2023-2024 Season

[billikenfan05]

2 hours ago, Soderball said:

Zach; the A-10 would not be a Juan Bid league if SLU wasn't horrendous. Why are we not performing like Dayton? two programs in the top 50 + VCU/Bona/Duq in top 100 gives us a good place to be a two bid league, and then it's very in the realm of possibility.

 

You know it's true. We are the drag here. We are the problem.

I'm confused.

[cheeseman]

3 hours ago, Soderball said:

Cut the coaching salary to 1.5 and have 1 mil for NIL. Pretty much all the woes of this program at the moment boil down to CTF.

Assuming that the school is paying Ford I would think it would not be within the rules for them to pay money into the NIL pot.

[Lord Elrond]

Going into A10 play, we are 221 in NET.  We are 0-2 against Q1 teams, 1-2 against Q2 teams, 2-2 against Q3 teams, and 3-0 against Q4 teams. Looking at our schedule, based on ranking today, on our schedule we have 4 Q1 games, 4 Q2 games, 9 Q3 games, and 1 Q4 game. That’s not enough to move us up into at large territory if we sweep the A10 regular season. The real issue with why this is so hard to predict is other teams will move up and down in NET ranking based on their results, which makes this a very futile exercise. I probably just wasted my time, but all in all I find it very hard to see how we have any other path into the NCAA other than winning the A10 Conference Tournament.

[3star_recruit]

28 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

Going into A10 play, we are 221 in NET.  We are 0-2 against Q1 teams, 1-2 against Q2 teams, 2-2 against Q3 teams, and 3-0 against Q4 teams. Looking at our schedule, based on ranking today, on our schedule we have 4 Q1 games, 4 Q2 games, 9 Q3 games, and 1 Q4 game. That’s not enough to move us up into at large territory if we sweep the A10 regular season. The real issue with why this is so hard to predict is other teams will move up and down in NET ranking based on their results, which makes this a very futile exercise. I probably just wasted my time, but all in all I find it very hard to see how we have any other path into the NCAA other than winning the A10 Conference Tournament.

If you got some enjoyment out of it, it wasn't a waste of time.

We're not making a run at anything without Medley becoming an above average point guard and Thames becoming an impact defensive player.  I will be eyeing their development over the next two months just as closely as Parker's.

[cgeldmacher]

17 hours ago, Lord Elrond said:

Going into A10 play, we are 221 in NET.  We are 0-2 against Q1 teams, 1-2 against Q2 teams, 2-2 against Q3 teams, and 3-0 against Q4 teams. Looking at our schedule, based on ranking today, on our schedule we have 4 Q1 games, 4 Q2 games, 9 Q3 games, and 1 Q4 game. That’s not enough to move us up into at large territory if we sweep the A10 regular season. The real issue with why this is so hard to predict is other teams will move up and down in NET ranking based on their results, which makes this a very futile exercise. I probably just wasted my time, but all in all I find it very hard to see how we have any other path into the NCAA other than winning the A10 Conference Tournament.

Thanks for the work putting that together.  I've always said that conference season should be a wash overall to a conference's NET rankings since each conference goes .500 overall during the conference season.  If you start the conference season with two wins, those two teams you beat end up playing each other.  One will win, helping your NET, and one will lose, hurting your NET.  Certainly, wins move you up and losses move you down, but no conference should improve or fall in the overall NET rankings due to conference season play.

[3star_recruit]

2 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

Thanks for the work putting that together.  I've always said that conference season should be a wash overall to a conference's NET rankings since each conference goes .500 overall during the conference season.  If you start the conference season with two wins, those two teams you beat end up playing each other.  One will win, helping your NET, and one will lose, hurting your NET.  Certainly, wins move you up and losses move you down, but no conference should improve or fall in the overall NET rankings due to conference season play.

If the teams in your conference happened to beat teams that did well in their conference, that would boost the NET of the former.

[cgeldmacher]

8 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

If the teams in your conference happened to beat teams that did well in their conference, that would boost the NET of the former.

That's true

[House]

21 hours ago, JMM28 said:

I talked to a pretty solid source recently that told me SLU has in the neighborhood of 500k +/- 100K for NIL efforts. That is a solid pot, if accurate. 

