|
|
Post by manayunk53 on Jan 23, 2015 11:21:19 GMT -5
This is quite clearly a disappointing season, and it really might get even uglier as we progress towards the end. But I find myself very conflicted in trying to determine where La Salle actually is as a basketball program. It is obviously not realistic to expect every season to be better than the one before it, but it would be nice to feel like there is some momentum building. Making the NIT in 2012 was great progress, and the run in 2013 was more than I could have ever expected.
But after a big letdown last year and another letdown this year, I don't really know what constitutes a "good season" or a "positive sign" anymore.
Is it reasonable to expect a shot at a postseason tournament every year? Is it reasonable to expect it more often than not? Probably not, but then what is reasonable to expect?
G's favorite measuring stick to bring up is the Big Five. We're not going to be Villanova anytime soon, but it's a nice goal to be the best team in the city some years. It seems overly simplistic to say that we need to try to be ahead of Temple and St. Joe's. Even if that is a good goal to have, is that really all we should be focused on?
I'm interested to see what others think about this. |
|
|
|
Post by heftyexpl on Jan 23, 2015 12:11:15 GMT -5
We are no where as a program until we define our style of play. Find a recipe for success and stick to it. Play smart and discipline. Define player's roles on team. Get the absolute MOST out of every player.
For most fans , i think all agree we want to see exciting basketball. Play better than your given talent. Get a couple of big wins in a season. SO when we do get better players, it equals success.
I'm sorry, for Doc's 10 years of coaching at La Salle he has yet to do anything (as a game coach) that's got me excited. And im starting to think most of our success from Ramon's years we're due to him taking over games.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 12:21:00 GMT -5
We are no where as a program until we define our style of play. Find a recipe for success and stick to it. Play smart and discipline. Define player's roles on team. Get the absolute MOST out of every player. For most fans , i think all agree we want to see exciting basketball. Play better than your given talent. Get a couple of big wins in a season. SO when we do get better players, it equals success. I'm sorry, for Doc's 10 years of coaching at La Salle he has yet to do anything (as a game coach) that's got me excited. And im starting to think most of our success from Ramon's years we're due to him taking over games. I'm plugging something I wrote after the Villanova game.The next step, however, is for one of the aforementioned players to develop a reputation. Duren was a silent killer, often the smallest guy on the floor but one that could break your ankles and land a soft floater through the lane. Mills was a shutdown defender, usually found covering the other team’s best player; making his game more difficult. And then there was Galloway, the uber-athletic, supremely-talented superstar that seemed to lead his team with his words as much as his play.
Which of the current Explorers can fill these roles? Or will they form their own? Giannini can talk about formulas and the abilities of his “big three”, but until one of them rises beyond just the best players on this La Salle squad, the 2014-2015 Explorers will be an average – or worse – basketball team.This is the biggest thing to me. These guys have no identity yet as individuals, so it hard to have an identity as a team. Look at years past and players past. We all knew what these guys were, something that I don't think you can say about this group yet. Call it inconsistency, maybe, but I think it is just a case of 2006 all over again, when La Salle was full of swing players with questionable skills in certain areas. Outside of Wright, who does one thing REALLY WELL, can you say that about anybody else on the squad? |
|
|
|
Post by SICguy84 on Jan 23, 2015 12:46:41 GMT -5
These are the types of threads that pop up on the Hawk Droppings board bi weekly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 12:56:20 GMT -5
These are the types of threads that pop up on the Hawk Droppings board bi weekly. I don't imagine that these are the types of threads that pop up regularly on the Villanova board whatever it is called. |
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Jan 23, 2015 13:02:45 GMT -5
Good post. I think really, we've mostly eliminated the capacity for 23 loss seasons, but I think where we are as a program is a lot of years like last year and this one. Certainly better than things were at the absolute darkest time, but I'm tired of judging everything against Speedy's last few years and the 2004 Scandal.
Yes, we made the Sweet 16 2 years ago, and that was phenomenal. And as a fan, I wouldn't trade it for anything. But in terms of strength of the program, getting bounced in the 1st Round 3 years in a row would have been a better indicator than a lone Sweet 16 appearance.
