|
Post by possum on Feb 24, 2020 8:41:55 GMT -5
Yeah then only 2 of the next 20 scoring leaders are seniors, at least this year it's hard to say it's a senior dominated league.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 24, 2020 8:48:50 GMT -5
Don't understand with all the blowout games this year how Hart and Sandy have gotten no playing time. What is Nelson trying to prove playing Pridgen and Butler 40 minutes in a 30 point rout. It must be discouraging to practice every day and never get on the floor no matter how lopsided the game is. I don't pay enough attention to know if Florida or Marquette don't play walk ons at all, but right now those guys are critical to the ability to run a practice. These guys work hard and I am in favor of throwing them something. The flip side of that argument is the fact that emptying the bench is a way of conceding. You tell the guys to play hard until the final whistle and never quit. I suppose emptying the bench sends a mixed message. The question becomes when does common sense kick in. I suppose if you're down 10 with a minute to go, you might pull it out. With two minutes to go, even the most purple glasses couldn't see a comeback vs Northeastern, but Sandy, Hart, and Lovisolo never got in
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Feb 24, 2020 9:09:51 GMT -5
Yeah then only 2 of the next 20 scoring leaders are seniors, at least this year it's hard to say it's a senior dominated league. I think it may be comforting to some folks to say that we aren't good at all because everybody knows that seniors are the best players and the good teams are dominated by seniors and we are lacking seniors.
As you note, there are many flaws in this line of reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Feb 24, 2020 9:16:28 GMT -5
Possum I haven’t reviewed it but my guess is the ALL PL teams over the years were highlighted by seniors. Maybe. But it's a team game. And just looking over the last decade, there have only been two regular season champions whose success was inarguably due to its senior class - Bucknell in 2012-13 and 2017-18.
2009-10. Lehigh. Clearly led by freshman phenom CJ McCollum. Three of top seven in minutes were seniors.
2010-11. Bucknell. Led by sophomore Mike Muscala. Only two of top seven in minutes were seniors.
2011-12. Bucknell. Led by Muscala. Only one senior among top seven.
2013-14. BU. Regular-season champ led by sophomore Mo Watson. Three of top eight were seniors. AU. PLT champion. Arguable whether success "led" by senior C Tony Wroblicky or soph PG Pee Wee Gardner. Wroblicky was the only contributing senior on the team.
2014-15. Bucknell. Led by junior Chris Hass. Only one of top eight was a senior.
2015-16. Bucknell. Hass led team in scoring, and two other seniors among top eight. Super-soph class (Foulland/Thomas/Brown) was a major factor in success.
2016-17. Bucknell. Led by the three juniors. No major contributions by seniors.
2018-19. Colgate. Led by three juniors. Minor contributions from two seniors
Agree it is a team game , but leadership and experience aren’t the same as talent. Senior experience and leadership become additional coaches during practices and the challenges that take place off the court For people to lead others must follow and we havent had a group of seniors for a number of years If we did perhaps some of our program issues would have been minimized
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 24, 2020 9:45:20 GMT -5
Generally agree, but possibly the last senior dominated team —of Champion, Alexander, Thompson and Husek in 2016-17 greatly underachieved after their PLC of their junior years So it is not a guaranteed formula to have a senior led team
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Feb 24, 2020 9:54:43 GMT -5
Might be more accurate to use "upperclassmen", vs. seniors. Ralph Willard at least believed experienced teams had an advantage. Quality of upperclassmen figures in too. BU may only have 1 senior, but he's pretty darn good.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Feb 24, 2020 9:59:05 GMT -5
The preponderance of talent on three of Willard's most successful teams (00-01, 01-02, 04-05) was not in the senior class. Two non-seniors on those teams (Szatko, Hamilton) were PoYs.
Six of the last ten PoYs in the PL have been non-seniors
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 24, 2020 10:29:24 GMT -5
Agree it is a team game , but leadership and experience aren’t the same as talent. Senior experience and leadership become additional coaches during practices and the challenges that take place off the court For people to lead others must follow and we havent had a group of seniors for a number of years If we did perhaps some of our program issues would have been minimized It has been posted here that Devin Brown was kind of a jerk when he got here but that the upperclassmen "straightened him out" I didn't really meet him until junior year back when the basketball society was supposed to be mentoring with job search stuff. Devin Brown the junior was an incredibly polite young gentleman with no hints of the issues hinted at on this board. I agree with efg's point Going back to previous point, 05 had contributing senior role players like Hurley, Kinsey, and Smiley. I don't think a total benchwarmer makes a good leader, but someone who is out on the court even if not the star can be a leader. Curry and Pegues were seniors in 01. Serravalle and 4th year man Whearty in 02 Very fair point
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 24, 2020 10:49:37 GMT -5
We currently have one guy (Pridgen) playing at a position where he would be in demand for any of the good teams in the PL.
