2021-2022 Season

[AnkielBreakers]

20 minutes ago, DOC said:

Do you see Kramer in the Ford 8 next year?

I Motion that we just nickname him Cosmo.

[NH]

1 hour ago, BIG BILL FAN said:

Were you one on the talent evaluators who said YC wouldn’t play significant minutes until he was a jr??? There were many who said that. I agree with Roy on Kramer, and I have saw him play numerous  times.  By the way, I said Collins was a day one starter... not that it took much sense to realize that...

I’m not sure, but I think said Yuri would play when his defense was ready. I also don’t think you can compare Yuri’s situation to Kramer’s. Kramer is a wing who will be competing with veteran players for minutes. He’s coming into a team that doesn’t have a need at his position.

I will be rooting for Nick Kramer as much as anybody on here. He went to the same high school as me and he will be playing for my favorite college team. I’m glad he’s coming to SLU. And I know there are others I respect like @Pistolwho have seen him play that think he will be ready from day one. But my opinion is that it will take Nick a year or two to acclimate to college basketball before he is in the rotation. He has work to do on both his defense and ballhandling, and he would be the first to tell you that.

[3star_recruit]

The factor that none of us MBMs is privy to is how much the coach trusts a new player.  I assumed Rashad Williams would be given a shot ahead of Deandre Jones at the beginning of the season based on his past scoring against strong competition.  Instead, coach gave the backup job to the guy who protected the ball.  It also probably didn't hurt that our first game was against a foe Jones was quite familiar with, his former team.

The winner of the Parker/Williams/Kramer/Thames competition is the guy that wins Coach Ford's trust.  How MBMs can determine that 9 months ahead of time is beyond me.

 

 

[dennis_w]

41 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The factor that none of us MBMs is privy to is how much the coach trusts a new player.  I assumed Rashad Williams would be given a shot ahead of Deandre Jones at the beginning of the season based on his past scoring against strong competition.  Instead, coach gave the backup job to the guy who protected the ball.  It also probably didn't hurt that our first game was against a foe Jones was quite familiar with, his former team.

The winner of the Parker/Williams/Kramer/Thames competition is the guy that wins Coach Ford's trust.  How MBMs can determine that 9 months ahead of time is beyond me.

 

 

You should know by now us mbm’s are smarter than coach ford and he doesn’t always do what we say

[wgstl]

I refuse to believe linssen doesn’t come back for one more try the way the season has gone. I refuse. 

[Pistol]

On 2/25/2022 at 5:06 PM, NH said:

I’m not sure, but I think said Yuri would play when his defense was ready. I also don’t think you can compare Yuri’s situation to Kramer’s. Kramer is a wing who will be competing with veteran players for minutes. He’s coming into a team that doesn’t have a need at his position.

I will be rooting for Nick Kramer as much as anybody on here. He went to the same high school as me and he will be playing for my favorite college team. I’m glad he’s coming to SLU. And I know there are others I respect like @Pistolwho have seen him play that think he will be ready from day one. But my opinion is that it will take Nick a year or two to acclimate to college basketball before he is in the rotation. He has work to do on both his defense and ballhandling, and he would be the first to tell you that.

Just so I'm not misunderstood, I've been saying that he's physically ready. I haven't been saying he'll immediately be in the rotation or a key contributor from day one.

I'm higher on his defensive abilities than some. He needs to polish his offensive game (although his shot is also college-ready).

Both he and Thames will take some time, for different reasons. I'm guessing they both understand this.

[Bills By 40]

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

Just so I'm not misunderstood, I've been saying that he's physically ready. I haven't been saying he'll immediately be in the rotation or a key contributor from day one.

I'm higher on his defensive abilities than some. He needs to polish his offensive game (although his shot is also college-ready).

Both he and Thames will take some time, for different reasons. I'm guessing they both understand this.

I'm hoping that our off-season transfer market efforts are focused solely on a Linssen replacement and we spend the rest of our time, energy, and resources developing Nesbitt into our secondary ball handler. Thames will take some time to grow into the college level game but he's been recruited to be our next PG - it's just a matter of how long it'll take for him to get there. 

I second that Kramer is physically ready. I expected a much different physique than the one I saw and I bet he puts on 10+ pounds of muscle between the time he steps foot on campus and when he plays his first game in a SLU(-H) uniform - his body looks like the type capable of being sculpted by the right guys, and SLU has those guys. 