John Giannini has conducted himself admirably as the head of this program (a few sideline outbursts notwithsanding), and he deserves a lot of a credit for us not being at the absolute bottom tier of the league every year, where we spent a lot of time before him. But I do think his warts as a Coach are starting to show more and more. I'm not saying moving on is the answer (and its not going to happen barring a few 8-23 seasons in a row), but I don't think its totally unfair to wonder if the success of 2011-2013 had a lot more to do with Ramon Galloway than anything else. What was G's best season beyond the 2 Galloway years? 2005-2006 and 2008-2009 probably. 2 years they won like 18 games, lost in their first A-10 tournament game, and didn't get into the Postseason (although you could argue that first team deserved to make the NIT). Not exactly sterling.
So to answer the question, that's where I think we are now. We are still a bottom half of the A-10 program overall. We finish in the 7-10 range most years, but outside of Fordham, it's usually a rotating cast of teams below us. Our non-conference is usually pretty unremarkable, we go 7-6 or 8-5, beating up (mostly) on the lower teams, and losing pretty much every "big" non-conference game we play. We get an 8 or 9 seed, and lose in the A-10 Quarterfinals. Right now, the Galloway years excepted, I think that's pretty much the forecast for any season, until proven otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Jan 23, 2015 13:04:22 GMT -5
These are the types of threads that pop up on the Hawk Droppings board bi weekly. Yeah the teams got a few days off now though, I think this a pretty logical time to do one of these. Don't wanna do it after every game, but this is a good time for some reflection I think. |
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Jan 23, 2015 13:17:08 GMT -5
We are no where as a program until we define our style of play. Find a recipe for success and stick to it. Play smart and discipline. Define player's roles on team. Get the absolute MOST out of every player. For most fans , i think all agree we want to see exciting basketball. Play better than your given talent. Get a couple of big wins in a season. SO when we do get better players, it equals success. I'm sorry, for Doc's 10 years of coaching at La Salle he has yet to do anything (as a game coach) that's got me excited. And im starting to think most of our success from Ramon's years we're due to him taking over games. I'm plugging something I wrote after the Villanova game.The next step, however, is for one of the aforementioned players to develop a reputation. Duren was a silent killer, often the smallest guy on the floor but one that could break your ankles and land a soft floater through the lane. Mills was a shutdown defender, usually found covering the other team’s best player; making his game more difficult. And then there was Galloway, the uber-athletic, supremely-talented superstar that seemed to lead his team with his words as much as his play.
Which of the current Explorers can fill these roles? Or will they form their own? Giannini can talk about formulas and the abilities of his “big three”, but until one of them rises beyond just the best players on this La Salle squad, the 2014-2015 Explorers will be an average – or worse – basketball team.This is the biggest thing to me. These guys have no identity yet as individuals, so it hard to have an identity as a team. Look at years past and players past. We all knew what these guys were, something that I don't think you can say about this group yet. Call it inconsistency, maybe, but I think it is just a case of 2006 all over again, when La Salle was full of swing players with questionable skills in certain areas. Outside of Wright, who does one thing REALLY WELL, can you say that about anybody else on the squad? That's a great point Joe. I think the only one I can say that I feel comfortable with is Stukes. He hasn't proven himself, but he seems to get it. The other players are just ridiculously inconsistent. |
|
|
|
Post by heftyexpl on Jan 23, 2015 13:30:26 GMT -5
We are no where as a program until we define our style of play. Find a recipe for success and stick to it. Play smart and discipline. Define player's roles on team. Get the absolute MOST out of every player. For most fans , i think all agree we want to see exciting basketball. Play better than your given talent. Get a couple of big wins in a season. SO when we do get better players, it equals success. I'm sorry, for Doc's 10 years of coaching at La Salle he has yet to do anything (as a game coach) that's got me excited. And im starting to think most of our success from Ramon's years we're due to him taking over games. I'm plugging something I wrote after the Villanova game.The next step, however, is for one of the aforementioned players to develop a reputation. Duren was a silent killer, often the smallest guy on the floor but one that could break your ankles and land a soft floater through the lane. Mills was a shutdown defender, usually found covering the other team’s best player; making his game more difficult. And then there was Galloway, the uber-athletic, supremely-talented superstar that seemed to lead his team with his words as much as his play.