Our next best player (Butler) would be best suited as the 3rd or 4th wing on a top PL team.
While teams with a more experienced roster are far better off at this level, the experience factor doesn't rally matter if you don't have talented players that are groomed and developed by your coaching staff.
|
|
|
Post by cfrivals on Feb 24, 2020 10:55:07 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope.
Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills.
3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job
“We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Feb 24, 2020 11:15:05 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. It's hard to get a spark off the bench mid game and then a renewed push from a rested starter later in the game when starters are playing 40 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Feb 24, 2020 11:15:22 GMT -5
The flip side of that argument is the fact that emptying the bench is a way of conceding. You tell the guys to play hard until the final whistle and never quit. I suppose emptying the bench sends a mixed message. The question becomes when does common sense kick in. I suppose if you're down 10 with a minute to go, you might pull it out. With two minutes to go, even the most purple glasses could see a comeback vs Northeastern, but Sandy, Hart, and Lovisolo never got in I disagree. If your starters/major-minutes players are getting blown out by 30 and you put in walk-ons at the end of the game, there is nothing left to concede. Your ass was already handed to you. Perhaps, with the right messaging and coaching, putting in walk-ons and emptying the bench might show these guys that what they're doing isn't exactly providing positive results.
If the guys who are playing and getting absolutely stomped week in and week out say that the walk-ons getting minutes, or the unproven players getting minutes over them is insulting, then they aren't looking in the mirror.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Feb 24, 2020 11:19:27 GMT -5
The first 37 minutes or so were bad enough, but then watching our starters playing against the Colgate bench players was really depressing
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Feb 24, 2020 11:21:00 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. Cohen's stat line for D2 Pace would say otherwise. May be apples and oranges but it's all we have to go by and it's pretty mediocre. One could argue that two of Carmody's recruiting classes produced no D1 ballplayers
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Feb 24, 2020 12:20:58 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. It is good you posted the team's record. As fans we might not have known it.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 24, 2020 12:23:30 GMT -5
The flip side of that argument is the fact that emptying the bench is a way of conceding. You tell the guys to play hard until the final whistle and never quit. I suppose emptying the bench sends a mixed message. The question becomes when does common sense kick in. I suppose if you're down 10 with a minute to go, you might pull it out. With two minutes to go, even the most purple glasses could see a comeback vs Northeastern, but Sandy, Hart, and Lovisolo never got in I disagree. If your starters/major-minutes players are getting blown out by 30 and you put in walk-ons at the end of the game, there is nothing left to concede. Your ass was already handed to you. Perhaps, with the right messaging and coaching, putting in walk-ons and emptying the bench might show these guys that what they're doing isn't exactly providing positive results.
If the guys who are playing and getting absolutely stomped week in and week out say that the walk-ons getting minutes, or the unproven players getting minutes over them is insulting, then they aren't looking in the mirror.
Your premise is assuming the starters have the talent but the issue is that they don't have the correct approach, aren't focused enough, working hard enough, etc. (e.g. if Sandy gets subbed in for Niego, Niego will have an epiphany and start playing like he's Alex Vander Baan). I don't think that is a valid assumption. I think Nelson has made it pretty clear when guys have not met his expectations for effort and intensity, and he seems to be satisfied with the work that the guys who are currently playing are putting in. We have a talent issue that is only going to be solved by turning over the roster.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Feb 24, 2020 12:34:18 GMT -5
I disagree. If your starters/major-minutes players are getting blown out by 30 and you put in walk-ons at the end of the game, there is nothing left to concede. Your ass was already handed to you. Perhaps, with the right messaging and coaching, putting in walk-ons and emptying the bench might show these guys that what they're doing isn't exactly providing positive results.
If the guys who are playing and getting absolutely stomped week in and week out say that the walk-ons getting minutes, or the unproven players getting minutes over them is insulting, then they aren't looking in the mirror.
