DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Stony Brook Fans
HTML https://sbufan.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: SBU Men's Basketball
*****************************************************
#Post#: 29159--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: guest369
Date: January 30, 2020, 10:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If Jeff or Mo had any consistent inside game they wouldn’t have
been Juco transfers
We saw Mo score 16 vs Bing, and Jeff has had two or three double
digit games. Neither are that great at posting up - how many
times have we seen Jeff get called for travels while trying to
post for the layup, while Mo slashes his way inside for the hook
shot.
#Post#: 29160--------------------------------------------------
Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Checkmate
Date: January 30, 2020, 11:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: OldSeawolf link ---
>
> [quote author=Hammertime link=topic=828.msg29156#msg29156
date=1580400283]
> [quote author=Checkmate link=topic=828.msg29155#msg29155
date=1580398038]
> [quote author=Chairman of the Board
link=topic=828.msg29151#msg29151 date=1580389375]
> well ill pose this question- we are comparing the chef to mo,
but really, they don't play the same position. i think we are
comparing them because of height, no? mo plays about as much
inside as he does outside (maybe a touch more inside?), but
willing to hear what others see...
>
> comparing chef to otch is better. and otch limits his own
minutes with foul trouble. the chef provides even more muscle
than otch.
>
> the AE doesnt normally have bigs like we do. i think we can
use them to our advantage.
>
> SB has one NCAA appearance: warney and mcgrew inside, warney
scored 43 points without taking a jump shot.
>
--- End Quote ---
Mind you one of these two played in the NBA and has his number
retired. Our current crop of post players is big and raw raw
raw. Defensively and on the glass, obviously Mo and Jeff are two
of the best we've ever had in terms of changing or blocking
shots. I just don't think you can force/expect these guys to be
major weapons in the post. It just isn't going to happen. The
strategy can't be "feed Jeff and Mo in the post." Dead serious:
Petras had a better array of offensive moves.
[/quote]
UMMMMMMMMMMM, NOOOO, Petras, for being 7'-0" couldn't jump to
save his life. I dont think I have ever seen Petras slam dunk.
His moves under the basket were like Gumby.
[/quote]
Hammer, you are too cruel! Petras came in as an unorthodox,
unskilled freshman, and was a serviceable player by his Senior
Year. Not an all-star, but was definitely a contributor.
Unless I'm mistaken, I believe he played professionally
somewhere after graduation.
[/quote]
[emoji1787] I knew this would start a riot. I’m just talking
offensively. Petras was pretty sure handed, threw his body
around in the paint and had decent touch around the rim. And he
could shoot it a little. Remember?
HTML https://twitter.com/AEHoopsNews/status/944405551802236929
On what was a pretty bad team, he was a good backup big man. Of
course he was infuriatingly below average on the glass for
somebody his size and wasn’t much defensively (wide body, five
fouls, not a rim protector) but he could do a little bit with
the ball in his hands.
I’d be more apt to feed him on the block than Jeff. And I don’t
see him as a distributor either. I agree with going in then out,
but more with a guard than through the post. Unfortunately, we
lack a pure distributor. Woodhouse or Hilaire would be perfect
for this team.
I’d run the high screen and roll with Gueye all day just to get
action toward the rim no matter if it’s him or the guard and to
get the defense thinking about collapsing on the penetrator.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#Post#: 29161--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Moveitfred
Date: January 30, 2020, 11:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Chairman of the Board link ---
>
>
> now tell me why- with all the talent and facilities- we've
secured one NCAA bid. but a lot of 25 win seasons.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
For whatever it's worth, my answer is either: A) Dumb Luck or B)
Dumb Misfortune.
I put this in the realm of philosophical question (in a mostly
non-philosophical world of sport), and I admit to thinking about
it too as a long-time member of the community and SBU sports
attendee.
Seems we are naturally conditioned to thinking that if we want
an outcome we just need to put together the concrete pieces to
reach that outcome. If we can do A (talent) + B (facilities) + C
(whatever else) we will = regular success.
Seawolves United suggests this, right? Send us money and we'll
be better. And I'll be the first to admit, maybe that's true.
Heck I don't know.
But what if....