Which of the current Explorers can fill these roles? Or will they form their own? Giannini can talk about formulas and the abilities of his “big three”, but until one of them rises beyond just the best players on this La Salle squad, the 2014-2015 Explorers will be an average – or worse – basketball team.This is the biggest thing to me. These guys have no identity yet as individuals, so it hard to have an identity as a team. Look at years past and players past. We all knew what these guys were, something that I don't think you can say about this group yet. Call it inconsistency, maybe, but I think it is just a case of 2006 all over again, when La Salle was full of swing players with questionable skills in certain areas. Outside of Wright, who does one thing REALLY WELL, can you say that about anybody else on the squad? So we should only expect Winning Results from our coach when he has a team full of All Americans? I obviously understand what your saying, but come on. This team has a player who scored 30pts in a game. A wing guard that shoots 45% from 3, a young talented point guard and 2 big men who are experienced. What has G done to help them succeed? I'm not saying this team should be atop the A10 but i think we can both agree they should be playing better than what they shown this year. And i put that all on the lack of coaching. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 13:57:36 GMT -5
I'm plugging something I wrote after the Villanova game.The next step, however, is for one of the aforementioned players to develop a reputation. Duren was a silent killer, often the smallest guy on the floor but one that could break your ankles and land a soft floater through the lane. Mills was a shutdown defender, usually found covering the other team’s best player; making his game more difficult. And then there was Galloway, the uber-athletic, supremely-talented superstar that seemed to lead his team with his words as much as his play.
Which of the current Explorers can fill these roles? Or will they form their own? Giannini can talk about formulas and the abilities of his “big three”, but until one of them rises beyond just the best players on this La Salle squad, the 2014-2015 Explorers will be an average – or worse – basketball team.This is the biggest thing to me. These guys have no identity yet as individuals, so it hard to have an identity as a team. Look at years past and players past. We all knew what these guys were, something that I don't think you can say about this group yet. Call it inconsistency, maybe, but I think it is just a case of 2006 all over again, when La Salle was full of swing players with questionable skills in certain areas. Outside of Wright, who does one thing REALLY WELL, can you say that about anybody else on the squad? So we should only expect Winning Results from our coach when he has a team full of All Americans? I obviously understand what your saying, but come on. This team has a player who scored 30pts in a game. A wing guard that shoots 45% from 3, a young talented point guard and 2 big men who are experienced. What has G done to help them succeed? I'm not saying this team should be atop the A10 but i think we can both agree they should be playing better than what they shown this year. And i put that all on the lack of coaching. This is not my argument at all. I think that most (all?) of the onus falls on Giannini. I also think that he and the fan base have grossly misjudged some of the talent out there, from Freshman to Senior. Why can't the team be atop the A10? URI, Dayton, Davidson? These schools routinely find themselves near the top in some years. St. Joe's? They struggle at times but have been in four (YES FOUR) A10 championship games in the last 10 years, winning just last year. St. Bonaventure, Richmond, Saint Louis. All got to the big show. La Salle's best finish is what, the semis once? This is what is most unacceptable to me, that the school has become irrelevant in its own conference. Not because of facilities or budgets. La Salle has a tremendous resource in Philadelphia that most schools cannot match. Yet La Salle sits as the only 10+ year member of the conference to never win it with just Fordham. And that is just sad. |
|
|
|
Post by heftyexpl on Jan 23, 2015 13:59:34 GMT -5
Agreed
|
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Jan 23, 2015 14:03:11 GMT -5
I think we are directionless at the moment. I think we need some self assessment from the administration down to G and the players.
