Jump to content

Lester Quinones Commits to Memphis


Hoosierdave

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

I’m so tired of hearing but coach K but coach K but coach K. So the **** what  Crean fell on his face too for his first 3 years it didn’t make him coach K  And I bet K was even saying he needed to do better  

Tons of coaches succeed in their second year. Teams that keep 5 of their top 7 players shouldn’t get worse it’s just reality. 

They do, but tons don't.  It is too early to judge any coach before year 3 or 4.  Most coaches fail. Top 25 minus Kansas, NC and Kentucky as UNC walked into 5 5 stars and multiple NBA draft picks as they fired Doherty after year 2,  Self had a full roster with him and a 5 star and 4 top 75 players that Roy left for him in his first class, and Calipari brought a herd of 5 stars along with him.  The winning percentage of coaches their first two seasons was 56%.  The coaches that had good seasons Mark Few.  Gonzaga has followed the Butler model.  Great transition and same style.  John Beilien had a 21-14 second season and followed it up with a third 15-17 season.  Chris Beard has had two great first seasons.  Musselman had a great second and third season. Weber had a great roster left over for him from Martin who left the job for another job.  Weber followed the first two good seasons and the second year was worse than the first as he finished first in the B12....with a third of 15-17 and a fourth of 17-16.  You take those coaches out and you are at a 50% wining percentage for the rest. 

Like I said, it isn't just taking over.  There was a reason Crean was fired.  Talent was an issue and coaching was an issue.  100-150 kids don't typically contribute until their junior seasons.  Most of our frosh and sophs who aren't injured are in this category.  Sorry, there are stats that support that.  Our three other top 100 kids that are frosh, sophs and juniors have been injured the entire time or the majority of the time the last two seasons in Hunter, Thompson and Davis.  We are playing Durham and Green who are 200+ kids and most of these kids at the high major level fail statistically.  Smith is Troy Williams.  

Jay Wright sucked his first three seasons.   Tony Bennett sucked his first two seasons.   What am I trying to say? You just don't hire a new coach and expect it to automatically correct itself.  There are dynamics that change, styles changes, chemistry problems can occur, and you need to infuse talent that is experienced.....which takes time. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, IU_Realist said:

They do, but tons don't.  It is too early to judge any coach before year 3 or 4.  Most coaches fail. Top 25 minus Kansas, NC and Kentucky as UNC walked into 5 5 stars and multiple NBA draft picks as they fired Doherty after year 2,  Self had a full roster with him and a 5 star and 4 top 75 players that Roy left for him in his first class, and Calipari brought a herd of 5 stars along with him.  The winning percentage of coaches their first two seasons was 56%.  The coaches that had good seasons Mark Few.  Gonzaga has followed the Butler model.  Great transition and same style.  John Beilien had a 21-14 second season and followed it up with a third 15-17 season.  Chris Beard has had two great first seasons.  Musselman had a great second and third season. Weber had a great roster left over for him from Martin who left the job for another job.  Weber followed the first two good seasons and the second year was worse than the first as he finished first in the B12....with a third of 15-17 and a fourth of 17-16.  You take those coaches out and you are at a 50% wining percentage for the rest. 

Like I said, it isn't just taking over.  There was a reason Crean was fired.  Talent was an issue and coaching was an issue.  100-150 kids don't typically contribute until their junior seasons.  Most of our frosh and sophs who aren't injured are in this category.  Sorry, there are stats that support that.  Our three other top 100 kids that are frosh, sophs and juniors have been injured the entire time or the majority of the time the last two seasons in Hunter, Thompson and Davis.  We are playing Durham and Green who are 200+ kids and most of these kids at the high major level fail statistically.  Smith is Troy Williams.  

Jay Wright sucked his first three seasons.   Tony Bennett sucked his first two seasons.   What am I trying to say? You just don't hire a new coach and expect it to automatically correct itself.  There are dynamics that change, styles changes, chemistry problems can occur, and you need to infuse talent that is experienced.....which takes time. 

 

 

Perfect post.  It's hard to believe our intelligent fanbase doesn't understand this.  I'm more disappointed in US as fans, than the players and coaching staff at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

Fans of sports do this with recruiting. It’s not typical for most FANS of a team to assume that the recruits they have coming in all SUCK. It’s usually more fun to be a fan that is excited for things to come and hopeful things will improve and not someone who “pees on everyone’s Wheaties” 

It is the shiny new object phenomena.  