You do A, B, and C and = no change? What if, as the saying goes,
it (SBU sports in this case) is what it is. Isn't that equally
possible, even probable? I know this idea is outside what many
probably like to admit or think, but I wonder. Think about it
next time SH pitches you for a check! ;D
The reality is SBU is in a one-bid conference with a bunch of
schools that are ALL recruiting the same 2-star recruits. Maybe
you get lucky for a year or a time and get a Warney or a Lyles
or a Lamb, but other than that everyone is pretty much the same
despite what we'd like to think. And all coaches are pretty good
and all are working pretty hard. Not much difference.
This has been said many times and comes down as the key in my
mind: nothing will probably ever change beyond dumb
luck/misfortune in a one-bid conference for SBU until and if
they move into a "better" conference. Simple as that. And I
wouldn't begin to know the desire or politics for that to
happen.
But maybe with regard to men's basketball there is one more
lingering and maddening question: So then why is UVM ALWAYS the
best team until they're not? Admit it, drives us all crazy,
right? Why can't we be like them (and, yeah, admittedly take our
lumps losing the championship once in awhile, but we'd love to
always be in the championship)?
I have no idea beyond this isolated and personal experience: I
have a child who was a recent college athlete (completely
unrelated sport) who was recruited by AE schools. She didn't go
to an AE school, but if she had? Easy, and we (athlete, mom,
dad...) were all onboard with the same school: UVM. Easy
decision for many reasons having to do with the broader aspects
of school and environment beyond the sport.
Have a hunch that might be something that gives UVM the edge.
Sorry SBU, but maybe it just is what it is.
#Post#: 29162--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Hammertime
Date: January 30, 2020, 12:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Checkmate link ---
>
> [quote author=OldSeawolf link=topic=828.msg29157#msg29157
date=1580400882]
> [quote author=Hammertime link=topic=828.msg29156#msg29156
date=1580400283]
> [quote author=Checkmate link=topic=828.msg29155#msg29155
date=1580398038]
> [quote author=Chairman of the Board
link=topic=828.msg29151#msg29151 date=1580389375]
> well ill pose this question- we are comparing the chef to mo,
but really, they don't play the same position. i think we are
comparing them because of height, no? mo plays about as much
inside as he does outside (maybe a touch more inside?), but
willing to hear what others see...
>
> comparing chef to otch is better. and otch limits his own
minutes with foul trouble. the chef provides even more muscle
than otch.
>
> the AE doesnt normally have bigs like we do. i think we can
use them to our advantage.
>
> SB has one NCAA appearance: warney and mcgrew inside, warney
scored 43 points without taking a jump shot.
>
--- End Quote ---
Mind you one of these two played in the NBA and has his number
retired. Our current crop of post players is big and raw raw
raw. Defensively and on the glass, obviously Mo and Jeff are two
of the best we've ever had in terms of changing or blocking
shots. I just don't think you can force/expect these guys to be
major weapons in the post. It just isn't going to happen. The
strategy can't be "feed Jeff and Mo in the post." Dead serious:
Petras had a better array of offensive moves.
[/quote]
UMMMMMMMMMMM, NOOOO, Petras, for being 7'-0" couldn't jump to
save his life. I dont think I have ever seen Petras slam dunk.
His moves under the basket were like Gumby.
[/quote]
Hammer, you are too cruel! Petras came in as an unorthodox,
unskilled freshman, and was a serviceable player by his Senior
Year. Not an all-star, but was definitely a contributor.
Unless I'm mistaken, I believe he played professionally
somewhere after graduation.
[/quote]
[emoji1787] I knew this would start a riot. I’m just talking
offensively. Petras was pretty sure handed, threw his body
around in the paint and had decent touch around the rim. And he
could shoot it a little. Remember?
HTML https://twitter.com/AEHoopsNews/status/944405551802236929
On what was a pretty bad team, he was a good backup big man. Of
course he was infuriatingly below average on the glass for
somebody his size and wasn’t much defensively (wide body, five
fouls, not a rim protector) but he could do a little bit with
the ball in his hands.
I’d be more apt to feed him on the block than Jeff. And I don’t
see him as a distributor either. I agree with going in then out,
but more with a guard than through the post. Unfortunately, we
lack a pure distributor. Woodhouse or Hilaire would be perfect
for this team.
