minutes ago, Box and Won said:

I don't get the fascination with Andre.  

I not sure either and when Strickland played in the NIT game he did not impress me with 2 missed dunks.

I hope both do well and find the right fit, but the team improved without them with the freshman and the transfers.

[majerus mojo]

1 hour ago, SLUMedBilliken15 said:

Honestly, I'm not opposed to losing prospects such as Andre L and M Strickland.

People have this notion that these guys and their “high ceilings” are being mismanaged by the coaching staff, and then taking their talents elsewhere. 

The coaches can see how high each player’s ceiling is every day in practice. If they’re not earning minutes during their second season in the program, odds are that ceiling is a lot lower than you think. 

[ACE]

15 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Do some good teams only go 8 deep when everyone is healthy?  Yes, some do, but most go deeper.  16 of top 25 teams in the final AP top 25 went at least nine deep with double digit minutes when healthy last season.  6 of those went 10 deep.  I don't think Strickland or Andre were double digit minute players, but SLU's rotation of only 8 guys getting double digit minutes would have been in the minority if they were a top 25 team last season.

Look at the 2020-21 season, looks to me like Ford went a minimum of 9 deep and even more often 10 deep (with Bell being the 10th)

Perkins

Goodwin

French

Jimmer

Linnsen

Thatch

Yuri

Jacobs

Hargrove

Bell

 

Nine players averaged double digit minutes and Bell averaged 8.8 mpg and played in every game, but two.

Based on the very recent past, I'm not sure why some people are worried about this. I expect a similar breakdown of minutes this year as we saw in 2020-21.

If Perkins doesn't get hurt this past season, Ford is playing 9 deep and if Williams didn't suck so bad, he probably would have gone 10 deep.

[3star_recruit]

7 minutes ago, ACE said:

Look at the 2020-21 season, looks to me like Ford went a minimum of 9 deep and even more often 10 deep (with Bell being the 10th)

Perkins

Goodwin

French

Jimmer

Linnsen

Thatch

Yuri

Jacobs

Hargrove

Bell

 

Nine players averaged double digit minutes and Bell averaged 8.8 mpg and played in every game, but two.

Based on the very recent past, I'm not sure why some people are worried about this. I expect a similar breakdown of minutes this year as we saw in 2020-21.

If Perkins doesn't get hurt this past season, Ford is playing 9 deep and if Williams didn't suck so bad, he probably would have gone 10 deep.

Me either.

[BilliesBy40]

1 hour ago, wgstl said:

I mean, 6'9 sharp shooters don't grow on tree's. 

When did he show proof of being a sharp shooter? Don't you think he would have played more if that was the case?

[wgstl]

1 minute ago, BilliesBy40 said:

When did he show proof of being a sharp shooter? Don't you think he would have played more if that was the case?

I mean, you really cant tell that's what he is? Even in the limited minutes? This is like saying are we sure Strickland is a dunker, bc barely played.

Andre not playing had nothing to do with shooting.  He was too weak to play down low, to slow to play up top.  Didn't move on offense. He was a major liability that shooting 40% from 3 couldn't make up.

[billiken_roy]

2 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Simple solution to getting guys ar the end of the bench more PT....blow more teams out.

you dont blow a lot of teams out when you stop running and full court defense and instead start milking the shot clock.  

[Old guy]

2 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

you dont blow a lot of teams out when you stop running and full court defense and instead start milking the shot clock.  

Could not agree more, but I do not see this aggressive, unpredictable instinct in Ford. I am afraid that he will follow his usual play routine. I am one of possibly few members that really thinks losing Strickland was not a good thing.

In my opinion the worst thing a coach can do is to become predictable or cautious in the way he will handle a given situation. Majerus was not predictable, Crews was very predictable plus he was a wretched recruiter. I just wish Ford was more aggressive and less predictable than he has shown to be.

[cheeseman]

4 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

why were they projects?  why did we not improve them in the offseason after one season to at least garner a few more minutes?   player development is a huge part of a coach's job imo.   the best coaches will develop players.   

Remember what Ford said at the end of the season - we need to get players who want to improve.  Maybe the problem was the players not dedicated to that principle not the coaching staff letting them down.  You can not teach passion.

[BilliesBy40]

2 hours ago, wgstl said:

I mean, you really cant tell that's what he is? Even in the limited minutes? This is like saying are we sure Strickland is a dunker, bc barely played.

Andre not playing had nothing to do with shooting.  He was too weak to play down low, to slow to play up top.  Didn't move on offense. He was a major liability that shooting 40% from 3 couldn't make up.

I could tell he was a big guy who likes to shoot the ball from outside, but no, I could not tell he was a sharpshooter. I am skeptical he would shoot 40% over a real sample size.

[almaman]

4 hours ago, brianstl said:

Do some good teams only go 8 deep when everyone is healthy?  Yes, some do, but most go deeper.  16 of top 25 teams in the final AP top 25 went at least nine deep with double digit minutes when healthy last season.  6 of those went 10 deep.  I don't think Strickland or Andre were double digit minute players, but SLU's rotation of only 8 guys getting double digit minutes would have been in the minority if they were a top 25 team last season.

How many of those were blowouts?

[billiken_roy]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

Remember what Ford said at the end of the season - we need to get players who want to improve.  Maybe the problem was the players not dedicated to that principle not the coaching staff letting them down.  You can not teach passion.

Yeah I was disappointed that Ford seemed to throw the players under the bus more last season than previous seasons