2019-20 Season

[dlarry]

1 hour ago, Clocktoweraccords2004 said:

Santos I heard popped for marijuana which is why it was quick, no fight to be had. 

You can get kicked off the team for smoking pot?

It’s 2019 for crying out loud. 

Is that a team rule or an NCAA rule?

[willie]

28 minutes ago, dlarry said:

You can get kicked off the team for smoking pot?

It’s 2019 for crying out loud. 

Is that a team rule or an NCAA rule?

Maybe he was dealing. 

[Clocktoweraccords2004]

44 minutes ago, dlarry said:

You can get kicked off the team for smoking pot?

It’s 2019 for crying out loud. 

Is that a team rule or an NCAA rule?

The entire ncaa gets drug tested. Every player in all sports gets them randomly. 

Santos was supposed to be really good but was very lazy and sluggish as well. Yes people at SLU athletics do stuff but “study” before the piss tests 

[almaman]

47 minutes ago, Clocktoweraccords2004 said:

The entire ncaa gets drug tested. Every player in all sports gets them randomly. 

Santos was supposed to be really good but was very lazy and sluggish as well. Yes people at SLU athletics do stuff but “study” before the piss tests 

Pot can be a month long "study". Under the influence is currently not able to be distinguished from 5 week old indulgence. YTF is that sanctioned by the powers that be?

[RiseAndGrind]

Santos was not dismissed for weed. 

No one was sad to see him go. 

I’ll leave it at that

[dlarry]

Just now, RiseAndGrind said:

Santos was not dismissed for weed. 

No one was sad to see him go. 

I’ll leave it at that

Good enough for me!

 

[slu72]

56 minutes ago, RiseAndGrind said:

Santos was not dismissed for weed. 

No one was sad to see him go. 

I’ll leave it at that

And we made the dance w/o him and Baby Huey, aka Gordon. That was what we all wanted last season. Yeah, a sweet 16 might have been doable with those two, as would a complete blow up of the team. I'll take the dance. 

[Aquinas]

I thought we had a reasonable shot at being among the leaders in the A10 this year, if we landed a starting quality big and guard, grad transfers.  Now it isn't impossible, but a lot of things have to go out way. French and Goodwin need to improve shooting range and FTs. Thatch can't have a sophomore slump and must also improve his shooting. Perkins needs to have a big year. Bell needs to play significant minutes. At least 2 of our freshman need to be impact freshman.  Coach Ford will need to figure out who is making the grade and the combinations that work by conference play. With so many new players and freshmen, we are going to see a lot of players getting  lost at times, on both ends of the floor.  Will we press, and run, it depends on who excells and how well we shoot as a team.  If Hargrove is getting a lot of minutes, we are probably running. Our returning 3 experienced players need to stay healthy, an injury especially to French, would be devastating.  A lot of things need to go right. 

[Taj79]

S1 = Kwamain, Reed, Smith & Jordan.

S2 = Henriquez, Bishop, Graves & Goodwin.

S3 = Santos.

I don't consider Gordon any different than Frazier, Smith, Edwin, Ford, Carter or other guys who transfer out for whatever reason.  The S's were all sex related (although now I am hearing otherwise on Santos).

[Old guy]

2 hours ago, Aquinas said:

I thought we had a reasonable shot at being among the leaders in the A10 this year, if we landed a starting quality big and guard, grad transfers.  Now it isn't impossible, but a lot of things have to go out way. French and Goodwin need to improve shooting range and FTs. Thatch can't have a sophomore slump and must also improve his shooting. Perkins needs to have a big year. Bell needs to play significant minutes. At least 2 of our freshman need to be impact freshman.  Coach Ford will need to figure out who is making the grade and the combinations that work by conference play. With so many new players and freshmen, we are going to see a lot of players getting  lost at times, on both ends of the floor.  Will we press, and run, it depends on who excells and how well we shoot as a team.  If Hargrove is getting a lot of minutes, we are probably running. Our returning 3 experienced players need to stay healthy, an injury especially to French, would be devastating.  A lot of things need to go right. 