I’d run the high screen and roll with Gueye all day just to get
action toward the rim no matter if it’s him or the guard and to
get the defense thinking about collapsing on the penetrator.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/quote]
Checkmate. I am not bashing Petras personally. You should know
by now this is how I am towards everybody, blunt, to the point
and I dont beat around the bush or sugarcoat anything. I
actually enjoyed watching Petras play for the time my seats were
down on the floor at SB. He was very entertaining and definitely
was the fan-favorite. With all that being said. He was not a D1
player. In my book anyway. Did Petras improve a little after 4
years at SB? possibly, but please, Lets stop wasting
scholarships on project players and start recruiting players who
are college, D1 ready. SB is no longer that little kid on the
block. Let's step it up, up the anty and get serious with
participating in the NCAA, year after year.
#Post#: 29163--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Hammertime
Date: January 30, 2020, 12:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Moveitfred link ---
>
> [quote author=Chairman of the Board
link=topic=828.msg29158#msg29158 date=1580401921]
>
> now tell me why- with all the talent and facilities- we've
secured one NCAA bid. but a lot of 25 win seasons.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
For whatever it's worth, my answer is either: A) Dumb Luck or B)
Dumb Misfortune.
I put this in the realm of philosophical question (in a mostly
non-philosophical world of sport), and I admit to thinking about
it too as a long-time member of the community and SBU sports
attendee.
Seems we are naturally conditioned to thinking that if we want
an outcome we just need to put together the concrete pieces to
reach that outcome. If we can do A (talent) + B (facilities) + C
(whatever else) we will = regular success.
Seawolves United suggests this, right? Send us money and we'll
be better. And I'll be the first to admit, maybe that's true.
Heck I don't know.
But what if....
You do A, B, and C and = no change? What if, as the saying goes,
it (SBU sports in this case) is what it is. Isn't that equally
possible, even probable? I know this idea is outside what many
probably like to admit or think, but I wonder. Think about it
next time SH pitches you for a check! ;D
The reality is SBU is in a one-bid conference with a bunch of
schools that are ALL recruiting the same 2-star recruits. Maybe
you get lucky for a year or a time and get a Warney or a Lyles
or a Lamb, but other than that everyone is pretty much the same
despite what we'd like to think. And all coaches are pretty good
and all are working pretty hard. Not much difference.
This has been said many times and comes down as the key in my
mind: nothing will probably ever change beyond dumb
luck/misfortune in a one-bid conference for SBU until and if
they move into a "better" conference. Simple as that. And I
wouldn't begin to know the desire or politics for that to
happen.
But maybe with regard to men's basketball there is one more
lingering and maddening question: So then why is UVM ALWAYS the
best team until they're not? Admit it, drives us all crazy,
right? Why can't we be like them (and, yeah, admittedly take our
lumps losing the championship once in awhile, but we'd love to
always be in the championship)?
I have no idea beyond this isolated and personal experience: I
have a child who was a recent college athlete (completely
unrelated sport) who was recruited by AE schools. She didn't go
to an AE school, but if she had? Easy, and we (athlete, mom,
dad...) were all onboard with the same school: UVM. Easy
decision for many reasons having to do with the broader aspects
of school and environment beyond the sport.
Have a hunch that might be something that gives UVM the edge.
Sorry SBU, but maybe it just is what it is.
[/quote]
Well said. If and only if SB ever gets out of this AE conference
they will be just like any other team. No better no worse.
#Post#: 29164--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Checkmate
Date: January 30, 2020, 1:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hammertime link ---
>
> [quote author=Checkmate link=topic=828.msg29160#msg29160
date=1580406267]
> [quote author=OldSeawolf link=topic=828.msg29157#msg29157
date=1580400882]
> [quote author=Hammertime link=topic=828.msg29156#msg29156
date=1580400283]
> [quote author=Checkmate link=topic=828.msg29155#msg29155
date=1580398038]
> [quote author=Chairman of the Board
link=topic=828.msg29151#msg29151 date=1580389375]
> well ill pose this question- we are comparing the chef to mo,
but really, they don't play the same position. i think we are
comparing them because of height, no? mo plays about as much
inside as he does outside (maybe a touch more inside?), but
willing to hear what others see...