Most fans need to take this into account.

1) Typically, kids ranked 100-150 take time.  Typically they become starters  or main contributors by their junior and senior seasons.  People expecting them to be impacting early are just not thinking rationally.

2) Kids that are 50-100 typically don't become starters or main contributors until their sophomore season.  These kids have some flaws that need to be improved.

Most kids entering college take time. Think about Wisconsin under Bo Ryan.  He would bring in top 100 kids and they would average like 2 ppg their first season, 5 ppg their second season and double digits in year 3 and 4.  Jon Leuer is a great example of this. Ranked 82nd and averaged 18 ppg his senior season.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CapnRon said:

Perfect post.  It's hard to believe our supposed intelligent fanbase doesn't understand this.  I'm more disappointed in US as fans, than the players and coaching staff at this point.

Do I like how we are playing? No. Can I understand why? Yes. I don't think it is an Archie problem.  I think it is a talent issue.  Personally, I would purge the roster and bring in my guys if I was him.  Like I said at one point, Crean said something right that he should have gotten rid of a lot of the players when he took over Georgia.  It isn't wrong because typically it is what is best.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

Fans of sports do this with recruiting. It’s not typical for most FANS of a team to assume that the recruits they have coming in all SUCK. It’s usually more fun to be a fan that is excited for things to come and hopeful things will improve and not someone who “pees on everyone’s Wheaties” 

Oh, I know.  I was just trying to have a little fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

They do, but tons don't.  It is too early to judge any coach before year 3 or 4.  Most coaches fail. Top 25 minus Kansas, NC and Kentucky as UNC walked into 5 5 stars and multiple NBA draft picks as they fired Doherty after year 2,  Self had a full roster with him and a 5 star and 4 top 75 players that Roy left for him in his first class, and Calipari brought a herd of 5 stars along with him.  The winning percentage of coaches their first two seasons was 56%.  The coaches that had good seasons Mark Few.  Gonzaga has followed the Butler model.  Great transition and same style.  John Beilien had a 21-14 second season and followed it up with a third 15-17 season.  Chris Beard has had two great first seasons.  Musselman had a great second and third season. Weber had a great roster left over for him from Martin who left the job for another job.  Weber followed the first two good seasons and the second year was worse than the first as he finished first in the B12....with a third of 15-17 and a fourth of 17-16.  You take those coaches out and you are at a 50% wining percentage for the rest. 

Like I said, it isn't just taking over.  There was a reason Crean was fired.  Talent was an issue and coaching was an issue.  100-150 kids don't typically contribute until their junior seasons.  Most of our frosh and sophs who aren't injured are in this category.  Sorry, there are stats that support that.  Our three other top 100 kids that are frosh, sophs and juniors have been injured the entire time or the majority of the time the last two seasons in Hunter, Thompson and Davis.  We are playing Durham and Green who are 200+ kids and most of these kids at the high major level fail statistically.  Smith is Troy Williams.  

Jay Wright sucked his first three seasons.   Tony Bennett sucked his first two seasons.   What am I trying to say? You just don't hire a new coach and expect it to automatically correct itself.  There are dynamics that change, styles changes, chemistry problems can occur, and you need to infuse talent that is experienced.....which takes time. 

 

 

Interesting thing about Bennett and Wright though was theirs teams did better in conference in year 2 than 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Interesting thing about Bennett and Wright though was theirs teams did better in conference in year 2 than 1

To be fair though, didn't the Big Ten only have 4 teams in the tourney last year, and this year they've talked up to 9 or 10 could get in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

LOL.

Tony Bennett went from 15-16 to 16-15.

Jay Wright did worse in year 2 and was one game over .500 in year 3.  Facts hurt.

 

To be fair, the distinction was "in conference", although that completely ignores the fact that the Big Ten is far, far better this year than last year. 

Just ill-conceived cherry-picked statistics that are meaningless without context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IU_Realist said:

It is the shiny new object phenomena.  

Most fans need to take this into account.

1) Typically, kids ranked 100-150 take time.  Typically they become starters  or main contributors by their junior and senior seasons.  People expecting them to be impacting early are just not thinking rationally.

