Jump to content

2021-2022 Season


Aquinas

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

9 minutes ago, willie said:

It’s x days before your first game. Varies between schools. You are allowed so many practices before that game so there is coaching discretion. 

I believe it’s 42 days prior to your first game, and you can hold 30 practices in that time period. Coach has practiced 5 days straight with two days off, but said he might take the late Coach Stuen’s suggestion and practice 3 consecutive days followed by a day off.

bauman likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, billikenbill said:

I believe it’s 42 days prior to your first game, and you can hold 30 practices in that time period. Coach has practiced 5 days straight with two days off, but said he might take the late Coach Stuen’s suggestion and practice 3 consecutive days followed by a day off.

Okay this is what I was looking for. Backing up 42 days from Nov 9 puts you into mid next week. But yes we know Coach starts with some of the required off days so I’m guessing sometime week of Oct 4. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

I admire your ability to read so much into one still shot. 

That one pic tells me that he looks like a well conditioned plus athlete.  Raw, probably, but appears to be blessed with the physical tools needed to succeed.  Could be a big plus for SLU.

Just finished this book.  Could use a "Sooley" without the sad ending.  Ya never know.    https://www.inquirer.com/arts/books/john-grisham-sooley-book-review-20210505.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WVBilliken said:

That one pic tells me that he looks like a well conditioned plus athlete.  Raw, probably, but appears to be blessed with the physical tools needed to succeed.  Could be a big plus for SLU.

Just finished this book.  Could use a "Sooley" without the sad ending.  Ya never know.    https://www.inquirer.com/arts/books/john-grisham-sooley-book-review-20210505.html

Can you tell what he had for lunch from the photo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/25/2021 at 3:15 PM, billikenbill said:

I believe it’s 42 days prior to your first game, and you can hold 30 practices in that time period. Coach has practiced 5 days straight with two days off, but said he might take the late Coach Stuen’s suggestion and practice 3 consecutive days followed by a day off.

You nailed it. Xavier had their first practice today, 42 days ahead of Nov 9. 
So when does Ford open the gate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

You nailed it. Xavier had their first practice today, 42 days ahead of Nov 9. 
So when does Ford open the gate?

I think I heard Stu say that they will start practice on Friday on this "Valley Hoops Insider" Podcast from last night:

Note: I'm not sure why Valley Hoops Insider is covering SLU Basketball, but I'm not necessarily complaining about extra SLU content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

I think I heard Stu say that they will start practice on Friday on this "Valley Hoops Insider" Podcast from last night:

Note: I'm not sure why Valley Hoops Insider is covering SLU Basketball, but I'm not necessarily complaining about extra SLU content.

They always have a tab for SLU on that site.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry Schroeder's panel talked at length about the prospect of playing positionless basketball.  Positionless really means guys who are capable of playing multiple positions:  Guys who can handle the ball like a guard, shoot it well enough to keep defenses honest and defend positions 2-4. 

I think they overestimate the number of guys we have that can do that.  Perkins is dynamite offensively but only a passable  defender.  Thatch, despite his stature, can defend positions 1-3 and and smaller 4s but doesn't scare teams offensively.  Nesbitt is the closest we have to someone you have to worry about offensively and defensively. The other 6'4 to 6'6 guys on the team are either limited defensively, don't handle the ball well enough or both.

Historically, we have had an issue with guys going off on us at the point guard, wing and power forward.  My hope is that Rashad Williams and Jordan Nesbitt will help clamp down on the first two positions.

cgeldmacher and RUBillsFan like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Harry Schroeder's panel talked at length about the prospect of playing positionless basketball.  Positionless really means guys who are capable of playing multiple positions:  Guys who can handle the ball like a guard, shoot it well enough to keep defenses honest and defend positions 2-4. 

I think they overestimate the number of guys we have that can do that.  Perkins is dynamite offensively but only a passable  defender.  Thatch, despite his stature, can defend positions 1-3 and and smaller 4s but doesn't scare teams offensively.  Nesbitt is the closest we have to someone you have to worry about offensively and defensively. The other 6'4 to 6'6 guys on the team are either limited defensively, don't handle the ball well enough or both.

Historically, we have had an issue with guys going off on us at the point guard, wing and power forward.  My hope is that Rashad Williams and Jordan Nesbitt will help clamp down on the first two positions.