I believe it's actually a little higher than that.  

[Dr Bird]

15 minutes ago, House said:

I believe it's actually a little higher than that.  

I bet SLU's power boosters know the amount of our NIL pot.  Whether the boosters deem the NIL pot sufficient or not for the team to succeed will affect their support for AD May and CTF after this season.   Certainly facilities and coaching/staff salaries are more than sufficient for success.

[Pistol]

21 hours ago, JMM28 said:

I talked to a pretty solid source recently that told me SLU has in the neighborhood of 500k +/- 100K for NIL efforts. That is a solid pot, if accurate. 

 

25 minutes ago, House said:

I believe it's actually a little higher than that.  

That's higher than I would've expected based on what we've seen so far. I assume that figure (if true) is as of today and was a lot lower last spring. Maybe they're hoping to make a big splash this spring.

[SLUMS81]

I have heard that Mizzou’s vaunted incoming recruits are each getting 6 figure NIL money.  The returning players will need taken care of, as well.  

   Whatever budget we may have needs to support both recruitment and retention.  Such is the cost of being competitive going forward.

[TheA_Bomb]

14 minutes ago, SLUMS81 said:

I have heard that Mizzou’s vaunted incoming recruits are each getting 6 figure NIL money.  The returning players will need taken care of, as well.  

   Whatever budget we may have needs to support both recruitment and retention.  Such is the cost of being competitive going forward.

It's spelled SPUMAC (scandal plagued University of Missouri at Colombia).  No way they're each getting over $1mil.  Highest rated player by consensus 247sports is #41.

If they're spending $1mil each for 5 players ranked 41 to 100 that's bad management. Because like you said you'll need to pay that to retain the player and are they likely to play this season? 

Gary Parrish on his podcast answered a hypothetical question, "would you rather have the #75 ranked transfer for the #75 ranked HS recruit?" He said he'd rather have the #75 ranked transfer over even the #50 ranked HS recruit. He explained that unless that HS recruit is immediate impact player then it won't help your team like a transfer and you're likely to lose the player.

I tend to agree with Parrish. It's rare for a player to stick around and develop at a program.

[willie]

3 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

It's spelled SPUMAC (scandal plagued University of Missouri at Colombia).  No way they're each getting over $1mil.  Highest rated player by consensus 247sports is #41.

If they're spending $1mil each for 5 players ranked 41 to 100 that's bad management. Because like you said you'll need to pay that to retain the player and are they likely to play this season? 

Gary Parrish on his podcast answered a hypothetical question, "would you rather have the #75 ranked transfer for the #75 ranked HS recruit?" He said he'd rather have the #75 ranked transfer over even the #50 ranked HS recruit. He explained that unless that HS recruit is immediate impact player then it won't help your team like a transfer and you're likely to lose the player.

I tend to agree with Parrish. It's rare for a player to stick around and develop at a program.

 

3 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

It's spelled SPUMAC (scandal plagued University of Missouri at Colombia).  No way they're each getting over $1mil.  Highest rated player by consensus 247sports is #41.

If they're spending $1mil each for 5 players ranked 41 to 100 that's bad management. Because like you said you'll need to pay that to retain the player and are they likely to play this season? 

Gary Parrish on his podcast answered a hypothetical question, "would you rather have the #75 ranked transfer for the #75 ranked HS recruit?" He said he'd rather have the #75 ranked transfer over even the #50 ranked HS recruit. He explained that unless that HS recruit is immediate impact player then it won't help your team like a transfer and you're likely to lose the player.

I tend to agree with Parrish. It's rare for a player to stick around and develop at a program.

He said 6 figures not 7. 

[TheA_Bomb]

4 minutes ago, willie said:

 

He said 6 figures not 7. 

Ok sorry misread it. Yeah 6 makes better sense. So not as agregious.  

Bottom line SPUMAC sucks I hope they lose. 

[SLUMS81]

Me too.  

[3star_recruit]

27 minutes ago, SLUMS81 said:

I have heard that Mizzou’s vaunted incoming recruits are each getting 6 figure NIL money.  The returning players will need taken care of, as well.  

   Whatever budget we may have needs to support both recruitment and retention.  Such is the cost of being competitive going forward.