Nothing at all is ever guaranteed in sports. You  can have the absolutely best team as far a stats and rankings go prior to the season, and have them blow up in little pieces due to injuries, or people leaving for ? reason, or players not performing the way they were expected to or not working well with the team. The time between November and March will expose all weaknesses or strengths of each and every team. What you are describing Ford needs to do is most likely what he is doing right now, plus other things you have never thought about. This happens every single year. We are not out of the Dance yet whether or not Bell plays or does not play significant minutes during the season. There are many moving parts within a basketball team, give them time.

[almaman]

It's like Pluto. I do not think Santos qualifies as and S_.

Does school start Monday?

[Clock_Tower]

17 hours ago, Aquinas said:

I thought we had a reasonable shot at being among the leaders in the A10 this year, if we landed a starting quality big and guard, grad transfers.  Now it isn't impossible, but a lot of things have to go out way. French and Goodwin need to improve shooting range and FTs. Thatch can't have a sophomore slump and must also improve his shooting. Perkins needs to have a big year. Bell needs to play significant minutes. At least 2 of our freshman need to be impact freshman.  Coach Ford will need to figure out who is making the grade and the combinations that work by conference play. With so many new players and freshmen, we are going to see a lot of players getting  lost at times, on both ends of the floor.  Will we press, and run, it depends on who excells and how well we shoot as a team.  If Hargrove is getting a lot of minutes, we are probably running. Our returning 3 experienced players need to stay healthy, an injury especially to French, would be devastating.  A lot of things need to go right. 

Aquinas.

We did land a quality guard transfer in Tay Weaver - and frankly, I am more high on him than I was on Isabell at this time last year.

But yes, we did not land a big grad transfer.  Instead, we did land 2 freshmen 7 footers along with Hargrove who might be able to the play 4 and allow us to move French to the 5.  And according to CF (not me or some pre-season scouting report) Bell has already been impressive, already better than coach thought and apparently will have a large and immediate impact. And keep in mind, not all grad transfers are all that great.   Isabell sure did great down the stretch for us but the first half of last season he we was somewhat of a disappointment -- an undisciplined turnover machine.  And Wiley had a few games last year when he carried us on his back to wins - but for most of the season - he was injured and/or a non-factor.   And personally, I would rather take my chances with our 2 freshmen 7 footers than to have desperately landed another Rasheed Anthony guy.

But most importantly, disagree with your premise.  Even had we signed a grad transfer big, we STILL would have needed the other things you mention to occur from the rest of the team to among the leaders of the A10.

No offense, but do you remember Charlie Spoonhour's teams?  Do you remember him bringing in ALOT of new faces every year ?  Charlie relied heavily upon JUCOs and transfers.   7 new faces for Charlie would be no big deal.  And again, why are all the new faces/transfers/recruits at our competition considered to be positives and yet the new faces/transfer/recruits for us not?   If UD has 4 new transfers, will UD not also have issues getting these guys to gel with the rest of their team? UD, VCU and the others just reload and their guys will all perform as expected?  all will remain healthy?  not have an adjustment period to D1 basketball?  immediately gel with their teammates?  only complement and fill gaps instead of duplicate existing contributions?

[moytoy12]

4 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

 If UD has 4 new transfers, will UD not also have issues getting these guys to gel with the rest of their team? UD, VCU and the others just reload and their guys will all perform as expected?  all will remain healthy?  not have an adjustment period to D1 basketball?  immediately gel with their teammates?  only complement and fill gaps instead of duplicate existing contributions?

Just a small, but important point, UD’s 4 transfers have actually been around the team/coach and practicing for a year plus with UD.  Whereas 5 of our newcomers have only been around since the beginning of summer, 1 has been around a few weeks, and 1 hasn’t yet formally practiced with the team. So, yes, there is a difference in our newcomers and UD’s.

[Compton]

11 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

But yes, we did not land a big grad transfer.  Instead, we did land 2 freshmen 7 footers along with Hargrove who might be able to the play 4 and allow us to move French to the 5..... And personally, I would rather take my chances with our 2 freshmen 7 footers than to have desperately landed another Rasheed Anthony guy.

SLU won't have any 7 footers this year. It will have a couple of 6'10" guys though. 

[slu72]

12 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

Just a small, but important point, UD’s 4 transfers have actually been around the team/coach and practicing for a year plus with UD.  Whereas 5 of our newcomers have only been around since the beginning of summer, 1 has been around a few weeks, and 1 hasn’t yet formally practiced with the team. So, yes, there is a difference in our newcomers and UD’s.