2) Kids that are 50-100 typically don't become starters or main contributors until their sophomore season.  These kids have some flaws that need to be improved.

Most kids entering college take time. Think about Wisconsin under Bo Ryan.  He would bring in top 100 kids and they would average like 2 ppg their first season, 5 ppg their second season and double digits in year 3 and 4.  Jon Leuer is a great example of this. Ranked 82nd and averaged 18 ppg his senior season.  

 

Totally agree but pooping on incoming recruits is one extreme and the other extreme is assuming a top 100-150 player is going to come in and average 15ppg. 

A fair feeling as a fan is simply “I’m excited to have this recruit coming in and he has potential I’m excited to watch.”

lord im sick of everyone painting everyone else to such extremes. It’s OK to be excited about Incoming players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, IU_Realist said:

Again, IU fans can be idiots. Coach K had a 17-13 first year, a 10-17 second year, and a 11-17 third year.  Keeping starters means jack insert a multitude of curse words when they would be a backup at best or not playing for top 25 teams...aka Smith and Durham.  Phinisee is a frosh and a 100-150 kid and most of those kids are inconsistent and don't play or start until their JUNIOR SEASONS HISTORICALLY.  Green and Durham are 200+ kids that typically aren't a good recipe for top 25 teams.  IU fans are being idiots.  Chill out and let it happen.  Typically a coaching change with subpar talent and youth takes time.  Again Coach K, had three NBA players, Jay Bilas, and a 15 ppg returning scorer and couldn't win more than 11 games.  Disappointment is a word being used too early by idiots.  

I don't know why people keep bringing up Coach K.  For starters, you are really cherry picking to find a HOF coach who started out poorly and went on to greater things.  Yes, that is always a possibility but there are literally hundreds of instances where that logic has not held true.

Additionally, and I think of equal importance, this is not the NCAA of the early 80 to mid 80's.  IMO it probably did take longer back then because the good players stayed much longer.  It would take a while longer to build a team even if you were bringing in a Zion Williamson as a freshmen because his equivalent would be a junior or senior playing for North Carolina as opposed to a third year pro playing for the Mikwaukee Bucks.  In today's game you can get better quicker if you land top talent because the pure skill of the younger guys can overcome some of the advantages of the less skilled and less athletic players have with experience.

So can we please stop bringing up a HOF coach who got his start around 40 years ago?  Coach K taking 4 years to make the tournament is as relevant as Bob Knight making the Final Four in 3 years.  If you want to keep bringing up K as the norm, then I am going to start throwing Bob Knight up as what our standard should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, IU_Realist said:

They do, but tons don't.  It is too early to judge any coach before year 3 or 4.  Most coaches fail. Top 25 minus Kansas, NC and Kentucky as UNC walked into 5 5 stars and multiple NBA draft picks as they fired Doherty after year 2,  Self had a full roster with him and a 5 star and 4 top 75 players that Roy left for him in his first class, and Calipari brought a herd of 5 stars along with him.  The winning percentage of coaches their first two seasons was 56%.  The coaches that had good seasons Mark Few.  Gonzaga has followed the Butler model.  Great transition and same style.  John Beilien had a 21-14 second season and followed it up with a third 15-17 season.  Chris Beard has had two great first seasons.  Musselman had a great second and third season. Weber had a great roster left over for him from Martin who left the job for another job.  Weber followed the first two good seasons and the second year was worse than the first as he finished first in the B12....with a third of 15-17 and a fourth of 17-16.  You take those coaches out and you are at a 50% wining percentage for the rest. 

Like I said, it isn't just taking over.  There was a reason Crean was fired.  Talent was an issue and coaching was an issue.  100-150 kids don't typically contribute until their junior seasons.  Most of our frosh and sophs who aren't injured are in this category.  Sorry, there are stats that support that.  Our three other top 100 kids that are frosh, sophs and juniors have been injured the entire time or the majority of the time the last two seasons in Hunter, Thompson and Davis.  We are playing Durham and Green who are 200+ kids and most of these kids at the high major level fail statistically.  Smith is Troy Williams.  

Jay Wright sucked his first three seasons.   Tony Bennett sucked his first two seasons.   What am I trying to say? You just don't hire a new coach and expect it to automatically correct itself.  There are dynamics that change, styles changes, chemistry problems can occur, and you need to infuse talent that is experienced.....which takes time. 

