ACE Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Yes, the talent level in the program is not where it needs to be. It's going to take a little time. Consider that Pulley, Edwin, McClain, Hollins and Kern were all Romar recruits who are no longer here for a variety of reasons. For good measure, Romar left us Ross Varner. Ouch! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 I'm not a Romar apologist but Josh Fisher and Chris Sloan are Romar recruits and they have certainly been solid starters for us the past few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Chris Sloan has been solid from January of last season through the first three games of this year. After that Chris Sloan was kidnapped and replaced by an impostor. I will not rest until I find the real Chris Sloan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 What I don't understand about Romar is that he preached about wanting to develop a program with long and athletic players who could run the floor. Then, after already making the mistake of recruiting and coaching Varner for a year at Pepperdine, he recruits Varner at SLU. From all accounts, Varner is a very bright and hardworking young man who just isn't a very talented basketball player by CUSA (or MVC) standards. There is a role in our system for a guy like Ross: walk-on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Add John Seyfert to the list of Romar recruits who left the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Chris Sloan and Josh Fisher have been two of our better players the last few years. They work very hard and are a lot of fun to watch. Unfortunately, they are both "tweeners" whose limitations become evident against top teams. Sloan isn't broad and strong enough to be a true power forward and isn't athletic enough to be a true small forward. Josh Fisher isn't big enough to be a true small forward, isn't a good enough shooter to be a true shooting guard, and isn't a good enough penetrator/creator to be a true point guard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SluSignGuy Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 "Sloan isn't broad and strong enough to be a true power forward and isn't athletic enough to be a true small forward" Nah, he's just athletic enough to dunk on Memphis and Arizona :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Sloan is a good athlete, so maybe my statement was completely accuarate. A more fair statement is that Sloan doesn't have the ball handling skills and quick first step required to play the small forward position at a high level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 other than h waldman and charlie newberry, i would take josh fisher as my point guard over any point guard the billikens have had in the last 15 seasons. as to sloan not being athletic, i dont know where you keep getting that from. chris runs the floor as well as anyone on the team and as 3 star has indicated, he gets up as quick and effectively as any sf. chris' problem is that he has had to play out of position for the last 3 seasons because we havent had adequate inside players on the team to fill that spot. our horrible recruiting of inside players since the baniak, tatem and heinrich recruiting class has more to do with the billikens roller coaster imo than anything. we do not have the inside horses to play consistent basketball. the mediocre inside game regulates us to a win by the 3 die by the 3 game. our guards have proven they can compete with any set of guards in the country. the problem is we basically play 4 guards as i still believe sloan would have succeeded best as a wing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 romar's problem was he was a good enough recruiter to be in the ballgame to the last second for the tip top recruits. however when he didnt win, the next level were gone thus having to then stock the roster with the leftovers. we have been over it a million times, but had romar ever hit on one of his targeted recruiting classes, which i believe he would have eventually done, then it would have created a far different situation thereafter. he finished in the last group with quite a list of recruits nationally. chuck hayes, darius miles, david lee, jimmy mckinney, jamal sampson, etc all took slu down to the last day. brad is approaching recruiting with a 4 year outlook. he isnt even looking at national recruits or immediate impact players. but what everyone has to realize is that with that change comes a transition period. so we go 500 for a couple or three seasons, i am convinced he will get the job done and in the long run have a pipeline running that has a team on the floor each year that not only is talented, but experienced with mostly junior and seniors playing and with underclassmen on the bench learning the game and taking their turn when the time is right. but to be ripping on sloan and fisher when they are two of the best reasons to still have hope, is beyond me. everyone should be focusing on watching the youngsters improve and thus begin to take on the responsibilities of the less talented upper classmen that are now holding their rightful spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted December 22, 2003 Author Share Posted December 22, 2003 Each of those kids who left or never even made it was a wasted opportunity. This program has to quit pissing away scholarships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted December 22, 2003 Author Share Posted December 22, 2003 The problem is not Fisher and Sloan, they are fine role players. But the problem is that this program has had too many role players and not enough marque (Marque) players. Sloan and Fisher are fine if they are playing alongside more talented players. One of these days, it would nice to again have about 3 consistent scorers in the lineup, like what we had with Claggett, Highmark and Dobbs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Roy, Did you even read my post? I wasn't "ripping on Sloan and Fisher." I pointed out that Fisher and Sloan are good, hardworking players who are playing out of position. Chris Sloan is playing power forward; when has he ever scored a bucket with his back to the basket? Josh Fisher is playing point guard; when has he ever used a crossover dribble? Both Josh and Chris have been great Billikens. Both have learned new positions at their coach's request. Nonetheless, neither player is all-conference material and is a "go to" guy. If we plan on being a top 25 team in the future, our starting point guard and power forward are going to have to be better than Chris and Josh. This is reality, not a criticsm. BTW, if Josh is our best point guard since H. Waldman (Carl