Mike Zaun wrote: Fair responses, just concerned and hopefully it really is just playing down to teams. It's just interesting how we are still learning to play together with lots of veteran players. Keep in mind that Mount looked like a well-oiled machine and there are 6 freshmen on the team. Among youngest in nation. Food for thought.

I'm amazed we are 8 and 0, especially considering we have played teams, as you describe them, that are well oiled machines and that hit layups, unlike Simon, with perfect spin. Here's my spin: as a fan, you over-analyze every missed shot and every errant pass. Imagine what you would be calling the teams we beat if you were fans of them. Not well oiled machines, that's for sure. I also don't get where people think we only attract athletes that aren't skilled players. Ponds are Heron are both highly skilled, as s Figgy. Same with Clark. Simon is the best overall athlete we have, but he is a far cry from unskilled.

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote: Fair responses, just concerned and hopefully it really is just playing down to teams. It's just interesting how we are still learning to play together with lots of veteran players. Keep in mind that Mount looked like a well-oiled machine and there are 6 freshmen on the team. Among youngest in nation. Food for thought.

I'm amazed we are 8 and 0, especially considering we have played teams, as you describe them, that are well oiled machines and that hit layups, unlike Simon, with perfect spin. Here's my spin: as a fan, you over-analyze every missed shot and every errant pass. Imagine what you would be calling the teams we beat if you were fans of them. Not well oiled machines, that's for sure. I also don't get where people think we only attract athletes that aren't skilled players. Ponds are Heron are both highly skilled, as s Figgy. Same with Clark. Simon is the best overall athlete we have, but he is a far cry from unskilled.

A low or mid major has much different expectations typically than a major conference team with tons of talent. A year or so before I started Marist, we beat Oklahoma State in the NIT and that was like our superbowl. I still remember in like 2008 or 2009 Marist played against St. John's while I was a student and almost beat SJ at MSG. That was a big deal. Being a huge SJ fan now after being a student there as well, you see the difference. Marist's best year would be something one of our coaches could be fired for (NIT). So the expectations are different. So it's not like I freaked out every time Marist lost (and there were many losses). I knew the program just wasn't good and could only get 2 star players. SJ has legit history, tradition, and branding in a major conference and we have some of the best talent in decades. So yes, of course I'll be frustrated if we can't easily handle worst teams than Marist.

Maybe I do over-analyze some menial things at times, but I think it's hard to argue that we are crisp. That's more what I was getting at. Our passes are caught at times with 1 hand before falling into the crowd, we go to make a layup and miss or we make it but it hits mostly rim. Layups are supposed to be a near certainty maybe converted 95% of the time. Just going off my eye test which can be wrong of course but trying to be accurate...maybe we have converted 70%. Many of these were in transition or on fast breaks. I'm sorry I just haven't seen any other teams we've played struggle in this area. When they pass, it's crisp. When they are on a fast break or making a transition layup, it's going in and it's a sure thing. We are not crisp and you can take a guess who I blame for that. We also have a poor tendency to finally go on an 8-0 run and then right as we can pull away, we take a contested 3 a few seconds into the shot clock. Opponent rebounds the brick or airball, and they make an easy layup to end the run. We need to wait for better looks to develop, no need to chuck contested shots early in the shot clock.

Mike Zaun wrote:

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote: Fair responses, just concerned and hopefully it really is just playing down to teams. It's just interesting how we are still learning to play together with lots of veteran players. Keep in mind that Mount looked like a well-oiled machine and there are 6 freshmen on the team. Among youngest in nation. Food for thought.

I'm amazed we are 8 and 0, especially considering we have played teams, as you describe them, that are well oiled machines and that hit layups, unlike Simon, with perfect spin. Here's my spin: as a fan, you over-analyze every missed shot and every errant pass. Imagine what you would be calling the teams we beat if you were fans of them. Not well oiled machines, that's for sure. I also don't get where people think we only attract athletes that aren't skilled players. Ponds are Heron are both highly skilled, as s Figgy. Same with Clark. Simon is the best overall athlete we have, but he is a far cry from unskilled.

