Brock Vice de-commits

[DOC]

Without hindsight, name a top player we have signed that you would have passed on due to roster construction? Let's not forget, we are a mid-major, where perfect rosters don't exist. You can say whatever you want about Ford's coaching, but to say, for whatever reason, he hasn't been a good recruiter is just not true.

[wgstl]

1 minute ago, DOC said:

Without hindsight, name a top player we have signed that you would have passed on due to roster construction? Let's not forget, we are a mid-major, where perfect rosters don't exist. You can say whatever you want about Ford's coaching, but to say, for whatever reason, he hasn't been a good recruiter is just not true.

I can go either way on the Ford recruiting thing.  One thing I wouldn't have mind seeing happen of the last 3-4 years if over recruiting.  It is harder to do a this level yes, but I also think Ford game the current players too much of a leash.  Good teams over recruit and recruiting is apparently Ford's strength, he could have helped make up for his coaching woes by doing so. 

[johnbj14]

I think two things can be true. 1. Travis has historically been a good recruiter. 2. It’s not clear how well that translates to this era, where NIL can allow other programs to level the playing field. 
 

I have serious concerns based on how this off-season is playing out so far that next year’s roster will be an above average one. There are quite a few holes and not a ton of momentum (that’s public) on the recruiting trail. 

[TheA_Bomb]

17 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

You are correct on all of this but I would add one more thing - roster construction is part of the recruiting process.  If you just simply recruit players without real consideration of the entire picture then your effectiveness as a recruiter is in essence devalued.  I have come to the idea that just saying Ford is a good recruiter is not necessarily accurate.

I don't necessarily agree with BrianSTL's assertion that good recruiters aren't necessary in today's NCAA MBB landscape. They maybe even more important as there is more player movement and you must re-recruit your own players yearly.  I personally think that all the player movement is the new normal and that NIL will settle into an equilibrium as the big programs will continue to be the big programs.  There was a window to be a first mover and seize an opportunity on NIL enticements but now it's gone.

as to @DOC I'm not sure who is saying that Ford isn't a good recruiter, most have acknowledged that and no one is saying to pass up on good players but others have criticized the construction of the roster.  So you have a choice you can be dedicated to a system and recruit to that system or you can adjust to the players you have.  Have we really done either?  If we have, we haven't done either effectively.

[DOC]

I was responding to cheeseman, who just said it. I think the poor roster construction is overblown. It definitely was not well put together this year, but during the Goodwin era it was a very good roster for a mid-major. 

[billiken_roy]

30 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

You are correct on all of this but I would add one more thing - roster construction is part of the recruiting process.  If you just simply recruit players without real consideration of the entire picture then your effectiveness as a recruiter is in essence devalued.  I have come to the idea that just saying Ford is a good recruiter is not necessarily accurate.

ford's style is obviously a 4 out 1 in dribble drive offense where the outside shot is normally secondary.   i.e. he doesnt need 4 or 5 bigs on the roster.   it would be nice if he truly had 3 at a point of development that all three could actually contribute, but the last few years that 3rd is a project and had only a few appearances and most were defintely in that development stage yet.  

if your issue is not a decent backup point guard last year, i agree that was a weakness.  young hughes was coming around, but it was far too late in the season.   in my view, it was likely hard to find and convince a point to come here to sit on the bench for likely 35 -38 minutes a game unless yuri got in foul trouble, so that was indeed an issue.  but i am not sure that was fixable.  i guess the answer is having more wings that had point guard capabilities.   and if that is what you are getting at, that indeed would have fixed the issue.   

i feel roster construction wasnt as big of a problem as the way he used his roster.  all those wings and so many hardly played.  as usual, my point is play fast defend close and all over.  when tired, sub in and out frequently.  and my gosh, no more shot clock run downs.  i had no problem with ford's recruiting and roster construction prior to now.   However, i believe this is a new animal now with the NiL nonsense about to really take off.   i am betting it will cost big to play in the same realm as the big boys and those going cheap at best will tread water.   we shall see.

[wgstl]

4 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

ford's style is obviously a 4 out 1 in dribble drive offense where the outside shot is normally secondary.   i.e. he doesnt need 4 or 5 bigs on the roster.   it would be nice if he truly had 3 at a point of development that all three could actually contribute, but the last few years that 3rd is a project and had only a few appearances and most were defintely in that development stage yet.  

 

That's where I get confused.  Yes Ford likes the 4-1 but his 2 best teams here used 2 bigs in at the same time. 

