2019-20 Season

[Sheltiedave]

RUBills, if we pulled Collins for Weaver in games where the other team plays a pack defense, prorated we lose 3.5 apg, 0.5 steals, all to gain 3.5 ppg from Weaver.

Since Weaver and Jacobs both fill the spot up 3 pt shooter slot, why not play Jacobs over Weaver, which gives us better D, better rebounding, a better defender, and someone who can step in from 3 pt land to make a short at the rim or midrange?

Collins is not the stick in the mud on offense, he is the straw that stirs the drink. He is better than Weaver at making the entire team score more, while Weaver functions as the energy/breather guard who can score 3s in his backfill time.

When the pack occurs, it is incumbent on everyone not named French to realize they need to markedly up their midrange play, and hit the 3s they do take.

[NH]

6 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

 Do you have one example of a time this year it is fair to criticize Ford?

Im still mad about the end of the UMass game when we didn’t foul down 2 with 40 seconds left

[cheeseman]

1 minute ago, NH said:

Im still mad about the end of the UMass game when we didn’t foul down 2 with 40 seconds left

The problem with this is that there is no consensus among coaches as to foul or not to foul.  So the choice is Fords and many would have agreed with him and of course some coaches would not have - that is the problem with when a strategy does not have a consensus.  

[RUBillsFan]

10 minutes ago, Sheltiedave said:

RUBills, if we pulled Collins for Weaver in games where the other team plays a pack defense, prorated we lose 3.5 apg, 0.5 steals, all to gain 3.5 ppg from Weaver.

Since Weaver and Jacobs both fill the spot up 3 pt shooter slot, why not play Jacobs over Weaver, which gives us better D, better rebounding, a better defender, and someone who can step in from 3 pt land to make a short at the rim or midrange?

Collins is not the stick in the mud on offense, he is the straw that stirs the drink. He is better than Weaver at making the entire team score more, while Weaver functions as the energy/breather guard who can score 3s in his backfill time.

When the pack occurs, it is incumbent on everyone not named French to realize they need to markedly up their midrange play, and hit the 3s they do take.

You're just pulling Collins #s and Weaver's #s off the stat sheet in a vacuum.  If you read my post I wasn't advocating for Weaver to always play more.  I gave specific circumstances where teams are actively taking away what Yuri does best (fast breaks & getting into the lane).  Think about the Fordham game or LaSalle game vs the VCU game.  Fordham and LaSalle slowed the game down packed it in and took away Yuri's creating off the break and getting into the lane.  Against VCU that was wide open and we absolutely needed Yuri on the floor.

I also wasn't advocating Weaver over Jacobs.  My ideal lineup against a slow the pace / pack it in D includes both.  Jacobs or Goodwin are the PGs in this situation.

Your last line is great if guys make shots, but we only have 3 reliable 3 point shooters (Weaver, Jacobs, & Perkins).  Teams are going to let us shoot low % 2s or let Yuri, Goodwin, Hargrove, etc. miss from 3 point land all day long.  That is exactly what they want.  By playing our 3 best 3 point shooters against such a defense, we are better equipped to exploit what the defense gives us.

Note that I'm also not saying Yuri shouldn't play at all in those situations.  We don't have the depth for that.  Just that I'd like to see Jacobs and Weaver get more minutes than they have been against that that type of D.

[NH]

31 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

The problem with this is that there is no consensus among coaches as to foul or not to foul.  So the choice is Fords and many would have agreed with him and of course some coaches would not have - that is the problem with when a strategy does not have a consensus.  

I would say there is general consensus that fouling is the correct move. I can’t prove this, but I would guess that 80%+ of coaches would foul there.

[slufanskip]

39 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

 Do you have one example of a time this year it is fair to criticize Ford?

Not that immediately comes to mind, but I'm 100% sure there are decisions he's made that haven't turned out well and that even he would like to have back. In fact on interviews I've heard him say and I'm paraphrasing " In hindsight I should have "  I'm not a big criticize the coach guy. I was probably worse 20 years ago though. Anytime we criticize a decision or a strategy it's usually after we see it didn't work. We then come up with something that might have worked and tout it like it was a guarantee. 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, NH said:

I would say there is general consensus that fouling is the correct move. I can’t prove this, but I would guess that 80%+ of coaches would foul there.