A low or mid major has much different expectations typically than a major conference team with tons of talent. A year or so before I started Marist, we beat Oklahoma State in the NIT and that was like our superbowl. I still remember in like 2008 or 2009 Marist played against St. John's while I was a student and almost beat SJ at MSG. That was a big deal. Being a huge SJ fan now after being a student there as well, you see the difference. Marist's best year would be something one of our coaches could be fired for (NIT). So the expectations are different. So it's not like I freaked out every time Marist lost (and there were many losses). I knew the program just wasn't good and could only get 2 star players. SJ has legit history, tradition, and branding in a major conference and we have some of the best talent in decades. So yes, of course I'll be frustrated if we can't easily handle worst teams than Marist.

Maybe I do over-analyze some menial things at times, but I think it's hard to argue that we are crisp. That's more what I was getting at. Our passes are caught at times with 1 hand before falling into the crowd, we go to make a layup and miss or we make it but it hits mostly rim. Layups are supposed to be a near certainty maybe converted 95% of the time. Just going off my eye test which can be wrong of course but trying to be accurate...maybe we have converted 70%. Many of these were in transition or on fast breaks. I'm sorry I just haven't seen any other teams we've played struggle in this area. When they pass, it's crisp. When they are on a fast break or making a transition layup, it's going in and it's a sure thing. We are not crisp and you can take a guess who I blame for that. We also have a poor tendency to finally go on an 8-0 run and then right as we can pull away, we take a contested 3 a few seconds into the shot clock. Opponent rebounds the brick or airball, and they make an easy layup to end the run. We need to wait for better looks to develop, no need to chuck contested shots early in the shot clock.

I hate those boneheaded plays. It has to be bad coaching. For example, I was watching a close game last week and a player fouled the shooter with 2 seconds on the shot clock 35 feet from the basket. That foolish play was done by a UConn player, so I guess Hurley can't coach. Earlier in the game, Yakwe received a perfect pass that would have been a layup, except he fumbled the pass and then traveled. Just like when he was here. The point is that these are college kids. They all make mistakes. Our opponents force threes and miss layups and turn the ball over like us, but even more so. Because you are a fan, you don't focus on them.

gonzalo wrote:

NY JAYHAWKS @NYJayhawks

Upper Room ‘21 6’4 PG Andres Marrero, LuHi ‘20 6’8 F Zed Key, Upper Room ‘20 6’9 F Luis Risquez, LuHi ‘20 6’1 Andre… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

06 Dec 2018 17:28

1 Retweets 11 favorites

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

I was at the game - I would still like us to announce firmer players who attend games - they are after all part of our larger Redmen/Storm family
Thanks Gonzalo!

This is a no brainer and should be done immediately every game. We waste our rich history and excellence by not recognizing these former players. They are at games all the time talking to Louie and Brian Mahoney. New AD should do this before anything else, cost nothing!

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote:

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote: Fair responses, just concerned and hopefully it really is just playing down to teams. It's just interesting how we are still learning to play together with lots of veteran players. Keep in mind that Mount looked like a well-oiled machine and there are 6 freshmen on the team. Among youngest in nation. Food for thought.

I'm amazed we are 8 and 0, especially considering we have played teams, as you describe them, that are well oiled machines and that hit layups, unlike Simon, with perfect spin. Here's my spin: as a fan, you over-analyze every missed shot and every errant pass. Imagine what you would be calling the teams we beat if you were fans of them. Not well oiled machines, that's for sure. I also don't get where people think we only attract athletes that aren't skilled players. Ponds are Heron are both highly skilled, as s Figgy. Same with Clark. Simon is the best overall athlete we have, but he is a far cry from unskilled.