>
> comparing chef to otch is better. and otch limits his own
minutes with foul trouble. the chef provides even more muscle
than otch.
>
> the AE doesnt normally have bigs like we do. i think we can
use them to our advantage.
>
> SB has one NCAA appearance: warney and mcgrew inside, warney
scored 43 points without taking a jump shot.
>
--- End Quote ---
Mind you one of these two played in the NBA and has his number
retired. Our current crop of post players is big and raw raw
raw. Defensively and on the glass, obviously Mo and Jeff are two
of the best we've ever had in terms of changing or blocking
shots. I just don't think you can force/expect these guys to be
major weapons in the post. It just isn't going to happen. The
strategy can't be "feed Jeff and Mo in the post." Dead serious:
Petras had a better array of offensive moves.
[/quote]
UMMMMMMMMMMM, NOOOO, Petras, for being 7'-0" couldn't jump to
save his life. I dont think I have ever seen Petras slam dunk.
His moves under the basket were like Gumby.
[/quote]
Hammer, you are too cruel! Petras came in as an unorthodox,
unskilled freshman, and was a serviceable player by his Senior
Year. Not an all-star, but was definitely a contributor.
Unless I'm mistaken, I believe he played professionally
somewhere after graduation.
[/quote]
[emoji1787] I knew this would start a riot. I’m just talking
offensively. Petras was pretty sure handed, threw his body
around in the paint and had decent touch around the rim. And he
could shoot it a little. Remember?
HTML https://twitter.com/AEHoopsNews/status/944405551802236929
On what was a pretty bad team, he was a good backup big man. Of
course he was infuriatingly below average on the glass for
somebody his size and wasn’t much defensively (wide body, five
fouls, not a rim protector) but he could do a little bit with
the ball in his hands.
I’d be more apt to feed him on the block than Jeff. And I don’t
see him as a distributor either. I agree with going in then out,
but more with a guard than through the post. Unfortunately, we
lack a pure distributor. Woodhouse or Hilaire would be perfect
for this team.
I’d run the high screen and roll with Gueye all day just to get
action toward the rim no matter if it’s him or the guard and to
get the defense thinking about collapsing on the penetrator.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/quote]
Checkmate. I am not bashing Petras personally. You should know
by now this is how I am towards everybody, blunt, to the point
and I dont beat around the bush or sugarcoat anything. I
actually enjoyed watching Petras play for the time my seats were
down on the floor at SB. He was very entertaining and definitely
was the fan-favorite. With all that being said. He was not a D1
player. In my book anyway. Did Petras improve a little after 4
years at SB? possibly, but please, Lets stop wasting
scholarships on project players and start recruiting players who
are college, D1 ready. SB is no longer that little kid on the
block. Let's step it up, up the anty and get serious with
participating in the NCAA, year after year.
[/quote]
He was a solid D-I backup center, which is what he was. And as
long as we're in the America East, we are very much the little
kid on the block. There's a reason we can count legitimate NBA
players on one hand, two max. Kids will always want to play for
the best program in the best conference.
#Post#: 29165--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Seawolf97
Date: January 30, 2020, 3:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Fred agree 100% ! I have been watching SBU sports over at
least the 15 years and in many cases we have improved. I made
the trip to Omaha in 2012 and that was an experience but our
other teams with exception of ladies lax remain well just good
teams. We have had 1 NCAA appearance in Mens Hoops in 20 years
, won a few Big South Championships in football moved up and
havent done a thing . Baseball wins AE Titles but cant get
over the hump of the first round of the NCAA's . So thats our
sports programs in a nut shell . Good teams winning games but
no real championship teams . I really doubt we win a CAA Title
in the next 5 years or advance in the NCAA if we ever get there
in basketball. Ladies Lax is about the best we got and thats ok
Accept good teams , win a few along the way dont expect an
Alabama or Duke or Baylor or even an Villanova .
#Post#: 29166--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: guest369
Date: January 30, 2020, 3:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
When you frame it as “1 NCAA in 20 years” that makes it look
really bad. How many times did we fall one game short? How close
was it to being “5 NCAAs in 6 years”? WLAX needs a championship
soon too, we can’t keep settling for a second round.