Well if your proof is your opinion then you have no proof.  

[NH]

46 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Well if your proof is your opinion then you have no proof.  

Agreed, which is why i said as much in my post.

[Old guy]

Nothing to be apologetic for, a lot of what is posted in this board, as well as a lot of what you read in the sports reports is opinion. It may be backed by more or less factual data, but ultimately the right thing to do is what works, whatever it may be.

[Clock_Tower]

4 hours ago, RUBillsFan said:

You're just pulling Collins #s and Weaver's #s off the stat sheet in a vacuum.  If you read my post I wasn't advocating for Weaver to always play more.  I gave specific circumstances where teams are actively taking away what Yuri does best (fast breaks & getting into the lane).  Think about the Fordham game or LaSalle game vs the VCU game.  Fordham and LaSalle slowed the game down packed it in and took away Yuri's creating off the break and getting into the lane.  Against VCU that was wide open and we absolutely needed Yuri on the floor.

I also wasn't advocating Weaver over Jacobs.  My ideal lineup against a slow the pace / pack it in D includes both.  Jacobs or Goodwin are the PGs in this situation.

Your last line is great if guys make shots, but we only have 3 reliable 3 point shooters (Weaver, Jacobs, & Perkins).  Teams are going to let us shoot low % 2s or let Yuri, Goodwin, Hargrove, etc. miss from 3 point land all day long.  That is exactly what they want.  By playing our 3 best 3 point shooters against such a defense, we are better equipped to exploit what the defense gives us.

Note that I'm also not saying Yuri shouldn't play at all in those situations.  We don't have the depth for that.  Just that I'd like to see Jacobs and Weaver get more minutes than they have been against that that type of D.

Yes.  Good points.   But in response, I re-state what Skip has been saying.   I defer to the coaches.

Specifically, Tay Weaver has simply not been good defensively.   Has he improved?  Yes.   If he played better defensive and could handle the ball better, he would play ALOT.   Instead, Tay has been a very unique player.  Usually 5'10" guys with prior D1 experience are also very good handling the ball.   Tay is not.   Usually Seniors who play (not counting the guys who cannot make it off the bench) are good defensively - though with Tay,  it does not seem like he played much defense prior to SLU.  Tay certainly can and does make 3 pointers - which is why I want to play him more just like you  - but when teams focus on him, he is easier to shut down due to his height and other limitations.   I

[RUBillsFan]

45 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Yes.  Good points.   But in response, I re-state what Skip has been saying.   I defer to the coaches.

Specifically, Tay Weaver has simply not been good defensively.   Has he improved?  Yes.   If he played better defensive and could handle the ball better, he would play ALOT.   Instead, Tay has been a very unique player.  Usually 5'10" guys with prior D1 experience are also very good handling the ball.   Tay is not.   Usually Seniors who play (not counting the guys who cannot make it off the bench) are good defensively - though with Tay,  it does not seem like he played much defense prior to SLU.  Tay certainly can and does make 3 pointers - which is why I want to play him more just like you  - but when teams focus on him, he is easier to shut down due to his height and other limitations.   I

Right, the other caveat I threw in my initial post was that Tay has to be able to guard someone on the opposing team in the situations I outlined.  I'm not sure that is the case very often where Weaver's offensive contribution can outweigh his defensive shortcomings.  Perhaps that why his minutes have been limited compared to Collins.

I do want to say that this is a message board and we can question the coaches all we want.  This "well the coaches know more about basketball than you so you must be wrong" defense is silly.  If you know the basketball reason behind why the coaches are right and someone on the board is wrong, then state that reason (like you did with Weaver's D).  I like our coaches, but they aren't flawless.  Questioning their decisions doesn't mean I want them fired.

[Old guy]

To reinforce what I have been posting in today's game thread. I think the team would do better having Hargrove playing more minutes and Weaver less minutes. I tend to agree with what you say about Weaver Clock, BUT he is not good for defence, he is not that great a ball handler, and when he is "cold" and not making his shots, he can be more of a liability to the team than an asset. I think Hargrove is a lot better, as he has shown in the last 2 games (including tonights's).