A low or mid major has much different expectations typically than a major conference team with tons of talent. A year or so before I started Marist, we beat Oklahoma State in the NIT and that was like our superbowl. I still remember in like 2008 or 2009 Marist played against St. John's while I was a student and almost beat SJ at MSG. That was a big deal. Being a huge SJ fan now after being a student there as well, you see the difference. Marist's best year would be something one of our coaches could be fired for (NIT). So the expectations are different. So it's not like I freaked out every time Marist lost (and there were many losses). I knew the program just wasn't good and could only get 2 star players. SJ has legit history, tradition, and branding in a major conference and we have some of the best talent in decades. So yes, of course I'll be frustrated if we can't easily handle worst teams than Marist.

Maybe I do over-analyze some menial things at times, but I think it's hard to argue that we are crisp. That's more what I was getting at. Our passes are caught at times with 1 hand before falling into the crowd, we go to make a layup and miss or we make it but it hits mostly rim. Layups are supposed to be a near certainty maybe converted 95% of the time. Just going off my eye test which can be wrong of course but trying to be accurate...maybe we have converted 70%. Many of these were in transition or on fast breaks. I'm sorry I just haven't seen any other teams we've played struggle in this area. When they pass, it's crisp. When they are on a fast break or making a transition layup, it's going in and it's a sure thing. We are not crisp and you can take a guess who I blame for that. We also have a poor tendency to finally go on an 8-0 run and then right as we can pull away, we take a contested 3 a few seconds into the shot clock. Opponent rebounds the brick or airball, and they make an easy layup to end the run. We need to wait for better looks to develop, no need to chuck contested shots early in the shot clock.

I hate those boneheaded plays. It has to be bad coaching. For example, I was watching a close game last week and a player fouled the shooter with 2 seconds on the shot clock 35 feet from the basket. That foolish play was done by a UConn player, so I guess Hurley can't coach. Earlier in the game, Yakwe received a perfect pass that would have been a layup, except he fumbled the pass and then traveled. Just like when he was here. The point is that these are college kids. They all make mistakes. Our opponents force threes and miss layups and turn the ball over like us, but even more so. Because you are a fan, you don't focus on them.

Obviously players have SOME responsibility, not arguing they don't. But habits are instilled by coaches. This happens in practice. You're right...these are college kids. That's exactly why they need a strong coach who can help refine their game and improve their basketball IQ. Mullin's style just seems way too loose and open. Basketball is not a complicated game, but it can be if you have no positions and you don't have a real plan with weak coaching. This is not the NBA, this is college. Players are much more raw and they need to be told what they can and can't do. They need to follow a specific system with structure. Working in a school I can't tell you how many times parents tell me their teenagers are awful at home but do much better in school. It's because schools have structure and routines. Once they get home and it's much more loose, they may not do as well. There are exceptions no doubt, but you can see my point.

Mike Zaun wrote: I'm just sick of playing streetball with everyone standing outside the 3 PT line and the defense literally not even having to move their feet to defend us with no sense of urgency. I'm sick of not having several solid bigs with some semblance of a jump hook or soft touch and solid rebounding (like almost every team has) which we knew we needed badly for several years. I get the same feeling I was getting with Lavin...didn't seem to matter what players he had, they always seemed to underachieve. They never passed the eye test. They got a few nice wins here and there usually isolated and Lav put together some solid seasons record wise but had Sweet 16 talent and got knocked out of tournaments immediately. Our next hire has to be the epitome of hunger and passion. They have to make our program their baby. You get that sense with Cooley at PC and Wright at Nova. They have to have an idea of what style they want the team to be and get skilled specific players to fit that. Then they need to stick to their role and make their teammates better. Then the chemistry comes.

Most streetball courts don't have a three point line.

Mike Zaun wrote:

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote:

Ray Morgan wrote:

Mike Zaun wrote: Fair responses, just concerned and hopefully it really is just playing down to teams. It's just interesting how we are still learning to play together with lots of veteran players. Keep in mind that Mount looked like a well-oiled machine and there are 6 freshmen on the team. Among youngest in nation. Food for thought.