It still seems to take time for a team like UD to gel. I remember a few years back LaSalle had a lot of transfers and they struggled all year. No doubt, though, UD's ahead of us on the getting it together curve. As for VCU, I think they bring back all but a couple of players. I don't think they'll have any problems. Same goes for Davidson and StB. 

[Old guy]

54 minutes ago, Compton said:

SLU won't have any 7 footers this year. It will have a couple of 6'10" guys though. 

So, who  would you prefer to have Matt Neufeld at 6 11 or Jimmy Bell at 6 11 or 6 10 (?).

[Old guy]

45 minutes ago, slu72 said:

It still seems to take time for a team like UD to gel. I remember a few years back LaSalle had a lot of transfers and they struggled all year. No doubt, though, UD's ahead of us on the getting it together curve. As for VCU, I think they bring back all but a couple of players. I don't think they'll have any problems. Same goes for Davidson and StB. 

If you take all coaches, all players, and the types of plays used to be equal to one another, then yes, the amount of time practicing together makes all the difference. If neither the coaches, nor the players, nor the types of plays used are equal, then the amount of practice together is just another factor in the equation. We can be just as good or better than UD by the time we get to play them this year. Stop worrying. What you are saying sounds logical but it is not accurate in terms of probability analysis.

[moytoy12]

54 minutes ago, slu72 said:

It still seems to take time for a team like UD to gel. I remember a few years back LaSalle had a lot of transfers and they struggled all year. No doubt, though, UD's ahead of us on the getting it together curve. As for VCU, I think they bring back all but a couple of players. I don't think they'll have any problems. Same goes for Davidson and StB. 

Just another data point, each of UD’s transfers previously played D-1 ball, 3 of 4 at decent to good programs.  I think it’s fair to assume that UD’s newcomers are more likely to hit the ground running than our guys thus it’s fair to draw a distinction between our new guys and UD’s.  

[Quality Is Job 1]

1 hour ago, Clock_Tower said:

But yes, we did not land a big grad transfer.  Instead, we did land 2 freshmen 7 footers along with Hargrove who might be able to the play 4 and allow us to move French to the 5.  And according to CF (not me or some pre-season scouting report) Bell has already been impressive, already better than coach thought and apparently will have a large and immediate impact. And keep in mind, not all grad transfers are all that great.   Isabell sure did great down the stretch for us but the first half of last season he we was somewhat of a disappointment -- an undisciplined turnover machine.  And Wiley had a few games last year when he carried us on his back to wins - but for most of the season - he was injured and/or a non-factor.   And personally, I would rather take my chances with our 2 freshmen 7 footers than to have desperately landed another Rasheed Anthony guy.

But most importantly, disagree with your premise.  Even had we signed a grad transfer big, we STILL would have needed the other things you mention to occur from the rest of the team to among the leaders of the A10.

Good post, but we want to move French to the 4; we've already seen him as the primary 5.

[3star_recruit]

1 hour ago, Clock_Tower said:

Aquinas.

We did land a quality guard transfer in Tay Weaver - and frankly, I am more high on him than I was on Isabell at this time last year.

But yes, we did not land a big grad transfer.  Instead, we did land 2 freshmen 7 footers along with Hargrove who might be able to the play 4 and allow us to move French to the 5.  And according to CF (not me or some pre-season scouting report) Bell has already been impressive, already better than coach thought and apparently will have a large and immediate impact. And keep in mind, not all grad transfers are all that great.   Isabell sure did great down the stretch for us but the first half of last season he we was somewhat of a disappointment -- an undisciplined turnover machine.  And Wiley had a few games last year when he carried us on his back to wins - but for most of the season - he was injured and/or a non-factor.   And personally, I would rather take my chances with our 2 freshmen 7 footers than to have desperately landed another Rasheed Anthony guy.

But most importantly, disagree with your premise.  Even had we signed a grad transfer big, we STILL would have needed the other things you mention to occur from the rest of the team to among the leaders of the A10.