Turner? Marque Perry? Larry Hughes?), then it reflects more on our lack of quality recruiting then it does Josh's abilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 You forgot H and Turner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted December 22, 2003 Author Share Posted December 22, 2003 Nark, That's very well stated about Sloan and Josh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 many a point guard do not use a cross over dribble. i personally think a crossover dribble is as dangerous of a move as there is unless you have supreme quickness and hands and the explosiveness to use it. otherwise, a reverse dribble or a spin move is just as effective for making a move to the basket. iverson's biggest gift to the game is the "crossover dribble". of course alan iverson is probably the fastest guard ever to play the game and is the exact person that can get away with "showing the ball". had perry played point his last two years, i agree he would have been better. but his first two seasons while he was a phenomenol raw talent, he wasnt a better point guard than what josh is now. turner played point guard about an average of 4 minutes a game. so i wont get into that comparison. hughes had to play wing so we could make room for jamal walker. why? i dont know. that still leaves waldman and newberry. there is a reason this billiken team last year and this year as well is averaging as low turnovers per game as almost what waldman and company did, and the first place to start is our point guard, josh fisher. what he might lack in first step, i say he makes up for it in strength (the young man is just ripped) and courage. he is fearless. some of those "shots" discussed today, come from moments you can just see, he knows he can make it. now i would rather he either did or he pass, but still, you have to have a fearless point guard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 I was just using the crossover dribble as an example. The point is that Josh does not use dribble penetration to set the tone for the half court offense. The staff appears to have conceded that it doesn't have a true point guard and has asked Josh to get the ball up the court without turning it over. In the respect, he is an effective point guard. Real good teams typically have a point guard who penetrates and creates offense from the top of the key in the half court set. We do not have a real good point guard because Brandon Morris couldn't handle juco academics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 i dont think the pass and screen motion offense that brad uses utilizes the "traditional" point guard approach of dribble down and make a move to the basket, etc. josh is doing what the offense is designed to do. i.e. he is doing what coach soderberg has told him, or would have told alan iverson if he was the billiken point guard. that is just the appearance of brad's offense is my opinion on that. fisher has gotten to the basket a lot this year when the opportunity makes it necessary. we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 If Polk is told to stop breaking the defender's ankles to accommodate the motion offense, we all need to go to Brad's office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 Josh is playing the point for us ... because we have Reggie ... Josh is not a true point guard and is clearly out of position. I think Josh could be a very good 2 with a good point ... problem is we have not had one during his career. A true point would get him open looks from the 3 and draw his man away opening up a lane for Josh to drive ... Josh can get to the hole ... but only with the intent to score ... that is a problem for a point gd. as it doesn't take to much film to learn that your big can let go and help out with Josh as he won't very often find the open man off his drive. Josh lacks a points vision and ability to create easy opportunities for his teamates. That is the main problem with our offense the last few years ... we haven't had a real point guard. Everyone must be able to create their own scoring opportunities. The motion offense will create some open looks from the 3 off screens ... but none inside. Josh is a 2 gd who is doing an admirable job playing the point for the Bills. I commend him for his dedication to his team. I think Josh could be a 2nd or 3rd team CUSA 2 gd. He is now and has in the past given up that opportunity for his team. This team really misses Brandon Morris. Brad dropped the ball when he didn't know Brandon might not become eligible and did not have a back up plan. If you have seen Tommie play you will see a player with a point guards vision Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 maybe polk wont be told to stop one on one moves, but it wouldnt surprise me to see polk on the wing instead of at the point due to the way brad wants the offense to run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 We have two players coming in next year with point guard handles and visions: Polk and Liddell. If Tommie qualifies, next year will be a lot of fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 let's not lose sight of the fact that both dwayne and tommie will be freshmen in conference usa. it isnt like tommie going to the basket versus alton or dwayne pulling up for a shot versus sumner. instead tommie will meet the likes of travis deiner and francisco garcia. i.e. while i agree these two players are the most exciting freshmen to be recruited to slu since larry hughes, they arent exactly on hughes level and i dont expect them to dominate next year. this hit home with me at the shootout. tommie had a very good game versus hazelwood, but as i left that night, i realized he was miles from being in the same class with the likes of shaun livingston, dorrell wright or brandon rush. i think he is going to be a very good player, but i dont expect him or polk or meyer to necessarily even start next year let alone take over the action. that is rare for a conference usa freshman. that is why mr hughes was such a special player. my point is i hope no one is expecting the lights to go on bright next year just because we have 3 nice recruits coming. it will help, but i am expecting a gradual improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aj_arete Posted December 23, 2003 Share Posted December 23, 2003 I'd take him over Josh Fisher on the offensive end. He was a tremendous playmaker, who simply had a horrendous senior year. But he was very solid his first three years. By the way, did he ever recover from a serious car accident a couple of years ago? I heard he was coaching before that. Anyone have an update on him?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.