[SLUperman]

Thinking if we win convincingly at Rhody (10+ points), win out, get the 4 seed, and beat Dayton in the A10 tourney there's a path that exists where we are an at large team, probably 11-12 seed. I mean I'd prefer a repeat party in Brooklyn, but think the SLU at large hopes aren't entirely dead yet.

[Quality Is Job 1]

12 minutes ago, SLUperman said:

Thinking if we win convincingly at Rhody (10+ points), win out, get the 4 seed, and beat Dayton in the A10 tourney there's a path that exists where we are an at large team, probably 11-12 seed. I mean I'd prefer a repeat party in Brooklyn, but think the SLU at large hopes aren't entirely dead yet.

Well, the first part of your dream scenario will certainly be a piece of cake!

[SLUperman]

2 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Well, the first part of your dream scenario will certainly be a piece of cake!

Truly a dream scenario. But if we keep the momentum we've been playing with recently, no reason it can't happen. 

[SLUperman]

16 hours ago, SLUperman said:

Thinking if we win convincingly at Rhody (10+ points), win out, get the 4 seed, and beat Dayton in the A10 tourney there's a path that exists where we are an at large team, probably 11-12 seed. I mean I'd prefer a repeat party in Brooklyn, but think the SLU at large hopes aren't entirely dead yet.

Phase 1: Complete

[Quality Is Job 1]

4 minutes ago, SLUperman said:

Phase 1: Complete

I posted in the game thread:  "Write a book, man!"

[Quality Is Job 1]

16 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Well, the first part of your dream scenario will certainly be a piece of cake!

Is it too late for me to say no irony was intended? *wink*

[SLUperman]

2 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Is it too late for me to say no irony was intended? *wink*

Never too late. Starting to Billieve in this squad. Ford has learned from his mistakes and made some great rotations the last few games. Can't have another let down like at UMass... that loss still bugs me. 

[Quality Is Job 1]

2 minutes ago, SLUperman said:

Never too late. Starting to Billieve in this squad. Ford has learned from his mistakes and made some great rotations the last few games. Can't have another let down like at UMass... that loss still bugs me. 

I don't know, UMass has been earning more respect as the season has continued.  Remember, they subsequently took out VCU.

[SLUperman]

Just now, Quality Is Job 1 said:

I don't know, UMass has been earning more respect as the season has continued.  Remember, they subsequently took out VCU.

It's more about how we lost than losing to UMass. Just complete loss of focus and Ford had a tough one too. Might've been what we needed though because the guys have played with a serious fire lit under their @ss since it happened. 

[BillsBeliever!!!]

Currently 20-8 in the eyes of the committee because of the D2 win. NET will probably be mid 50s. Win the last two of the season and we are 22-8 with a NET around 50. Get the four seed, win the quarterfinal game, and then beat Dayton and we are 24-8 with a NET in the mid to low 40s. Don’t see how a neutral court loss against URI or Richmond would drop us too low as long as we aren’t blown out.

24-9 with 3 Q1 wins and a Mid 40s NET could get us into the Dayton play in games if other bubble teams lose and there aren’t too many bid stealers.

[HoosierPal]

We are still mathematically alive for the A10 2nd seed.  We win out, Rhode Island and Richmond lose out, and Duquesne loses at VCU, we take #2 on tie breakers.  Losing twice to the Dukes could bite us.

[GBL_Bills]

Is there a good resource that lists any non-con games already scheduled for next year?

[Schasz]

18 minutes ago, BillsBeliever!!! said:

Currently 20-8 in the eyes of the committee because of the D2 win. NET will probably be mid 50s. Win the last two of the season and we are 22-8 with a NET around 50. Get the four seed, win the quarterfinal game, and then beat Dayton and we are 24-8 with a NET in the mid to low 40s. Don’t see how a neutral court loss against URI or Richmond would drop us too low as long as we aren’t blown out.

24-9 with 3 Q1 wins and a Mid 40s NET could get us into the Dayton play in games if other bubble teams lose and there aren’t too many bid stealers.

Problem with predicting getting in the NCAA is how many Power 5 teams lose in their Conference Tourney is hard to predict. Yesterday we watched the Vols beat the Gators. FL was pretty hot going into the game. Hard for me to believe FL is in as the SEC is down IMHO!