I understand G is the coach and has the ultimate authority but wish there was more input from others or apparent input. Right now it looks like G or the highway and we all know that can be a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 14:36:28 GMT -5
The unfortunate thing is that none of this is new. You are looking at a coach that has managed to win 4 or 5 more games than loses over almost 11 years. If that isn't mediocrity then what is? To paraphrase Einstein or somebody who said, stupid is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Our recruiting average is 2.5 stars. This puts us right in the middle of the A-10. We are about even with the recruits from GW and better than Davidson. The difference is that those programs take what they have and get the most from them. We don't. So who's to blame? And what can be done about it expect for the people on this board bemoaning the situation? It isn't going to change anything until Brennan decides that it's time to go in a different direction. He probably doesn't read this board.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 14:40:17 GMT -5
Why can't the team be atop the A10? URI, Dayton, Davidson? These schools routinely find themselves near the top in some years. Would an objective person looking at the Atlantic 10 as a whole and say "La Salle should be perennially at the top"? I doubt it. When you have our facilities and the (reported) 10th highest basketball budget out of 14 teams and, yes, our semi-recent past ... why would you expect it? We could be a power, and probably much more easily than a bunch of other schools all things equal, but we're not and our inputs don't justify us expecting it. There are scheme problems, no doubt, but we're not an offensive guru assistant coach away from a decade of success. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Jan 23, 2015 14:40:37 GMT -5
The best way to describe us is that we've never really been the doormat nor the top dog in this league. Fordham and Duquesne have been the doormats while more recently VCU and Saint Louis have been the top dogs. We need to strive to be the top dog of the A10. That takes commitment from everyone from the ball boy all the way up to the University President.
The commitment and dedication to a mission statement to be the top dog must come before any funds are raised or before the new arena is built. Otherwise we will have the most state of the art arena with empty seats during games.
|
|
|
|
Post by a10champion15 on Jan 23, 2015 14:42:33 GMT -5
That is my biggest thing with this program, it never created an idenity after the 2012/2013 seasons when I was sure as hell G found soemthing that worked for him and his roster. I truly thought that G found his niche in transfers and running a 4 guard set. G roster management has been good over the years it is one reason why G never finds himself with a depleted roster.
The A10 is a guards league and we had one of the better back courts in the conference in 2012 and 2013. You will not win in this league by trying to win through two good big men. That is never how this conference worked and it never worked for G so why would it work now for him. This is most definitely a guards league.
We have the guards that can compete down the line but they are young right now. People can break down Price, Lewis, Stukes, Roberts and Shuler abililties but bottom line is their limitations are not the problem, it is Wright and Zack disadvantages. They will be very good guards down the line. G thinks that moving away from the four guard set which has hurt the guards and was what defined him and us as a program was a good move because fact of the matter is Wright and Zack are two very good big men usually. However, they CANNOT be on the floor together.
It would not surprise me at all next year when G is forced to play four guards and having a player like Sahkniuk with size and a shot that this team is better offensively and not at a huge disadvantage defensively.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 14:45:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 14:54:38 GMT -5
Why can't the team be atop the A10? URI, Dayton, Davidson? These schools routinely find themselves near the top in some years. Would an objective person looking at the Atlantic 10 as a whole and say "La Salle should be perennially at the top"? I doubt it. When you have our facilities and the (reported) 10th highest basketball budget out of 14 teams and, yes, our semi-recent past ... why would you expect it? We could be a power, and probably much more easily than a bunch of other schools all things equal, but we're not and our inputs don't justify us expecting it. There are scheme problems, no doubt, but we're not an offensive guru assistant coach away from a decade of success. Sure, Dayton is a bad example. they are always good. URI is not though. Davidson is not, even in their short time in the league. They are, however, good occasionally. And by good I mean possibly winning the conference good. |
|
|
|
Post by a10champion15 on Jan 23, 2015 15:00:32 GMT -5