[brianstl]

33 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

I don't necessarily agree with BrianSTL's assertion that good recruiters aren't necessary in today's NCAA MBB landscape. They maybe even more important as there is more player movement and you must re-recruit your own players yearly.  I personally think that all the player movement is the new normal and that NIL will settle into an equilibrium as the big programs will continue to be the big programs.  There was a window to be a first mover and seize an opportunity on NIL enticements but now it's gone.

as to @DOC I'm not sure who is saying that Ford isn't a good recruiter, most have acknowledged that and no one is saying to pass up on good players but others have criticized the construction of the roster.  So you have a choice you can be dedicated to a system and recruit to that system or you can adjust to the players you have.  Have we really done either?  If we have, we haven't done either effectively.

I think you need to look to at like a pro team.  How many pro teams hire a coach because he is a good recruiter?

I think the most important thing a program like SLU needs on their staff in this new era people that can maximize the skill of the talent on the roster and people that can properly judge what the talent out there is actually worth.  That last thing is the biggie and it is where a program like SLU could get an advantage in the first few years of this new era.  The programs that adopt a for a lack of a better term a "Moneyball" approach to building their teams can get a significant advantage while programs throw money at top line numbers and recruiting service rankings.  

[TheA_Bomb]

5 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think you need to look to at like a pro team.  How many pro teams hire a coach because he is a good recruiter?

I think the most important thing a program like SLU needs on their staff in this new era people that can maximize the skill of the talent on the roster and people that can properly judge what the talent out there is actually worth.  That last thing is the biggie and it is where a program like SLU could get an advantage in the first few years of this new era.  The programs that adopt a for a lack of a better term a "Moneyball" approach to building their teams can get a significant advantage while programs throw money at top line numbers and recruiting service rankings.  

Pro team's have a draft and free agency with a player CBA.  NCAA does not have a CBA governing player contracts.  Everyone is year to year.  So going all in like a pro team probably won't work either.  Though I agree with a "moneyball" like approach to zig when others are zagging.  Perhaps we lean into analytics like Nate Oates at Bama or a system like Bellarmine used to run that is just different.

Here's a list of key coaching skills:

Recruiting

Development (subsets individual, team)

Tactics (offense, defense, in game adjustments subsets)

Scouting (Talent Evaluation, opponent subsets)

Many different combinations of the above could make a coach successful.  There is no 1 way to win.  Recruiting still remains important perhaps more so since players can leave easily.  Maybe scouting becomes more important to pick out players that you have a realistic shot at recruiting to your program and that fit into your system.

[cheeseman]

43 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

ford's style is obviously a 4 out 1 in dribble drive offense where the outside shot is normally secondary.   i.e. he doesnt need 4 or 5 bigs on the roster.   it would be nice if he truly had 3 at a point of development that all three could actually contribute, but the last few years that 3rd is a project and had only a few appearances and most were defintely in that development stage yet.  

if your issue is not a decent backup point guard last year, i agree that was a weakness.  young hughes was coming around, but it was far too late in the season.   in my view, it was likely hard to find and convince a point to come here to sit on the bench for likely 35 -38 minutes a game unless yuri got in foul trouble, so that was indeed an issue.  but i am not sure that was fixable.  i guess the answer is having more wings that had point guard capabilities.   and if that is what you are getting at, that indeed would have fixed the issue.   

i feel roster construction wasnt as big of a problem as the way he used his roster.  all those wings and so many hardly played.  as usual, my point is play fast defend close and all over.  when tired, sub in and out frequently.  and my gosh, no more shot clock run downs.  i had no problem with ford's recruiting and roster construction prior to now.   However, i believe this is a new animal now with the NiL nonsense about to really take off.   i am betting it will cost big to play in the same realm as the big boys and those going cheap at best will tread water.   we shall see.

My point was more generic.  Ford seems to end up with a roster that doesn't fit what he wants to do so in my mind that is a negative to his supposed recruiting skill.  Just talking the Eskimo in to buying a refrigerator - that dates me - is simply a salesman job but it may be better to sell ranges and dishwashers as well as refrigerators only.

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, TheA_Bomb said:

I don't necessarily agree with BrianSTL's assertion that good recruiters aren't necessary in today's NCAA MBB landscape. They maybe even more important as there is more player movement and you must re-recruit your own players yearly.  I personally think that all the player movement is the new normal and that NIL will settle into an equilibrium as the big programs will continue to be the big programs.  There was a window to be a first mover and seize an opportunity on NIL enticements but now it's gone.

as to @DOC I'm not sure who is saying that Ford isn't a good recruiter, most have acknowledged that and no one is saying to pass up on good players but others have criticized the construction of the roster.  So you have a choice you can be dedicated to a system and recruit to that system or you can adjust to the players you have.  Have we really done either?  If we have, we haven't done either effectively.