 

 

I am willing to buy this more if you see general improvement in the program.  Improvement does not necessarily equate to more wins.  This team is not improving.  They did not improve from last year and they did not improve from beginning of year to end.  That is what all of you guys are glossing over when you make this argument.

Can Archie turn it around?  Yes.  However, it is going to take some big changes over the summer.  This year has been an undeniable step back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

I am willing to buy this more if you see general improvement in the program.  Improvement does not necessarily equate to more wins.  This team is not improving.  They did not improve from last year and they did not improve from beginning of year to end.  That is what all of you guys are glossing over when you make this argument.

Can Archie turn it around?  Yes.  However, it is going to take some big changes over the summer.  This year has been an undeniable step back.

My whole thing is give him time. I agree, I would expect some type of improvement over the course of the season, but he’s not exactly flush with talent or with guys he chose. He may be battling a number of guys that refuse to buy in or work to get better 🤷🏻‍♂️. But he also knows he has nowhere else to turn if he’s trying to be competitive this year. I’m more disappointed in guys like Fitzner, Smith, and Green. These guys have gone backwards this year. You can tell there wasn’t much work put in during the off-season. JM is playing out of position bc of roster construction, which gets him in foul trouble easily. McRoberts is a walk-on who hasn’t given us anything near what he did last year. DD has been hurt most of the year. CM isn’t ready, and not sure he’s capable. I like AD, and think he needs to be on the floor more, but he’s inconsistent. RT and JH have been hurt all year. JF and DA are freshmen who weren’t expected to be immediate/major contributors. RL has struggled from deep, but has been forced to partly carry a team as a freshman. And RP has been a solid PG, but he also missed a large stretch. Hate to make excuses, but CAM wasn’t dealt much of a hand and has had to manage a mirage of issues. I just hope DA, JF, JH and RP make large strides this coming offseason along with AD and a couple impact freshmen in TJD and Brooks or we may be another year away (assuming another solid recruiting class) from really competing at the top of the Big10. JMO of course. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, kyhoosier29 said:

My whole thing is give him time. I agree, I would expect some type of improvement over the course of the season, but he’s not exactly flush with talent or with guys he chose. He may be battling a number of guys that refuse to buy in or work to get better 🤷🏻‍♂️. But he also knows he has nowhere else to turn if he’s trying to be competitive this year. I’m more disappointed in guys like Fitzner, Smith, and Green. These guys have gone backwards this year. You can tell there wasn’t much work put in during the off-season. JM is playing out of position bc of roster construction, which gets him in foul trouble easily. McRoberts is a walk-on who hasn’t given us anything near what he did last year. DD has been hurt most of the year. CM isn’t ready, and not sure he’s capable. I like AD, and think he needs to be on the floor more, but he’s inconsistent. RT and JH have been hurt all year. JF and DA are freshmen who weren’t expected to be immediate/major contributors. RL has struggled from deep, but has been forced to partly carry a team as a freshman. And RP has been a solid PG, but he also missed a large stretch. Hate to make excuses, but CAM wasn’t dealt much of a hand and has had to manage a mirage of issues. I just hope DA, JF, JH and RP make large strides this coming offseason along with AD and a couple impact freshmen in TJD and Brooks or we may be another year away (assuming another solid recruiting class) from really competing at the top of the Big10. JMO of course. 

 

I am giving him another year.  I agree with issues with the roster, part of my hope is that gets addressed in the off season.  But I absolutely have to have something next year to hang my hat on (or to feel good about). I am not feeling real good about anything having to do with the program right now...maybe recruiting but I am worried that the absolute poo show this year could effect that.

One major criticism I have of Miller is that he has stubbornly stuck with some players instead of trying something different (and when something different has worked, he goes back to the same bad thing). Case in point:

https://www.insidethehall.com/2019/02/12/film-session-ohio-state-6/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

I am giving him another year.  I agree with issues with the roster, part of my hope is that gets addressed in the off season.  But I absolutely have to have something next year to hang my hat on (or to feel good about). I am not feeling real good about anything having to do with the program right now...maybe recruiting but I am worried that the absolute poo show this year could effect that.