The top mid-major programs basically have 1 guy who could be a high-major starter on a good team, a couple of other guys who could be in a high-major rotation and other guys who are just mid-major guys.  I don't see that changing.  It will just become a lot more expensive to acquire and maintain such a team.

[TheA_Bomb]

The team has enough offensive skills to overcome a lack of coaching and score enough to win. The problem is that defense requires team cohesion and our Coach is ineffective. One indicator of the lack of defensive effectiveness is the lack of turn overs by our opponents.  According to this site:

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/turnovers-per-game

The median turn over rate is 12.4; the best in the country is 7.4* per game here's SLU's D1 opponents Turn Overs:

USI 12 (season avg 15.2)

ILST 15 (avg 12.8)

WYO 19 (14.5)

Vermont 8 (9.5)

WSU 10 (11.8)

Dartmouth 10 (avg 13.1)

USU 12 (avg 11.2)

SIUC 10 (avg 10.9)

Drake 10 (avg 10)

Hofstra 11 (11.3)

LaTech 0 (12.8)

NCState 6 (8.8)

Loyola 9 (12.7)

Average Turn Overs Per Game by SLU D1 Opponents is 10.15. 2 whole Turn Overs Better than the National Median. 9 Teams performed better than their season turn over average vs SLU and 3 performed worse.

 

 

*Rabbit Hole McNeese State has the best Turn Over average in D1 college basketball last season they averaged 14.7 which would rank them at 328 this season. That's a hell of a turn around. Their coach is Will Wade in his first season.  He was fired by LSU after the FBI probe into paying recruits had him on a wire tap.  But that's all legal now. He did well at VCU too.

Check out these quotes by the McNeese St AD at the hiring Marcy 2023:

"This is a completely different job than it was three years ago," said McNeese Athletics Director Heath Schroyer. "McNeese Basketball is one of the best jobs in the nation in regards to one-bid leagues. We are funded at the top of the league, have the best facility, a passionate fan base and many other built-in advantages. I will not make excuses for why we can't win and win big. Quite frankly, there is no excuse. 

"The days of us celebrating making conference tournaments or accepting mediocrity in all of our sports, let alone in basketball, are over." 

[Box and Won]

I just wanted to stop by this thread on the 2023-2024 season to say that I am not enjoying the 2023-2024 season.  Thank you for listening to my TED Talk.

[JMM28]

4 minutes ago, Box and Won said:

I just wanted to stop by this thread on the 2023-2024 season to say that I am not enjoying the 2023-2024 season.  Thank you for listening to my TED Talk.

+1. 

[willie]

We played a lot of ineffective zone last night. Both the 2-3 and 1-3-1 gave up a lot of open looks and lobs. Was this a statement that our man to man can't stop people so lets try something else?

[johnbj14]

10 minutes ago, willie said:

We played a lot of ineffective zone last night. Both the 2-3 and 1-3-1 gave up a lot of open looks and lobs. Was this a statement that our man to man can't stop people so lets try something else?

Switching to zone with this team is like putting lipstick on a pig. The defense sucks, no matter how they try and line up. Bad scheme, below average rotations, and a general lack of awareness add up to one of the worst in the NCAA. 

[Soderball]

35 minutes ago, willie said:

We played a lot of ineffective zone last night. Both the 2-3 and 1-3-1 gave up a lot of open looks and lobs. Was this a statement that our man to man can't stop people so lets try something else?

It's also trying to help Brad stay on the floor since his stamina is so horrendous. There's no way he can play proper defensive assignments right now.

[brianstl]

We currently rank 312th in Pomeroy’s defensive efficiency rankings.  

 

[Lord Elrond]

1 minute ago, brianstl said:

We currently rank 312th in Pomeroy’s defensive efficiency rankings.  

 

I’m surprised it’s that high, I would’ve thought it was worse just looking at the games.

[VeniceMenace]

24 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

I’m surprised it’s that high, I would’ve thought it was worse just looking at the games.

This is Ford’s downfall. In the first half of his tenure,  I thought he was following in the tradition of past SLU coaches with strong rebounding and defense. With time, D has fallen markedly, no set system. It was luck of the draw with players like JGood, French and Bess. Allowing 80 points is now common, long for the days when it was a rarity.