[NYBilliken]

The Billikens have been very good but not great. They look like textbook NIT team, as someone commented here a while back. They still have a shot at winning conference tournament if they change their strategy and shoot from outside more. They need to find out which outside shooters besides Jimerson can make enough to win games, from Collins, Nesbitt, Hargrove, Thatch, Jones, Williams. Everyone can see that our 3P% is high, but 3PA are low.

Richmond game was a telling game in that it showed Billikens at their best (first half) and their worst (second half). What happened? Richmond responded and adjusted, and Saint Louis failed to adjust.

More telling for the entire season is that balanced roster has backfired in some ways. The first half of Richmond game was great with balanced, brilliant attack, seven or eight players scoring. But then in second half it seemed like everyone was stopped, there was no star who could score despite Richmond's pressure.

The question for Ford critics is, what is best way to forge a dominant team from a squad that plays hard and has seven very good players, but few consistent elite scorers. How do you beat good teams that are playing well?

With balanced roster, in conference season Saint Louis has had seven players score in double figures, for a total of 50 times (including 11 games at 20+ points, and 2 at 30+) across 16 games. The totals per player have been Jimerson 12, Collins 10, Okoro 10, Thatch 9, Nesbitt 5, Hargrove 2, Linssen 2.

Compare this to first-place Davidson with only the five starters scoring in double figures, for a total of 57 times (with 15 at 20+ points, 1 at 30+). The totals per player have been Loyer 14, Brajkovic 13, Lee 13, Jones 11, Mennenga 6). The scorers at Davidson need to score every game. There is no one coming off the bench to score. While at SLU there are different scorers every game, which is great in some ways but can lead to inconsistency and dry spells.

Are Davidson players more talented than SLU players at scoring? Or have they been put in position by Davidson "system" to score more consistently?

Hindsight is 20/20, but it seems part of the answer is you need to shoot more from outside. Unless a team has truly dominant post play there needs to be consistent scoring from outside. This means consistent three-point attempts, not just shooting percentage. For Davidson, the 3PA averages for double-figure scorers are Loyer 6.0, Lee 6.3, Brajkovic 2.6, Jones 4.9, Mennenga 0.6. For SLU, the 3PA averages are Collins 1.8, Jimerson 5.4, Nesbitt 3.3, Hargrove 2.9, Thatch 1.3, Okoro 0.0, Linssen 0.0.

Multiplying 3PA by number of games in double figures for each player shows each team's reliability of scoring from outside. SLU scores 126.8 by this measure, Davidson more than doubles this at 258.5. This season at least, that is the difference between #1 and #5 teams.

So, to get to NCAA tourney, Billikens need to rebalance their offense and shoot more from outside. If they don't, they will continue to be vulnerable to good teams that are capable of elevating their defense inside the arc.

[juniorbill76]

I like your analysis, NYBill. One thing to add:

Richmond game was a telling game in that it showed Billikens at their best (first half) and their worst (second half). What happened? Richmond responded and adjusted, and Saint Louis failed to adjust.

At halftime it’s much easier for a coach to say, “What we’re doing isn’t working, so we’re going to do this instead” than “What we’re doing is working well, so we’re going to do this instead.” Where the Bills fall is in not adapting to the other team's adjustments. (Same basic thing you said but with more words.)

[wgstl]

9 hours ago, NYBilliken said:

Are Davidson players more talented than SLU players at scoring? 

Yes.  Davidson is better than most. 

[MichaelC]

9 hours ago, NYBilliken said:

So, to get to NCAA tourney, Billikens need to rebalance their offense and shoot more from outside. If they don't, they will continue to be vulnerable to good teams that are capable of elevating their defense inside the arc.

.This is easier said than done. The reason Davidson is more balanced is because that's the way they are built. They have several players with complementary skills sets and it's easy to shoot more 3s when 4 of your 5 starters (including a center who is shooting 43%) can make them and when 2 of those players (Lee and Jones) can make long or contested 3s. 

Also, Davidson does employ a more plug and play system that makes them somewhat less reliant on individual players. When we played Davidson did you see any real difference in the way they ran their offense with Huffman instead of Loyer? No, even though Loyer is a better player they did exactly the same things and Huffman put up numbers that were close enough to Loyers that he wasn't really missed.

Except for figuring out how to get more Jimerson more 3s (imo he should be getting 10-13 per game) I'm not sure at this point what else could be done. 

[Taj79]

McKillop's "system" has always worked for the players he had recruited.  Jack Gibbs.  Peyton Aldridsge.  Kellan Grady.  JonAxel Gudmundsson.  Foster Loyer.  Luka Brajkovic.  Hyun Lee.  And even Mike Jones.  It's as close to a system with the right players as Majerus was with the Sons of Majerus.