Totally agree with most of what you're saying.  At the college level, I'm not sure you need multiple guys who can do everything on offense (handle & shoot) while also defending multiple positions to play "position-less basketball".  You just need enough guys with overlapping skillsets who can also do multiple things (not necessarily everything) well.  Or well enough that playing without traditional positions doesn't cause you problems.  A lot of that also has to do with your matchups / your opponent.

If Thatch can handle smaller 4s as you said, that means we don't need to play a traditional 4 and can get away with playing a 1 big lineup against a lot of our opponents.  On the flip side if Okoro is nimble enough to stick with wings on D, we could play him & Linssen together a lot more.

On the Podcast, they mention using Hargrove as the "big" in some smaller lineups.  I think you might be able to get away with that against some A10 opponents, but offensively talented traditional big would eat him alive in the paint.

Something neither of us mentioned so far is rebounding.  You might have guys who can do multiple things on offense and cover multiple positions on defense, but if you're playing smaller & don't have enough rebounding you'll get killed on the glass.  Goodwin's rebounding was a key in allowing us to play with just 1 traditional big.  Hopefully Thatch, Nesbitt & others can fill that role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my few fears for this season will be not replacing Goodwin and french defense and rebounding.   No one can deny that is the difference factor they brought to the Billikens.   I've never seen a college guard like Goodwin that played so hard on both ends and french on D and rebounding was also stellar

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Totally agree with most of what you're saying.  At the college level, I'm not sure you need multiple guys who can do everything on offense (handle & shoot) while also defending multiple positions to play "position-less basketball".  You just need enough guys with overlapping skillsets who can also do multiple things (not necessarily everything) well.  Or well enough that playing without traditional positions doesn't cause you problems.  A lot of that also has to do with your matchups / your opponent.

If Thatch can handle smaller 4s as you said, that means we don't need to play a traditional 4 and can get away with playing a 1 big lineup against a lot of our opponents.  On the flip side if Okoro is nimble enough to stick with wings on D, we could play him & Linssen together a lot more.

On the Podcast, they mention using Hargrove as the "big" in some smaller lineups.  I think you might be able to get away with that against some A10 opponents, but offensively talented traditional big would eat him alive in the paint.

Something neither of us mentioned so far is rebounding.  You might have guys who can do multiple things on offense and cover multiple positions on defense, but if you're playing smaller & don't have enough rebounding you'll get killed on the glass.  Goodwin's rebounding was a key in allowing us to play with just 1 traditional big.  Hopefully Thatch, Nesbitt & others can fill that role.

Excellent post.  I just question whether we have "positionless players" beyond Perkins, Thatch and Nesbitt who do multiple things well.

RUBillsFan likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We essentially replace Goodwin, French, Jacobs and Bell with Okoro, Nesbitt, Jones and Williams.  

We figure to be worse with rebounding and defense, but much better perimeter shooting and free throw shooting. We will have a lot more viable 3-point scoring threats and dare I say it, we could be a very good free throw shooting - it should be a strength.

Not a knock on Goodwin, but I think we have a chance to be a much better offensive team. My biggest question is how will Okoro take over for Has? In addition to rebounding, which was one of French's obvious strengths, he was also a very good passer, shot blocker and could really run and finish on the break. I will be interested to see what Okoro can do in some of these areas. He'll be counted on to more here than he was at Oregon, so hopefully he'll take advantage of this opportunity to blossom.

slufan13 likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Excellent post.  I just question whether we have "positionless players" beyond Perkins, Thatch and Nesbitt who do multiple things well.

I kind of agree.  Playing like the KD era Warriors is every fan's dream, but it's not very realistic. 

I do think you can squint and see potential in some other guys:

Strickland - We haven't seen much at all from him yet other than some impressive garbage time dunks.  He does seem to have the size 6'5" and athleticism to possibly defend multiple positions.

Okoro - I haven't watched any tape from Oregon, but my hope is that (like French) he is athletic enough to hold his own as a perimeter defender if he gets caught in a switch or has to match up against a team playing small.