Would an objective person looking at the Atlantic 10 as a whole and say "La Salle should be perennially at the top"? I doubt it. When you have our facilities and the (reported) 10th highest basketball budget out of 14 teams and, yes, our semi-recent past ... why would you expect it? We could be a power, and probably much more easily than a bunch of other schools all things equal, but we're not and our inputs don't justify us expecting it. There are scheme problems, no doubt, but we're not an offensive guru assistant coach away from a decade of success. Sure, Dayton is a bad example. they are always good. URI is not though. Davidson is not, even in their short time in the league. They are, however, good occasionally. And by good I mean possibly winning the conference good. Davidson has been very good under McKillop very capable of winning the A10 this year....they won the southern conference 10 times since 2002. They will be a top of the A10 more seasons than most going forward. |
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 15:02:46 GMT -5
Rhode Island who spends over $600K (20%) more than us and plays here ...  Like I said, we "could" compete every year (or have the expectation to compete every year) if we chose to. |
|
|
|
Post by manayunk53 on Jan 23, 2015 15:03:13 GMT -5
Putting more money into the program is really the ultimate cure, but I think in order to get to a point where you have more money and a bigger budget, you first need to create a program that is perceived by others as a worthwhile investment. And by "others," I mean university leadership, fans with money to donate/spend, high-level recruits, and people from other schools around the conference. I just don't know how we can get to that point. We're a very average (at best) A-10 program, and it is going to be tough to improve on that anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Jan 23, 2015 15:05:21 GMT -5
Ironically, I just exchanged emails with another alum on this topic this am. End result was neither one of us can tell where the program is headed. I still think G works extremely hard at recruiting but actual development of players has to be questioned. With the facilities not changing anytime soon, we need to make sure that we get the maximum out of each players capability. Short term, Its time for G to seriously evaluate if that can occur with this group of assistants.
Before the season it appeared we would be relatively set at guard for the immediate future but now even that seems in some doubt. To this point, Price has to be one of the most perplexing designated "money" players we have ever had. His game is anything but smooth and consistent. Stukes shows promise but a genuine reluctance to take any shot but a layup. In a very few games, Temple being one, Roberts looked like a real aggressive offensive player but is now also proving very inconsistent. Shuler gives the impression he could be a spark plug if his potential can be tapped. If this group does not grow and become much more consistent we are in serious trouble.
As most others, I think it would be a great idea to bring in some fresh blood into the coaching staff. Doug Overton was interviewed on the radio a few games back and, while the specific question was not asked, as a start, he would be someone I would give serious consideration to adding to the staff.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 15:10:06 GMT -5
As most others, I think it would be a great idea to bring in some fresh blood into the coaching staff. Doug Overton was interviewed on the radio a few games back and, while the specific question was not asked, as a start, he would be someone I would give serious consideration to adding to the staff. Unless he is a coach-in-waiting, I doubt this is going to happen. He has been an NCAA assistant, an NBA assistant and a D-League head coach. Being an assistant at La Salle doesn't follow a logical career path unless he is the head coach soon. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 15:12:23 GMT -5
Rhode Island who spends over $600K (20%) more than us and plays here ... Like I said, we "could" compete every year (or have the expectation to compete every year) if we chose to. Not every year. Occasionally. |
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 15:19:27 GMT -5
Is four 18 win seasons and two 20+ in the past 9 seasons not competing occasionally?
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 15:22:51 GMT -5
Is four 18 win seasons and two 20+ in the past 9 seasons not competing occasionally? One A10 semis appearance. And the Sweet 16, which shouldn't be overlooked. But how you do in your conference should be #1. |
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 15:24:08 GMT -5
1 appearance, should be 3 (9*4/~12), 1 of those non-appearances was the tourney year. We're low, but we're not horrific outlier low.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 23, 2015 15:24:47 GMT -5
1 appearance, should be 3 (9*4/~12), 1 of those non-appearances was the tourney year. We're low, but we're not horrific outlier low. Not Fordham low, sure. |
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,424
Likes: 6,356
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 23, 2015 15:26:53 GMT -5
My overall point is "everyone thinks their team should be good ... but we have no objective reason for expecting it". Like the Phillies have that massive payroll and new stadium, that's a real reason to expect success. What real reason do we have?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 15:48:08 GMT -5
G has been a .500 coach for 11 years now. What would you expect his record will be for the next 11 years? Maybe it's not his fault. Maybe he just doesn't have the right assistants.
|
|