[Taj79]

To add on to this .... what is Ford's "system?"  To me, it seems to have shifted from the old recent bully ball, to the dependence on "hero ball."  Bess.  Isabell.  Goodwin.  French.  Perkins.  Now Collins.  And if it were designed for Jimerson, I have to believe he'd be getting more threes as many of you suggest.  I watch Gibby all the time.  I swear he clutched and grabbed at every occasion.  I also find it hard to believe that with all his motion, he is covered well at almost every turn.  

And despite the angst over the weave, I don't see our weave designed to get shots.  It is more akin to guys being in motion and shifts all over the place ala a pro football offense.  And its always done in the area between the top of the circle and the half court line.  We are still 25 feet from the objective ---- the orange hoop.  

I have long lamented and questioned just what our offense is designed to do.  I have been beating this drum for a few years now.  And I am still at a loss to answer my own question.  That's what I see.

[NH]

8 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

To add on to this .... what is Ford's "system?"  To me, it seems to have shifted from the old recent bully ball, to the dependence on "hero ball."  Bess.  Isabell.  Goodwin.  French.  Perkins.  Now Collins.  And if it were designed for Jimerson, I have to believe he'd be getting more threes as many of you suggest.  I watch Gibby all the time.  I swear he clutched and grabbed at every occasion.  I also find it hard to believe that with all his motion, he is covered well at almost every turn.  

And despite the angst over the weave, I don't see our weave designed to get shots.  It is more akin to guys being in motion and shifts all over the place ala a pro football offense.  And its always done in the area between the top of the circle and the half court line.  We are still 25 feet from the objective ---- the orange hoop.  

I have long lamented and questioned just what our offense is designed to do.  I have been beating this drum for a few years now.  And I am still at a loss to answer my own question.  That's what I see.

I would try to answer your question, but you are not looking for an answer. I believe you would have the same complaint if we ran the exact same offense as Davidson.

You repeatedly ask what system we run but  what kind of an answer you are looking for? Do you know what systems other schools run? 

The system we run is a pro-style, ball screen heavy offense with a high number of set plays. Another school with a similar offensive scheme would be Purdue. Stylistically, the opposite of our offense would be something like the Bobby Knight motion / passing game.

Our offense this year is our 3rd best offense of the last 20 years. Our offense last year was the 2nd best.

We have (statistically) the 2nd best offense in the A10, Davidson has the first.

Truth be told, our defense has been more disappointing this year than our offense. But people don’t complain about it as much because it doesn’t fit the preconceived narrative about coach Ford that they’ve been complaining about for years. Why actually watch the games when you have a script of complaints from years ago that you can recycle 

[almaman]

28 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

To add on to this .... what is Ford's "system?"  To me, it seems to have shifted from the old recent bully ball, to the dependence on "hero ball."  Bess.  Isabell.  Goodwin.  French.  Perkins.  Now Collins.  And if it were designed for Jimerson, I have to believe he'd be getting more threes as many of you suggest.  I watch Gibby all the time.  I swear he clutched and grabbed at every occasion.  I also find it hard to believe that with all his motion, he is covered well at almost every turn.  

And despite the angst over the weave, I don't see our weave designed to get shots.  It is more akin to guys being in motion and shifts all over the place ala a pro football offense.  And its always done in the area between the top of the circle and the half court line.  We are still 25 feet from the objective ---- the orange hoop.  

I have long lamented and questioned just what our offense is designed to do.  I have been beating this drum for a few years now.  And I am still at a loss to answer my own question.  That's what I see.

GJ seems to be least covered when he stays put in what used to be his sweet spot.

[Taj79]

You make a valid point on the defense.  

Our offense must work, given the numbers you quote.  I take some of that with a grain of salt as far as the A10 ranks are concerned.  Whatever we run has worked well against the dregs of a league that is in the midst of a down year.  Don't you find it surprising that we seem to falter against those teams ranked ahead of us ( 2 and 5 record) and teams with a decent chance of making the dance (i.e. Belmont, UAB, Auburn)?  In almost all cases, we seem to run into a brick wall especially in the second half against these teams.  Which woudl tend to support roy's and others statements about having a secondary scheme.  Yes, I have b*tched about this for a few years --- which seems to cement my belief that Ford is who he is.  I am resigned to accept that definition because I do think he's the best coach for the program right now.  And right now might mean two, three, four years going forward.  

I also think it might be on the players more than ever before.  You have to know how to win and given our second half foibles, it is safe to question if we are there yet.  You can call that what you want --- youth, tired legs, short bench.  