One major criticism I have of Miller is that he has stubbornly stuck with some players instead of trying something different (and when something different has worked, he goes back to the same bad thing). Case in point:

https://www.insidethehall.com/2019/02/12/film-session-ohio-state-6/

Yeah, can’t argue there. My suspicion is that he’s seen what guys are capable of in practice and in his opinion, those things that worked are short-lived and he believes the guys he keeps going back to are what really gives us a chance to win long-term. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Almost like he doesn’t really believe what he’s seeing, so he goes back to what his assessment is. I think he should roll with some of the young guys and put a few guys on the bench that continue to hurt us. Might as well let JF, DA and CM get their heads beat in so they know what kind of work they have to put in. DG and JS aren’t going to change at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kyhoosier29 said:

Yeah, can’t argue there. My suspicion is that he’s seen what guys are capable of in practice and in his opinion, those things that worked are short-lived and he believes the guys he keeps going back to are what really gives us a chance to win long-term. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Almost like he doesn’t really believe what he’s seeing, so he goes back to what his assessment is. I think he should roll with some of the young guys and put a few guys on the bench that continue to hurt us. Might as well let JF, DA and CM get their heads beat in so they know what kind of work they have to put in. DG and JS aren’t going to change at this point. 

Yeah, I just want to see a shake up.  Even if it does not work at least we tried a different approach.

 

So, sorry about the derail...how about this Quinones kid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IUCrazy2 said:

I don't know why people keep bringing up Coach K.  For starters, you are really cherry picking to find a HOF coach who started out poorly and went on to greater things.  Yes, that is always a possibility but there are literally hundreds of instances where that logic has not held true.

Additionally, and I think of equal importance, this is not the NCAA of the early 80 to mid 80's.  IMO it probably did take longer back then because the good players stayed much longer.  It would take a while longer to build a team even if you were bringing in a Zion Williamson as a freshmen because his equivalent would be a junior or senior playing for North Carolina as opposed to a third year pro playing for the Mikwaukee Bucks.  In today's game you can get better quicker if you land top talent because the pure skill of the younger guys can overcome some of the advantages of the less skilled and less athletic players have with experience.

So can we please stop bringing up a HOF coach who got his start around 40 years ago?  Coach K taking 4 years to make the tournament is as relevant as Bob Knight making the Final Four in 3 years.  If you want to keep bringing up K as the norm, then I am going to start throwing Bob Knight up as what our standard should be.

Coach K is a great example of showing that it takes time to wait for kids to mature and get your kids in.  Like I said, in year three in which he won 11 games, he had a Romeo type in Johnny Dawkins....he was phenomenal at 18 ppg, 5 rpg and 5 apg...he had two other NBA players.......Jay Bilas....and a returning senior who averaged 15 ppg the year before.  Morgan? Something clearly wasn't right.  What happened? All the old players left.  All the new players got more experience and he started to win.  It isn't like he learned to coach in year 4.  Beilien at Michigan is a great example.  Took him four years and getting rid of the old players and getting his new players experience.  Jay Wright was 18-17 in year 3.  Tony Bennett is another.  Taking over a losing program is never easy.  It isn't always fixed in a year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I am not sure why but I really like the prospect of getting LQ.  I was watching some of his videos and it appears he can shoot the ball but also appears to be able to run the break and go strong to the rim.  With any highlight real always question competition and never know what they will end up like once they get here (I think we all thought Anderson would bring more shooting than he has) but this kid could be exactly what the team needs next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

Coach K is a great example of showing that it takes time to wait for kids to mature and get your kids in.  Like I said, in year three in which he won 11 games, he had a Romeo type in Johnny Dawkins....he was phenomenal at 18 ppg, 5 rpg and 5 apg...he had two other NBA players.......Jay Bilas....and a returning senior who averaged 15 ppg the year before.  Morgan? Something clearly wasn't right.  What happened? All the old players left.  All the new players got more experience and he started to win.  It isn't like he learned to coach in year 4.  Beilien at Michigan is a great example.  Took him four years and getting rid of the old players and getting his new players experience.  Jay Wright was 18-17 in year 3.  Tony Bennett is another.  Taking over a losing program is never easy.  It isn't always fixed in a year or two.

I don't think Bilas was av MBA player or a senior in his 3rd year because he started on their 86 final four team.  Mark Alarie might be who you were thinking of being an NBA player but he was not a senior that 3rd either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...