I'm amazed we are 8 and 0, especially considering we have played teams, as you describe them, that are well oiled machines and that hit layups, unlike Simon, with perfect spin. Here's my spin: as a fan, you over-analyze every missed shot and every errant pass. Imagine what you would be calling the teams we beat if you were fans of them. Not well oiled machines, that's for sure. I also don't get where people think we only attract athletes that aren't skilled players. Ponds are Heron are both highly skilled, as s Figgy. Same with Clark. Simon is the best overall athlete we have, but he is a far cry from unskilled.

A low or mid major has much different expectations typically than a major conference team with tons of talent. A year or so before I started Marist, we beat Oklahoma State in the NIT and that was like our superbowl. I still remember in like 2008 or 2009 Marist played against St. John's while I was a student and almost beat SJ at MSG. That was a big deal. Being a huge SJ fan now after being a student there as well, you see the difference. Marist's best year would be something one of our coaches could be fired for (NIT). So the expectations are different. So it's not like I freaked out every time Marist lost (and there were many losses). I knew the program just wasn't good and could only get 2 star players. SJ has legit history, tradition, and branding in a major conference and we have some of the best talent in decades. So yes, of course I'll be frustrated if we can't easily handle worst teams than Marist.

Maybe I do over-analyze some menial things at times, but I think it's hard to argue that we are crisp. That's more what I was getting at. Our passes are caught at times with 1 hand before falling into the crowd, we go to make a layup and miss or we make it but it hits mostly rim. Layups are supposed to be a near certainty maybe converted 95% of the time. Just going off my eye test which can be wrong of course but trying to be accurate...maybe we have converted 70%. Many of these were in transition or on fast breaks. I'm sorry I just haven't seen any other teams we've played struggle in this area. When they pass, it's crisp. When they are on a fast break or making a transition layup, it's going in and it's a sure thing. We are not crisp and you can take a guess who I blame for that. We also have a poor tendency to finally go on an 8-0 run and then right as we can pull away, we take a contested 3 a few seconds into the shot clock. Opponent rebounds the brick or airball, and they make an easy layup to end the run. We need to wait for better looks to develop, no need to chuck contested shots early in the shot clock.

I hate those boneheaded plays. It has to be bad coaching. For example, I was watching a close game last week and a player fouled the shooter with 2 seconds on the shot clock 35 feet from the basket. That foolish play was done by a UConn player, so I guess Hurley can't coach. Earlier in the game, Yakwe received a perfect pass that would have been a layup, except he fumbled the pass and then traveled. Just like when he was here. The point is that these are college kids. They all make mistakes. Our opponents force threes and miss layups and turn the ball over like us, but even more so. Because you are a fan, you don't focus on them.

Obviously players have SOME responsibility, not arguing they don't. But habits are instilled by coaches. This happens in practice. You're right...these are college kids. That's exactly why they need a strong coach who can help refine their game and improve their basketball IQ. Mullin's style just seems way too loose and open. Basketball is not a complicated game, but it can be if you have no positions and you don't have a real plan with weak coaching. This is not the NBA, this is college. Players are much more raw and they need to be told what they can and can't do. They need to follow a specific system with structure. Working in a school I can't tell you how many times parents tell me their teenagers are awful at home but do much better in school. It's because schools have structure and routines. Once they get home and it's much more loose, they may not do as well. There are exceptions no doubt, but you can see my point.

Who was one of the most fundamentally sound players in the NBA over and above his physical ability?

Who is likely the fittest 55 year old coach in the college ranks, who not only has his players on fitness regimens, but his own staff?

Which player who was among the slowest players in the NBA, was also perennially among the leader in steals, and managed to average 0.6 blocks per game for his career, 4.1 rebounds including 1 offensive rebound, despite being lead footed?

Which college assistant spent several years breaking down film for the coaching staffs in the NBA?

To think that Mullin's staff does not work on effort, habits, positioning, shot selection, careless play, defensive effort, etc, is just sheer lunacy. You can argue that play is sometimes reckless and sloppy, and I'd agree. I've heard announcer this articulate that Mullin promoting an NBA style offense is something every kid wants to play in.

I think you should try to get Mullin's ear on this subject, or perhaps discuss it with Cragg who can communicate your concerns to the coaching staff.