We have a talent issue that is only going to be solved by turning over the roster. Sorry, but not buying that bringing in some better talent (by the way, we have no idea whether the incoming class is going to be good or not...I will take a wait and see approach) is going to magically fix some glaring problems with the defense. More often than not, it's a clear path to the basket for the opposition. Holding the opposition to less than a 50% EFG% would be nice...even approaching 50% would be good. That's something we haven't done since Milan Brown. At 56.2% this season, that's six from the bottom. I'm not so sure subtracting a couple guys and adding others is going to change Nelson's ability to coach a defense.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 24, 2020 12:38:07 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. Obviously you need the players. A mix of talent and leadership/stability is the ideal. Stevens would be more of a question mark to me than a total write-off. You are correct, we didn't see much from him as a freshman as he got basically no minutes playing behind Alexander and Floyd. Sophomore he basically spent the entire season in a boot. If not for an ill advised decision to tough it out for about two minutes, he would have been an easy redshirt. I'm not saying he definitely would have been a solid contributor, but I don't think you can write him (or anyone) totally off based only on limited freshman minutes
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 24, 2020 12:43:39 GMT -5
Back to the topic
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Feb 24, 2020 12:45:38 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. Our record is public knowledge as is our ranking. Would you like us to ignore the fact this has been the worst season in Holy Cross basketball history? The best thing we can say about this season, other than the emergence of JP and AB joining the 1,000 point club, is that mercifully, it is about to end.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 24, 2020 12:49:46 GMT -5
The flip side of that argument is the fact that emptying the bench is a way of conceding. You tell the guys to play hard until the final whistle and never quit. I suppose emptying the bench sends a mixed message. The question becomes when does common sense kick in. I suppose if you're down 10 with a minute to go, you might pull it out. With two minutes to go, even the most purple glasses could see a comeback vs Northeastern, but Sandy, Hart, and Lovisolo never got in I disagree. If your starters/major-minutes players are getting blown out by 30 and you put in walk-ons at the end of the game, there is nothing left to concede. Your ass was already handed to you. Perhaps, with the right messaging and coaching, putting in walk-ons and emptying the bench might show these guys that what they're doing isn't exactly providing positive results.
If the guys who are playing and getting absolutely stomped week in and week out say that the walk-ons getting minutes, or the unproven players getting minutes over them is insulting, then they aren't looking in the mirror.
For the record, I was presenting the the logic of the opposing view and saying I disagree with it. In general, if the game is effectively over, I am all in favor of emptying the bench. I would even do it earlier than most coaches. I think sending a message is a different story, If you're going that route, it has to be during meaningful minutes One of the many reasons I will never be a coach: If a player was "insulted" because a teammate was on the floor while he was on the bench, that player would get a dope-slap upside the head
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 24, 2020 13:00:04 GMT -5
The best thing we can say about this season, other than the emergence of JP and AB joining the 1,000 point club, is that mercifully, it is about to end. Although I thought this season would be bad from the start, and I didn't expect three of the top 9 players to disappear mid-season, I might have bought into the pre-season board hype too much. I need the team to win out and then run the table in the tournament to have my win poll category come out
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Feb 24, 2020 13:02:11 GMT -5
I actually think the 04-05 team is an example of experience paying off (well, at least until the championship game, when a bogus charge call spoiled things). Personnel wise it had most of the players from the previous year, except for Jave. That 03-04 team was a .500 squad. With Keith and Torey having a year under their belts, Kham taking on the role of an upperclassman star, and the seniors becoming more comfortable in their leadership roles, they spiked up to 25 wins.
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Feb 24, 2020 13:06:37 GMT -5
Guys, we would have three seniors on this team and I am not sure they would be any better. Cohen maybe, Stephens and Lesann nope. Recruiting has been very poor over the last 6 years. We were just looking for barely 1 dimensional players who have lacked D1 skills. 3-26 is horrendous! Any way you spell it out, this a bad team/coaching job “We are getting better in practice” Umm, not in games! Deficits are getting bigger and interest in players seems to tail off. Our record is public knowledge as is our ranking. Would you like us to ignore the fact this has been the worst season in Holy Cross basketball history? The best thing we can say about this season, other than the emergence of JP and AB joining the 1,000 point club, is that mercifully, it is about to end. I should have also added the emergence of Matt Faw as someone who can score in the paint.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 24, 2020 13:22:50 GMT -5
We have a talent issue that is only going to be solved by turning over the roster. Sorry, but not buying that bringing in some better talent (by the way, we have no idea whether the incoming class is going to be good or not...I will take a wait and see approach) is going to magically fix some glaring problems with the defense. More often than not, it's a clear path to the basket for the opposition. Holding the opposition to less than a 50% EFG% would be nice...even approaching 50% would be good. That's something we haven't done since Milan Brown. At 56.2% this season, that's six from the bottom. I'm not so sure subtracting a couple guys and adding others is going to change Nelson's ability to coach a defense. So you think our problems are based on Nelson's scheme? Any further details on that or just that it's been easy for opponents to score? Our second team at practice is Riley-Yeutter-LeSaan-Sandy-Verbeek. If my math is correct, those five guys have combined for one good college game (LeSaan at Army, whenever that was). I'm curious as to how you think Nelson should be able to teach the starters (who were not recruited to defend) a completely new defense when there is currently no opportunity to simulate a D1 offense for them to guard in practice. On top of that four starters are averaging 34+ minutes in games, so there is not really much opportunity for live, full speed practice.
|
|