Outside of just “outspending our competitors” I don’t know what
else we can do to push us higher. Even then, spending the most
doesn’t guarantee a W either.
The worst thing for us is to be satisfied with stagnation. Where
are we right now is not acceptable, we need to keep breaking
barriers and make advancements that will make us next level. For
all that Shawn talks about being “big time” it’s been 5 years
since he took over and we’re still in a one bid league and in
the FCS.
#Post#: 29167--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: Checkmate
Date: January 30, 2020, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Seawolf97 link ---
>
> Fred agree 100% ! I have been watching SBU sports over at
least the 15 years and in many cases we have improved. I made
the trip to Omaha in 2012 and that was an experience but our
other teams with exception of ladies lax remain well just good
teams. We have had 1 NCAA appearance in Mens Hoops in 20 years
, won a few Big South Championships in football moved up and
havent done a thing . Baseball wins AE Titles but cant get
over the hump of the first round of the NCAA's. So thats our
sports programs in a nut shell . Good teams winning games but
no real championship teams . I really doubt we win a CAA Title
in the next 5 years or advance in the NCAA if we ever get there
in basketball. Ladies Lax is about the best we got and thats ok
Accept good teams , win a few along the way dont expect an
Alabama or Duke or Baylor or even an Villanova .
>
>
--- End Quote ---
This is completely unreasonable. Do you realize how outrageous
that 2012 run was? It's arguably the most unlikely run in
college baseball history. And do you realize how few 4 seeds
prevail in the regionals? And northeast schools? It doesn't
happen. St. John's has made one Super Regional in the last 20
years and the programs don't compare. Same thing applies to
baseball as it does to hoops – if a kid has an opportunity to
play at St. John's or Stony Brook, they're going to choose St.
John's 10 times out of 10 because of the competition level.
I beg to differ on a lot of the non-money sports too. I for one
am very pleased with the status of the athletic program. Without
looking, women's volleyball is rolling right now. Women's hoops.
Women's soccer. Football made the postseason in the two seasons
before this one. You won't find any AE schools on the Capital
One cup standings, but I don't think there's much argument that
we are the most successful athletics program in the conference.
There is a ceiling that comes with being here though – one-bid
league across the board, a limit on the talent we're going to
get. Hoops is the most high-profile sport by a mile, and we've
come up short. And you can't NOT consider how close we were with
the Hooley shot and other attempts. We were right there. And as
long as we're in the AE, that's what it's going to come down to
– three days in March. The Duke, Baylor, Villanova stuff is 50
years away at best.
When I was in undergrad and being completely oblivious, I asked
women's volleyball players why they chose to play at UMass. Each
of their answers, every single one, was because they couldn't
get a roster spot elsewhere. Saaaame thing all these years later
and it'll always be that way.
#Post#: 29168--------------------------------------------------
Re: Game 22: at UMass Lowell, 1/29 7pm
DIR By: OldSeawolf
Date: January 30, 2020, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
We all like winning, but I’ll put things in perspective for some
of you young guys. I went to SBU from late 1970’s to early
1980’s; hence, my moniker “OldSeawolf”. Back in the olden days
we were D3 in every sport except for squash (D1) and football
(club team). We played football on a parcel of land just south
of North P-lot and had a single bleacher for fans. We played
basketball in an old dusty gym (the Pritchard prior to its
renovations). I couldn’t tell you who our AD was or even if we
had one. Our only athletic claim to fame was an appearance in
the men’s b-ball D3 Final 4 (yes, national), and our #1 national
ranking in D3 the following year for most of the year, before
being upset in the first round of the NCAA tourney.
I never could have dreamed back then that we’d have gorgeous
basketball and football facilities, and even a great baseball
complex. Being division 1? Never in my wildest dreams.
My point is that athletically we have come a long, long way. The
AD’s and the school administrators have done a fantastic job
growing athletics and putting us on the map. Can we achieve even
bigger things from this point? Perhaps. A SUNY budget does have
limiting factors, in terms of how much we can spend on coaches
and staff, scholarships, etc. I am optimistic though, that we
will continue to do better things. The seeds have been planted.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 10
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page