No offense, but do you remember Charlie Spoonhour's teams?  Do you remember him bringing in ALOT of new faces every year ?  Charlie relied heavily upon JUCOs and transfers.   7 new faces for Charlie would be no big deal.  And again, why are all the new faces/transfers/recruits at our competition considered to be positives and yet the new faces/transfer/recruits for us not?   If UD has 4 new transfers, will UD not also have issues getting these guys to gel with the rest of their team? UD, VCU and the others just reload and their guys will all perform as expected?  all will remain healthy?  not have an adjustment period to D1 basketball?  immediately gel with their teammates?  only complement and fill gaps instead of duplicate existing contributions?

Take SLU out of it.  If Team A was getting a low mid-major grad transfer guard who averaged 21 ppg and Team B was getting a low mid-major grad transfer who averaged 10 ppg, who would you say got the better end of the deal?

If Team A was getting an unranked big who came off the bench for his prep team and Team B was getting a big who was ranked in the top 100 and came off the bench for a high major that routinely makes the Dance, who would you say got the better end of the deal?

If Team A brought in a transfer mid-major guard who averaged 13.3 ppg 4.5 apg and shot 32% from three as a sophomore and Team B was bringing in a guard who has never played D-1 ball and shot 22% from 3 in high school, who would you say got the better end of the deal?

If Team A finished 3rd in the conference last year and returned 67% of their offense and Team B finished 6th and returned 36% of their offense, who would you say got the better end of the deal?

When I'm evaluating teams, I look at the numbers first and attach names to the teams later.  At the same time, I root for my team.  They're two totally separate activities.

 

 

[slu72]

1 hour ago, moytoy12 said:

Just another data point, each of UD’s transfers previously played D-1 ball, 3 of 4 at decent to good programs.  I think it’s fair to assume that UD’s newcomers are more likely to hit the ground running than our guys thus it’s fair to draw a distinction between our new guys and UD’s.  

On the plus side our new guys, mostly, are young and wide open to learning from the coaches and the vets. Transfers may have some embedded habits or thoughts that need to be deleted. Of course, that might have occurred during their year of ineligibility. Will UD hit the ground running, hard to say?  We didn't last year when we thought we were loaded. 

As stated before, hopefully this squad starts finding  their groove in mid January and by A10 tourney time are capable of upsetting some folks. 

[Clock_Tower]

Excellent posts and comments today.   Moy.   Good point:   UD's transfers have been on the team and in their coach's "system" for a year now - advantage UD though Old Guy correctly points out the others must still get used to playing with them and them with the others.   I recall of prior Billikens who sat out a year and there being talk about them being "rusty"...  Also, their transfers have prior D1 experience - not coming straight out of high school , though, 72 makes good comment about sometimes it being easier for youngsters learning rather than partially  seasoned guys (transfers) needing to "re-learn".  RM did not like JUCOs and transfers... Other teams are returning quite abit and their new guys simply need to not mess things up - and that's true.   And as  3 Star provides in his good summary of prior stats and figures, past performance sometimes does indicated future performance.   Do not disagree with any of these points.  Again, though, Spoon showed us year in and year out how talented guys can gel when they are well coached and play as a team.  Honestly, I think bad personalities (Gordon) hindered our team and either a distracted (due to family issues) or a defiant (me first) Isabell also prevented our team from coming together last year.

I guess where I am coming from is this:   I promised not to talk about the program's setback from 2 years ago - and trying to abide by that.   With that said, 2 years ago our team was diverse and our players complemented each other.  We had old and young, experience and young energy, skill and raw talent, we had interior and perimeter shooting, we had a returning PG with experience and new youngster PG with unlimited potential.   Not only was that season ruined but last season was diverse.   Last week, Frank C asked CF on the podcast/radio interview if Yuri Thatch, Goodwin and French could play together at the same time b/c of the lack of shooting.   CF responded - yes - but then pointed out that Thatch is better this year and also that our team will also use Jimerson, Perkins and Weaver to help shoot.   These past 2 years, we could have really used perimeter shooting - but we lacked it.   In fact, we played a lineup very similar to Frank's comment this year of Thatch, Goodwin, French, Foreman and a poor shooting Isabell for most of last year - and yet we still played OK.   In the OOC when teams did not scout us as much and played us man to man, we had alot of success.  When our rivals scouted us, packed the lane and played zone against us, we struggled a lot.   Then, it sure seemed that when Isabell's shots fell, team's guarded him and us on the perimeter and also allowed our "non-shooters" of Goodwin, French, Foreman and Thatch to operate -- and we sure did.   

