An Honest Question

[FlyingSpaghettiMonster]

Yes I still give him one more year. As I said it gets this recruiting class on campus. Also if they dont come back he has time to make whatever adjustments need to be made to be successful next year. This year he lost SM and TB late and had no time to prepare for it. One more year.

I agre with you in general but don't you think that he's had enough to to prepare for the loss of SM and TB at this point in the season? If SM and TB don't return or can't be effective, then he won't really have much more time to prepare next year. It isn't like he will be bringing in a player to replace them next year at this point or later.

The issue IMO is really recruiting. There seem to be several players that shouldn't be playing at this level. If it's not recruiting, then it's player development.

I won't be upset either way.

[real fan]

Last year it was said that its not a fair judge of the team because AW was coming off a major injury and wasn't in game shape, or whatever.

Wouldn't the same caveat apply to next year as well? Sam and TB are coming off probably more serious things than AW had. TB has to work his way back from apparently 0 athletic activity, and I doubt SM will be able to do much in the basketball department if his ankles are bad.

I wish Jim had been brought in here as an assistant head coach/lead recruiter type and able to learn to coach under an older and soon retired coach, grooming him as the eventual successor. Perhaps things would have worked out better. And regardless of anything this year or next, I think most will remember his tenure in a positive light from the Sweet 16 to the new facilities. When he does leave (again), the program will be better (again) because of him.

I believe Sam will be fine, Taylor hopefully will be able to play but if he can"t we are going to be in trouble once again .

[ER3]

who were the two best players for each of those teams? Although I would say JJ and Willie..it is apples to apples..but some folks would not want to see it that way...

take the best player and the point guard...obviously JJ and Hawk were more talented, but losing them would, to their team be equal to losing TB and SM to this team...

So "two best players from a team" is the only criteria that matters when talking about the impact their loss would have on a team? It doesn't matter how good those "two best players" actually are? Sorry, but that makes no sense to me.

So, using your logic...if the Bulls would have lost Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen off of the 1996 Bulls team, that would have exactly the same impact on that team as it would have if the 1999 Bulls team lost Toni Kukoc and Ron Harper (the two best players on that team)???

Sorry, but I can't follow any line of reasoning where Jordan/Pippen and Kukoc/Harper would be considered apples-to-apples...Same with trying to equate Hawkins/Les to Maniscalco/Brown...losing one of those duos from their respective team would be far, far more damaging to the team then the other...

[SaintLouBrave22]

Sommerville and Ruffin maybe I could see but JJ DT and Hawk...


You gottsta be kiddin me!!


And even then i think you'd be selling both of them a bit short

[ER3]

Last year it was said that its not a fair judge of the team because AW was coming off a major injury and wasn't in game shape, or whatever.

That excuse it utterly ridiculous to me. Warren was healthy last year. He was healthy enough to have members of this board campaigning for him to be on the Valley 1st Team All-Conference team last year...I find it highly unlikely that a guy that "wasn't in game shape" would have been able to put up numbers like he did last year...

Just shows you that some people will manufacture excuses for everything...The "Sammy isn't fully healed from his surgery" and "Taylor isn't in game shape" excuses are already getting warmed up for next year, I'm sure...

[shaunguth]

Same with trying to equate Hawkins/Les to Maniscalco/Brown...losing one of those duos from their respective team would be far, far more damaging to the team then the other...

Didn't they have a much better coach than we do now? How is JL expected to recover from these injuries and finish where we were picked to begin with, but another coach wouldn't be expected to do the same? Maybe that coach didn't recruit enough talent either?

[mrcoachdude]

So "two best players from a team" is the only criteria that matters when talking about the impact their loss would have on a team? It doesn't matter how good those "two best players" actually are? Sorry, but that makes no sense to me.

So, using your logic...if the Bulls would have lost Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen off of the 1996 Bulls team, that would have exactly the same impact on that team as it would have if the 1999 Bulls team lost Toni Kukoc and Ron Harper (the two best players on that team)???

Sorry, but I can't follow any line of reasoning where Jordan/Pippen and Kukoc/Harper would be considered apples-to-apples...Same with trying to equate Hawkins/Les to Maniscalco/Brown...losing one of those duos from their respective team would be far, far more damaging to the team then the other...

Jordan? Now we are in the NBA?

The Hawk and JJ teams were better for sure...but the point is...take the two best players from any team and see how they do...better yet...take the point guard and leading scorer away...it would be devastating to any team...

if you must the 1999 Bulls without their point guard and leading scorer would have been much worse off...