TJ Hargrove - Similar to Strickland, but with more tape.  He has size 6'4" and athleticism.  I'm not sold on him ever being a lock down defender, but hopefully he improves enough to cover either up or down the defensive spectrum a bit.  With our current lack of inside depth my guess is he'll get more run covering bigger guys.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Excellent post.  I just question whether we have "positionless players" beyond Perkins, Thatch and Nesbitt who do multiple things well.

The way I understand it, the "positionless" tag applies more on the defensive side of the ball.  Do we have enough guys who can defend almost any position on defense that you could throw them all out there together?  I think Perkins, Thatch, Nesbitt, and Hargrove fit that concept.  Lorentsson and Strickland might, but we'd have to see more.

If you get guys that fit that definition on defense, the offensive side is easier as you just have to take advantage of matchups.  If a slow big is defending one of our guards, take advantage.  If a small guard is trying to cover let's say Hargrove, post him up.

TheA_Bomb likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Excellent post.  I just question whether we have "positionless players" beyond Perkins, Thatch and Nesbitt who do multiple things well.

As you've said previously, we don't have any natural 4s. Inevitably when Perkins and Hargrove play the majority of our minutes there, we SLU fans will talk ourselves into it being "positionless" basketball, despite it being just "smallball". I'm not too worried about it though as long as we can rebound and not foul too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always find this discussion on labeling players with numbers as entertaining.  Coach Ford convinced me that those days of labeling players with a position number were gone on one of his radio shows several years ago. He also said players don't like the number labels.

For those that want to hang onto the old tradition, I am interested in your definitions for positions 2, 3 and 4.  Perhaps we can all agree that a "5" (or maybe that is a "4") plays with his back to the basket, and doesn't take a large number of three point shots.  But is there a height or weight requirement for your "5".  Is 6'7" 240 lbs okay?  What about 6'6" and 230 lbs?  What is your criteria that defines a '5'?

Okay, and then what is the difference between your 4 and 5?  Does your '4' play on the wing and shot three's or does he play also in the paint?  Are there height requirements and weight brackets?

Don't even try to differentiate between a '2' and a '3' is today's college ball.  Was Goodwin a '2', a '3', or even a '4'? 

Yes, a Point Guard will bring the ball up the floor and most of the time originate the offense. 

Now, look at the A10.  Who has 1'-5'?  St. Bonnie?  They play the 6'10" Osunniyi and then a bunch of guys 6'3" to 6'5", all listed as guards.  Pick one for your '4' and then tell me why.

Richmond has Golden, who starts in the paint, but has taken 176 three point shots in his career.  Does that make him a 4?  Burton is 6'7" but typically set up on the wing.  He has taken 129 three's in his two years.  Is he a '4' or a '3'. 

VCU has Stockard (listed as a Forward) and then a bunch of tall guards and forwards that play all over the court.  VCU doesn't list a center, so I guess that makes Stockard a 4?

Several posters will suggest I don't know basketball, and that is fine.  It is all personal opinion and everyone has one. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

I kind of agree.  Playing like the KD era Warriors is every fan's dream, but it's not very realistic. 

I do think you can squint and see potential in some other guys:

Strickland - We haven't seen much at all from him yet other than some impressive garbage time dunks.  He does seem to have the size 6'5" and athleticism to possibly defend multiple positions.

Okoro - I haven't watched any tape from Oregon, but my hope is that (like French) he is athletic enough to hold his own as a perimeter defender if he gets caught in a switch or has to match up against a team playing small.

TJ Hargrove - Similar to Strickland, but with more tape.  He has size 6'4" and athleticism.  I'm not sold on him ever being a lock down defender, but hopefully he improves enough to cover either up or down the defensive spectrum a bit.  With our current lack of inside depth my guess is he'll get more run covering bigger guys.

 

I don't buy the idea that TJ can cover a bigger guy or play the 5 on a smaller lineup. Unless his strength has improved dramatically he was manhandled on the block last year. He had trouble rebounding in a crowd do to lack of strength. Got his hands on a lot of balls he couldn't pull in. I also thought he was pretty good at chasing people on the wing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, NH said:

As you've said previously, we don't have any natural 4s. Inevitably when Perkins and Hargrove play the majority of our minutes there, we SLU fans will talk ourselves into it being "positionless" basketball, despite it being just "smallball". I'm not too worried about it though as long as we can rebound and not foul too much.

I think Okoro is actually an ideal 4. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...