Spare me the Monta, Bender stuff. What player has gotten better under him. Ravern, spot shooter, no ball handling, no d as a frsh. 4 years .later no ballhandling, no d, good shooter. Same for Kodi, Jarvis..etc.
If he's such a great recruiter, why doesnt he have ONE NBA player?
- Thread starter clydefrazier
- Start date
I agree that he has recruited well and we have generally underachieved. However, I do think some fans have an unrealistic opinion of some of our players. I remember people on this board claiming that Barry Stewart was as good as J.J. Redick. Barry Stewart was a nice player but he was nowhere close to being in Redick's league. The fact that Redick was drafted in the first round and still plays in the NBA (25 minutes per game) is proof of that. Many people thought Varnado was going to be a lottery pick. Varnado was a good player, but there isn't a big market for stick-skinny 6'-9" centers. The fact that he has yet to play in the NBA is proof of that.
Now we have repeatedly matched up against many teams with equal or inferior talent and been outcoached or outworked. That falls on Stansbury. It also falls on Stansbury that he has not recruited many players with leadership qualities. You can't win following Ravern Johnson, Renardo Sidney, or Dee Bost.
Some of this is Stansbury's fault, and some of it isn't. However, as the head coach, it is all his responsibility. Stricklin should hold Stansbury accountable, even if it means firing him.
Now we have repeatedly matched up against many teams with equal or inferior talent and been outcoached or outworked. That falls on Stansbury. It also falls on Stansbury that he has not recruited many players with leadership qualities. You can't win following Ravern Johnson, Renardo Sidney, or Dee Bost.
Some of this is Stansbury's fault, and some of it isn't. However, as the head coach, it is all his responsibility. Stricklin should hold Stansbury accountable, even if it means firing him.
Bowers. Frazier. Bost. Stewart. TURNER. Dizzy. Jarvis. Rhodes. Jamont. Kodi. Benock. Ravern. Moultrie. Lewis. Plus many many more.
I actually put some on here that will piss you and others off just to show that even they have improved.
All these players improved while at MSU and Stans was their coach.
If you argue against any of them improving, you are a complete moron and you are ignoring their stats as well as play on the court.
The real question(s) should be:
- Who did he coach that improved more than they would have naturally improved just from age and experience.
- Did these guys improve as much under Stans as they could have under another coach?
Those are questions that actually evaluate his effectiveness.
Just questioning who improved under him is an emotional tantrum of a question. Its absurd and easily answered.
I actually put some on here that will piss you and others off just to show that even they have improved.
All these players improved while at MSU and Stans was their coach.
If you argue against any of them improving, you are a complete moron and you are ignoring their stats as well as play on the court.
The real question(s) should be:
- Who did he coach that improved more than they would have naturally improved just from age and experience.
- Did these guys improve as much under Stans as they could have under another coach?
Those are questions that actually evaluate his effectiveness.
Just questioning who improved under him is an emotional tantrum of a question. Its absurd and easily answered.
as would just about any going from 18-22. Ravern? you must not have had cable the last 4 years. Could shoot it, not D and couldnt dribble when he arrived, same thing four years later/ Jarvis, when he got here, he was a skinny, excellent shot blocker with no offensive game. When he left, same thing. Jamont, a little better. Hansborough? Big east player of year.
clydefrazier said:
First off, where was this thread earlier in the season? Its come out now since we are losing to crap teams, but if you are consistent, it would have been just as applicable earlier in the season. Yet you didnt start a thread like this then. Odd.
Anyways...
Ravern absolutely improved. When he first got here, he was even skinnier than he left. He was only useful as a spot up shooter and on the fast break as long as the ball wasnt in his hands.
In his later years, he shouldered a significant part of our scoring, was bigger than when he came in, could finish in traffic, and was not 1 dimensional on offense.
Had he shouldered as much as a freshman as he did as a senior, the results wouldnt have been as good. Agree with that? Or do you really think he would have been just as effective with that much scoring responsibility when hefirst came in? Hell no he wouldnt have been.
His stats show his progression. If he didnt improve, he would have played more as a freshman and been just as effective. Furthermore, his shooting was better and HE GOT TO THE LINE MORElater on, which shows his game developed from just a spot shooter.
Yes Ravern still sucked at defense when he left.Yes he still couldnt handle the ball worth a damn when he was out on the perimeter. But just because he didnt improve in those areas doesnt mean he didnt improve overall.
As for Jarvis, you are nuts. He came in skinny and unable to stay on the floor because of fouls. He was a no factor on offense too. He fouled as much in 13mpg as a freshman as he did in 31mpg as a senior. He CLEARLY learned how to be an elite post defender while in college. The guy DEVELOPED into a defender of the year who AVERAGED A DOUBLE DOUBLE.
Jarvis' FT attempts went from 1 every 10 minutes played as a freshman to 1 every 5 minutes played. That shows he was more involved on offense and was more effective at getting shots up and to the line...which is kinda everything you want.
Jarvis' offensive game was limited, sure. But was wasnt shitting all over himself on the court. He had good footwork and could turn over both shoulders in the paint.
He came in unable to even stay on the floor long enough to affect the game and left as the all time leading shot blocker in NCAA history while averaging a DOUBLE DOUBLE.
Yep, no improvement there.
Jamont. Man, this is just dumb. Look at the stats.
He increased his shooting % while also increasing the overall shots taken per game. He increased his perimeter shooting. He increased his assists per game. He decreased his turnovers per game. He shouldered more of the offense later on.
Its all there.
Jamont is an interesting player since he came in so ready to contribute right away. And he did leave with many of the issues that he came with. But his stats show a clear progression in multiple categories. They also show he was able to play at an elite level right away and so maybe there wasnt much room to improve. Much like Lawrence Roberts, actually.
When he left,