It does matter how good the players are for that respective team...but the point remains..TB and SM gone = devastating loss...as would JJ and Willie or Hawk and Les..would we have made sweet 16 without DRuff and Summerville?

[squirrelgotdead]

who were the two best players for each of those teams? Although I would say JJ and Willie..it is apples to apples..but some folks would not want to see it that way...

take the best player and the point guard...obviously JJ and Hawk were more talented, but losing them would, to their team be equal to losing TB and SM to this team...

Thirdkill and JJ were also blue-chip recruits. Sammy was a solid 3rd-team All-State, and TB was kind of a project throw in. Scott, Houston, Mines etc were all solid DI players that could've started just about anywhere.

So what's lost in the debate is we are over-rating the quality of our best players, and allowing a pass on the lack of quality depth.

The notion that we're at a disposition because of SM and TB being out many of us see right through because there's no supporting cast. And THAT is the real problem. Versace built a team that could withstand the rigors of war, which is in a sense what competitive sport is.

[LittleBrave]

JP
Our greatest weakness the previous 3 years has been the lack of a consistent post player. I now think JP is a big improvement to past years post presence. (Although not the big time post player I'd hope to get, JP seems to be at least a decent quality player)

You got it! We would have certainly been a 20-game winning team last season if we had JP's 4 ppg! That was the missing piece!
Next season when we go 16-15, we'll be saying that the loss of either Dodie or Drew was why we didn't get to the tournament.

Now, do I really think we'll go 16-15 next season with a healthy SM and TB? No.
But have we managed to not come close to everyone's expectations the past 4 seasons? Yes.

[mrcoachdude]

Thirdkill and JJ were also blue-chip recruits. Sammy was a solid 3rd-team All-State, and TB was kind of a project throw in. Scott, Houston, Mines etc were all solid DI players that could've started just about anywhere.

So what's lost in the debate is we are over-rating the quality of our best players, and allowing a pass on the lack of quality depth.

The notion that we're at a disposition because of SM and TB being out many of us see right through because there's no supporting cast. And THAT is the real problem. Versace built a team that could withstand the rigors of war, which is in a sense what competitive sport is.

So your saying that hawk/les, jj/thirdkill would not have been missed? Please....without those two players on each team they would have been nowhere near where they finished...not over rating TB and SM, but they are the two best players on the team...although AW is making a case

[squirrelgotdead]

So your saying that hawk/les, jj/thirdkill would not have been missed? Please....without those two players on each team they would have been nowhere near where they finished...not over rating TB and SM, but they are the two best players on the team...although AW is making a case

Obviously you missed the point. Of course they would've been missed. But they still would have been able to battle on without them and have success because there was talent and depth.

While this team has some good players, let's face it, they are not the same level, and beyond that is probably another two levels down.

What you are implying, essentially, is if Duke lost its two best players its OK for them to finish last in the ACC and/or not make the NCAA Tournament.

[Da Coach]

Disagree. IMO, BU would have been a bad team in both those years ('82 and '86) if you took the two top players away. They would have been a second division team at best.

And it is not fair for fans to use opinion and conjecture to make points against Jim Les but not to allow anyone to use their own opinions or conjecture in supporting him.

[Buesch N Chips]

And it is not fair for fans to use opinion and conjecture to make points against Jim Les but not to allow anyone to use their own opinions or conjecture in supporting him.

Good point.

[squirrelgotdead]

If you want everyone to believe that Trimpe, Powell, Mike Williams or Luke Jackson (depending on what year you choose to compare) and Anthony Manuel (who, like Les is all-time Top 5 in the NCAA in an assist category-per game) would be "second division at best", I'm afraid our fans deserve a little more respect than that.

No one ever suggested they'd be league champs, but to compare those teams to this team is frankly laugh out loud funny.

[Da Coach]

Again, that may be your opinion, but I saw every one of those games in 81-82 and 85-86, and no matter what you might think, all those other guys were nothing more than solid role players.

Manual was a nice player, but you forget he was a freshman in 85-86, and would not have been able to replace Jim Les any more than DSE or DD have been successful replacing Sammy. And Mike Williams was simply not a scorer, he could not have carried that team. The few points he got were mostly on assists coming from Jim Les, or rebounds on shots by Hersey. Trimpe and Powell were sophomores, but not impact players at that point in their Bradley careers. And Luke Jackson was not even on that team, he started at Bradley in 1986-87.

The same is true with the 81-82 season. Take away JJ and either Thirdkill or Reese, and you would have a bunch of role players. They might have won a few more games than this year's team, but mainly because the MVC was a weak conference back then with just a couple good teams at the top.