Am I putting too much pressure on this year's team?  I don't think so.  Instead, I am pointing out that Goodwin, French and Thatch might really be far better than their peers at the top  of the A10 when they are defended honestly - as opposed to a packed-in lane with zones.  If Weaver, Perkins and Jimerson hit from the perimeter, if Thatch, Goodwin and French attack the basket and if Yuri develops into a D1 playmaker, then I think we will towards the top of the A10.   

[willie]

22 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Excellent posts and comments today.   Moy.   Good point:   UD's transfers have been on the team and in their coach's "system" for a year now - advantage UD though Old Guy correctly points out the others must still get used to playing with them and them with the others.   I recall of prior Billikens who sat out a year and there being talk about them being "rusty"...  Also, their transfers have prior D1 experience - not coming straight out of high school , though, 72 makes good comment about sometimes it being easier for youngsters learning rather than partially  seasoned guys (transfers) needing to "re-learn".  RM did not like JUCOs and transfers... Other teams are returning quite abit and their new guys simply need to not mess things up - and that's true.   And as  3 Star provides in his good summary of prior stats and figures, past performance sometimes does indicated future performance.   Do not disagree with any of these points.  Again, though, Spoon showed us year in and year out how talented guys can gel when they are well coached and play as a team.  Honestly, I think bad personalities (Gordon) hindered our team and either a distracted (due to family issues) or a defiant (me first) Isabell also prevented our team from coming together last year.

I guess where I am coming from is this:   I promised not to talk about the program's setback from 2 years ago - and trying to abide by that.   With that said, 2 years ago our team was diverse and our players complemented each other.  We had old and young, experience and young energy, skill and raw talent, we had interior and perimeter shooting, we had a returning PG with experience and new youngster PG with unlimited potential.   Not only was that season ruined but last season was diverse.   Last week, Frank C asked CF on the podcast/radio interview if Yuri Thatch, Goodwin and French could play together at the same time b/c of the lack of shooting.   CF responded - yes - but then pointed out that Thatch is better this year and also that our team will also use Jimerson, Perkins and Weaver to help shoot.   These past 2 years, we could have really used perimeter shooting - but we lacked it.   In fact, we played a lineup very similar to Frank's comment this year of Thatch, Goodwin, French, Foreman and a poor shooting Isabell for most of last year - and yet we still played OK.   In the OOC when teams did not scout us as much and played us man to man, we had alot of success.  When our rivals scouted us, packed the lane and played zone against us, we struggled a lot.   Then, it sure seemed that when Isabell's shots fell, team's guarded him and us on the perimeter and also allowed our "non-shooters" of Goodwin, French, Foreman and Thatch to operate -- and we sure did.   

Am I putting too much pressure on this year's team?  I don't think so.  Instead, I am pointing out that Goodwin, French and Thatch might really be far better than their peers at the top  of the A10 when they are defended honestly - as opposed to a packed-in lane with zones.  If Weaver, Perkins and Jimerson hit from the perimeter, if Thatch, Goodwin and French attack the basket and if Yuri develops into a D1 playmaker, then I think we will towards the top of the A10.   

I think this is a good post but I do disagree with your comment on Isabell.(me first) Isabell in my opinion started the year trying to fit in. Later in the year he started playing with the me first attitude and we became a much better team. Like you I do think if the pieces fit we can compete for the top of theA-10. 

[moytoy12]

19 minutes ago, willie said:

I think this is a good post but I do disagree with your comment on Isabell.(me first) Isabell in my opinion started the year trying to fit in. Later in the year he started playing with the me first attitude and we became a much better team. Like you I do think if the pieces fit we can compete for the top of theA-10. 

We also later found out that Isabell had a lot of personal things going on and he admitted that his head wasn’t really into things early on. 

[AnkielBreakers]

One of the most impressive things from Coach Ford’s radio discussion, was how they track players and the results from the practice scrimmages. He noted that GJ was on the winning team around 80%of the time in the scrimmages. No matter the combination. This is really an aggregated +\- system, and it points to the idea that GJ is the thing that turns the dial. Other teams can’t stop him, and he is not a major liability. We definitely did not hear anything like this about any freshmen in the Ford era. It seems like GJ will be a big part of the future of the Bills, this year and beyond.