I watch every Billiken game, some even twice on replay.  I watch more A10 basketball then anyone else on here.  I see what I see and it raises the same questions over and over again.  If ---- and this is a big if ---- we go inside tomorrow with Collins to Okoro and Francis gets his shots blocked multiple times by the Mitchell twins, I will again look to see what Plan B is.  Given Rhodey's statistical ineptness covering the three, I am hopeful we plan to take advantage of that.

[GoSluBills]

28 minutes ago, NH said:

 

Truth be told, our defense has been more disappointing this year than our offense. But people don’t complain about it as much because it doesn’t fit the preconceived narrative about coach Ford that they’ve been complaining about for years. Why actually watch the games when you have a script of complaints from years ago that you can recycle 

This isn't talked about nearly enough. Our defense has absolutely been blown up in several of our losses (At Bonnies, At Davidson, At Memphis, at Umass, Home Vs. UAB). All of these games gave up 75 points or more. And our defensive rebounding has been a recurring problem throughout the year. (currently only at 130 in Def Rebounding % on Kenpom). This is where the loss of Goodwin and French hurts the most. 

[dlarry]

2 minutes ago, GoSluBills said:

This isn't talked about nearly enough. Our defense has absolutely been blown up in several of our losses (At Bonnies, At Davidson, At Memphis, at Umass, Home Vs. UAB). All of these games gave up 75 points or more. And our defensive rebounding has been a recurring problem throughout the year. (currently only at 130 in Def Rebounding % on Kenpom). This is where the loss of Goodwin and French hurts the most. 

Agree about the poor defense. 
It also seems like something that should be pretty good.

We’ve heard talk of Collins being an all defensive team member.

Everyone raves about Thatch’s defense.
Okoro is a decent shot blocker. 
Nesbit seems to be a good defender. 

What if going on with the defense?
 

[MichaelC]

28 minutes ago, dlarry said:

Agree about the poor defense. 
It also seems like something that should be pretty good.

We’ve heard talk of Collins being an all defensive team member.

Everyone raves about Thatch’s defense.
Okoro is a decent shot blocker. 
Nesbit seems to be a good defender. 

What if going on with the defense?
 

I think some of the struggles have been matchup based. If you notice, we seem to have the most problems with teams that run a lot of off the ball action, we are for the most part pretty solid with our on the ball defense. Defending off the ball is much harder, requires way more concentration, a willingness to be physical (look at how teams defend Jimerson) and a certain level of feel for the game that can't necessarily be taught. For example players like Gilyard who are really good at anticipating and jumping passing lanes that's not something he was taught, he just has an excellent feel for where the ball is going based on where it is currently, how many passes his man is away from the ball, etc.

Nesbitt, Thatch and Okoro are all good on the ball but even Fred (imo the best defender of the 3) was caught a few times on back door cuts against Richmond, Nesbitt is inexperienced and will probably get better and Okoro often looks uncomfortable guarding on the perimeter (where he obviously can't block shots) so teams like Richmond, Davidson and Bona are tougher matchups for us defensively. 

[SLURadioBoy]

This is great news, but I didn’t think the team had a scholarship available at this time.

 

[billikenbill]

On 2/25/2022 at 11:19 PM, wgstl said:

I refuse to believe linssen doesn’t come back for one more try the way the season has gone. I refuse. 

Prepare to be disappointed. All indications say that Linssen is heading home in May to stay.

[wgstl]

10 minutes ago, billikenbill said:

Prepare to be disappointed. All indications say that Linssen is heading home in May to stay.

yes I've seen all of that. I'll hold hope until his plane takes off, and even then it may still turn around. 

[Taj79]

I thought it was well known that Linssen told the department he and his parents would be there for senior night.  I've counted that as an open scholarship for next year.  He and Jones are for sure gone.  I guess giving Courtney a scholarship depends on how you currently count Perkins in the mix.  If he counts, we ae at 13.  If heis an exemption, then we are at 12.  

[NH]

2 hours ago, SLURadioBoy said:

This is great news, but I didn’t think the team had a scholarship available at this time.

 

We have 13 scholarship guys, but Perkins doesn’t count against the limit, which left one for Courtney.

[billiken_roy]

44 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

I thought it was well known that Linssen told the department he and his parents would be there for senior night.  I've counted that as an open scholarship for next year.  He and Jones are for sure gone.  I guess giving Courtney a scholarship depends on how you currently count Perkins in the mix.  If he counts, we ae at 13.  If heis an exemption, then we are at 12.  

i've always understood the extra chinese flu virus year of eligibility didnt count against the roster numbers.