0
Started By
Message
re: Basketball team chemistry
Posted on 2/14/14 at 12:52 pm to mizzoukills
Posted on 2/14/14 at 12:52 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
Seems like Haith want to be a Coach Cal type coach. The only problem is that Haith isn't Coach Cal.
Cal's Kentucky is where freshmen go to play one to two years, then leave and become an NBA draft lottery pick.
Haith's Mizzou is where transfers go to play one to two years, then leave and become an NBA second round draft pick or sign as an undrafted free agent.
That's about where it's at.
Note I'm not passing judgment on the success of either model above. Calipari did win the natty title in 2012, but he also wound up in the NIT under the same method last year while Haith at least had his team consistently in the Big Dance both years.
Also for the record, the problem for Haith in recreating the Calipari model in terms of talent accumulation is not that Haith is not Cal. It's that Mizzou is not Kentucky. I have zero doubt that if Haith, Fuller and the rest of this staff were the staff at UK, they could pull in the very same freshman recruiting classes there that Cal does. Hell we saw that exact thing play out with Devin Booker. Everything was right about coming here for Booker except one thing: Mizzou ain't Kentucky. Nothing Haith said or did was gonna fix that one problem.
This post was edited on 2/14/14 at 12:55 pm
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:13 pm to reedus23
quote:It really just sounds like you've decided not to like him because he's a transfer, which is odd. I never heard anyone make the same complaints about Demarre Carroll or Alex Oriakhi.
If this is in reference to my comments, I NEVER said I can't cheer for him. I said it's just natural that there is not the same type of connection between fan and player when comparing a kid that comes in as a freshman and plays 3 or 4 years versus someone who transfers in and plays 1 to 2 years tops.
This post was edited on 2/14/14 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:09 pm to MIZ_STL
quote:
It really just sounds like you've decided not to like him because he's a transfer, which is odd. I never heard anyone make the same complaints about Demarre Carroll or Alex Oriakhi.
Yeah to me once they don black and gold they're all Tigers. The ones that come from elsewhere, even the ones that leave. You cannot think about the 1990 Mizzou basketball season without Travis Ford, its impossible. You can't fully recall Mizzou's performance against UCLA in the Tyus Edney game without Kendrick Moore, its just not possible, though he transferred away to a Big East school eventually (don't even remember which, Providence maybe??). All I remember is that they were Mizzou Tigers and I cheered for them as part of the team while they were here, and would still do so even if I somehow knew beforehand that eventually they were gonna transfer away. They were Mizzou Tigers. Pretty straightforward.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:48 pm to MIZ_STL
quote:
It really just sounds like you've decided not to like him because he's a transfer, which is odd. I never heard anyone make the same complaints about Demarre Carroll or Alex Oriakhi.
Meh. You're reading too much into it beyond the fact that I never said I don't like Brown. I like Brown. Hell, I think I said he's probably the most efficient scorer I've ever seen, or at least that I can recall right now. I just don't have the same attachment to him as I do to say a Smith or Peeler or what not. Carroll and Oriakhi were solid players and I appreciate what they did for Mizzou, but no, they don't hold the same place in my heart as Stipanovich or yes, even Pressey.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:50 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
quote:
I cheered for them as part of the team while they were here,
I think everyone would agree they cheer for them.
Posted on 2/15/14 at 7:51 am to reedus23
https://www.rockmnation.com/2014/2/14/5412154/mizzou-basketball-frank-haith-johnathan-williams-iii
Selected Quotes
Selected Quotes
quote:
If Year 1 of the Haith era taught us anything, it's how much chemistry, experience, and continuity can matter. Unless you're attracting five-star talent (and it bears mentioning that six of Mizzou's eight freshman signees thus far have been three-stars), you make your living off of year-to-year continuity.
Among other things, this is why I gave Frank Haith a major pass for the frustrating nature of last year's squad. He had to basically craft a new team from scratch, and the fact that he did very well at that (mostly because of transfers) created unreasonably high expectations that his team then failed to meet.
Haith basically had two recruiting classes to build an entire Year 3 squad, and the results have been mixed. Mizzou is still indeed on the bubble for the NCAA Tournament, but that alone is quite an accomplishment. Some examples:
In 2011, St. John's went 21-12 and surged to its first NCAA Tournament bid in quite a while in Steve Lavin's first season. Eight of the Red Storm's top 10 players on that team were seniors, however, and the Johnnies went 13-19 in Year 2 and 17-16 in Year 3.
In 2012, Kevin Stallings' Vanderbilt squad went 25-11 with a team that featured five seniors among its top seven players. The Commodores went 16-17 last year (they started 10-15 before a late rally) and are 13-10 this year.
Like Missouri, neither St. John's nor Vandy are programs likely to draw tons of five-star talent, so the rebuilding has been slow and relatively unsteady. St. John's had a win percentage of .462 in its two years after the huge class of seniors left and has finally taken a nice step forward in Year 3. Vandy is, to date, standing at 0.518, though the Commodores have been salty at times this year. Mizzou, meanwhile, stands at 40-18 (0.690) since Denmon, English, Ratliffe, etc., left. The Tigers are flawed and frustrating this year, but they're still on the bubble. If or when a Mizzou team can begin to develop continuity and experience again, their moderate success while in transition could hint at a wonderfully high ceiling. (And yes, 'could' is the key word there.)
quote:
It's safe to say that continuity has indeed been a serious issue for the last two Haith teams. Some of that is Haith's own fault -- he's the one who chose to attempt the risky "evening classes" method of transfers and whatnot, and he's the one who has failed to sign many impact freshmen -- but he was also dealt a really difficult long-term hand by Anderson.
Even though I'm fairly certain another player will defect at some point -- maybe Rector or one of next year's freshmen leaves, maybe Biedscheid (or Price, or Bello) is just so amazing that he goes pro after one year (doubtful as of now), maybe something else -- it's pretty clear that continuity will cease to become an issue within the next two seasons.
Posted on 2/15/14 at 8:45 am to MIZ_STL
Excellent article.
Posted on 2/15/14 at 9:45 am to MIZ_STL
Good article MIZ_STL. Thanks. Pretty much agree with everything said in there. In year 1, the team was centered around guys that had played together for years. Year 2 and this year, year 3, are centered around transfers that have not been playing together for years. While I think we're a better program than St. John's or Vandy and so our lean years will be better than their lean years, I also don't think that the continuity and chemistry will be there again for a couple of years, as the article says. Once JW3 and Clark's class has had a couple years playing together with the likes of Gant's class, I think they can be really good. Until then, I think we'll have glimpses of being good and will be a bubble team with no threat of challenging for anything.
Posted on 2/15/14 at 9:59 am to reedus23
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News