That was the genius of RM - he knew how to evaluate talent, get the pieces he needed for his system, and elevate the people he got.

[HoosierPal]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

My point was more generic.  Ford seems to end up with a roster that doesn't fit what he wants to do so in my mind that is a negative to his supposed recruiting skill.  Just talking the Eskimo in to buying a refrigerator - that dates me - is simply a salesman job but it may be better to sell ranges and dishwashers as well as refrigerators only.

I think Ford recruits to fit his plan....4 out 1 in, with a 8 to 10 man rotation.  Now, you may not agree with his plan, but he certainly gets the players to execute that style.

[cheeseman]

32 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

I think Ford recruits to fit his plan....4 out 1 in, with a 8 to 10 man rotation.  Now, you may not agree with his plan, but he certainly gets the players to execute that style.

Well if all you have to do is have 4 in and 1 out then any type of player would work.  I get that is how the motion offense works but how do you account then for what specific type of players you need to make this approach effective?

[cgeldmacher]

If our best recruiting coach in a long time if not ever does not have success getting recruits to come here in the NIL era, then we have a much bigger problem on our hands.  This off-season actually scares me quite a bit.  If we cannot get quality guys to come in, it may be a sign that we will never be able to outbid the power conferences.  They will always have more money to offer.

I think recruiting still matters quite a bit, but identifying diamonds in the rough (coming down from power conferences or up from lesser conferences) may be the most important attribute of a head coach for our program if we are not going to be able to outspend many of the other programs we want to compete with.

It will be interesting to see if a program like Gonzaga (7,300 students) starts to lose ground in the NIL era to programs like Washington (36,200 students) just based on the availability of NIL funds from its alumni.

[slu72]

In a motion offense you utilize off ball screens to free up players for open shots or back door cuts. I don’t recall seeing a lot of that from Ford’s offense. 

[HoosierPal]

23 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Well if all you have to do is have 4 in and 1 out then any type of player would work.  I get that is how the motion offense works but how do you account then for what specific type of players you need to make this approach effective?

So you agree. 

[cheeseman]

2 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

So you agree. 

I asked a question

[gabriel]

Who is the other SLU assistant that is rumored to be leaving? I saw people mentioning it in the twitter back and forth with Larry Hughes.

[wgstl]

2 minutes ago, gabriel said:

Who is the other SLU assistant that is rumored to be leaving? I saw people mentioning it in the twitter back and forth with Larry Hughes.

Bailey 

[JMM28]

11 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Pro team's have a draft and free agency with a player CBA.  NCAA does not have a CBA governing player contracts.  Everyone is year to year.  So going all in like a pro team probably won't work either.  Though I agree with a "moneyball" like approach to zig when others are zagging.  Perhaps we lean into analytics like Nate Oates at Bama or a system like Bellarmine used to run that is just different.

Here's a list of key coaching skills:

Recruiting

Development (subsets individual, team)

Tactics (offense, defense, in game adjustments subsets)

Scouting (Talent Evaluation, opponent subsets)

Many different combinations of the above could make a coach successful.  There is no 1 way to win.  Recruiting still remains important perhaps more so since players can leave easily.  Maybe scouting becomes more important to pick out players that you have a realistic shot at recruiting to your program and that fit into your system.

If you, me, and brian had a 2.5 million annual NIL budget, we could recruit a top 25 roster to a school like SLU. However SLU (probably) doesn’t have that kind of NIL coffer so recruiting still plays a part. 

I think the cares right now in some order are

Playing in the highest conference they can  

NIL$$$ 

Playing time/opportunity for it

 

[crymdg2]

He just IG'd an offer from Creighton.  Doesn't appear it's a slam dunk he just wants to be closer to family.  Disappointing that appears to be the case. 

[slu72]

12 minutes ago, crymdg2 said:

He just IG'd an offer from Creighton.  Doesn't appear it's a slam dunk he just wants to be closer to family.  Disappointing that appears to be the case. 

I think we’re gonna really regret losing Vice. 

[dlarry]

[slu72]

9 minutes ago, dlarry said:

? I’m old and not getting the above. 

[dlarry]

5 minutes ago, slu72 said:

? I’m old and not getting the above. 

It’s ts the album cover for a band named “Tool.” 
 

I hope the guy is happy where ever he lands just a play on the running gag of calling players who choose elsewhere Tools.