On basketball improvement...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

I wouldn't be mad if we hired a new coach this year. I'm nowhere near sold ray can get us where we need to be. I just don't think there's any way we fire Ray, so I'm trying to keep an open mind and hope for the best

---

Exactly. The upside of firing him immediately is the probability of(at least short term) renewed fan support, assuming we got off our asses and got someone that everyone could be excited about.

I still think 3 years is too quick of trigger in basketball for a school in our position to get and retain a desirable coach unless we overpay bigtime -- especially with the moderate improvement that has been shown, which was really the worst case scenario IMO as far as the fanbase goes. Especially when one year was a definite throw away and you could argue that 2 were at least partial throw aways. So, he's really had 1.5 years here, and Stricklin is prettymuch calling it one year.

I agree with D61 -- our seniors-to-be "are what they are" which is talented(but not well rounded) athletes without alot of basketball savvy that are prone to mental lapses and have not shown any semblance of consistent mental toughness. I don't know if what we see from them is what Ray teaches or not -- I do know that he comes off as basketball intelligent when he speaks about stuff at length. He notices the same issues we do. It could be argued that he should have fixed them quicker or done a better job evaluating and recruiting, and I'd tentatively agree. Tentatively because it seems we were very toxic on the recruiting trail for his first couple of years and it took Ray awhile to figure out and build his newtork here. Let's not forget -- his predecessor didn't find immediate success here, and he'd built his network at MSU for 9 years prior to getting the job.

Ray's fate still lies with Malik to an extent. I realize everyone is saying we don't have a chance -- but I won't buy in to all of that until he's signed elsewhere. That's the quickest way to win back the fanbase and get extended here. That opens the door to Kegler at least to an extent. Get one of those two -- and your back to recruiting on peak Stansbury levels here. Malik takes our mid 40s 2015 class and turns it into a top 25 2015 class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

I still think 3 years is too quick of trigger in basketball for a school in our position to get and retain a desirable coach unless we overpay bigtime -- especially with the moderate improvement that has been shown, which was really the worst case scenario IMO as far as the fanbase goes. Especially when one year was a definite throw away and you could argue that 2 were at least partial throw aways. So, he's really had 1.5 years here, and Stricklin is prettymuch calling it one year.

---

I would agree with you if the offense wasn't so atrociously awful, and not improving year 2 to year 3. We are #291/345 in scoring offense out of all DI basketball including SWAC and other irrelevant conferences. Last year we finished #259, so you could say we are regressing (tonight isn't going to help). If we were say, #175 having pulled it up from #200, I could say, well, we're just not that talented and we've put a few things in place to help out. That's not the case though. With an experienced team we are still worse on the offensive side of the ball than any other team in the SEC besides Missouri. They are having an awful year, but at least are in the first year of a new coach who has won a NC at a DII school.

These kids either aren't being taught effectively, or don't want to listen to Ray. In either case, that's on him. He gets props for stepping up the defense this year, but I can teach my dog to chase people and try to get the ball. I refuse to believe that we are #291 out of 345 in scoring offense because these kids are just so bad at basketball.

So are We to the point with our basketball program where we should be happy and satisfied being the third or forth tallest midget? Every improvement you list is marginal at best and result of guys having 2-3.5 years of experience under their belts. And from where we were there was only one direction for us to go, unless we pulled the plug on men's basketball altogether. To most of us using logic and not tying to fit our "hopes and dreams" into reality, the improvement is a product of experience. Just like a burger flipper at McDonald's. At first he will struggle with the trade. After 3 years of doing the same thing there will be marginal improvement simply from repetitive action. But he will still be a burger flipper. What's next? Are you going to start looking into hot dog and pretzel sales during Rays tenure in an attempt to show how we are better off now with him at the helm? Just stop trying to defend our horrendous program. It's really getting old seeing these threads putting so much effort into trying to turn chicken shit into chicken salad. Just stop it already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shannondawg

Someone told me that Stricklin's next door neighbor was Rick Ray. Is that true? Needless to say, that could make it uncomfortable.

---

I'm surprised he doesn't live with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by codeDawg

I would agree with you if the offense wasn't so atrociously awful, and not improving year 2 to year 3. We are #291/345 in scoring offense out of all DI basketball including SWAC and other irrelevant conferences. Last year we finished #259, so you could say we are regressing (tonight isn't going to help). If we were say, #175 having pulled it up from #200, I could say, well, we're just not that talented and we've put a few things in place to help out. That's not the case though. With an experienced team we are still worse on the offensive side of the ball than any other team in the SEC besides Missouri. They are having an awful year, but at least are in the first year of a new coach who has won a NC at a DII school.

These kids either aren't being taught effectively, or don't want to listen to Ray. In either case, that's on him. He gets props for stepping up the defense this year, but I can teach my dog to chase people and try to get the ball. I refuse to believe that we are #291 out of 345 in scoring offense because these kids are just so bad at basketball.

---

Wait you can't see how great ray is???*** Our revenue has been stagnant during his tenure while expenses have doubled. Haven't you seen the numbers? Our previous cosch never made this much revenue. Good thing these "revenue" guys aren't responsible for any business decisions or that business would be up Sh*t creek .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougeDawg

Wait you can't see how great ray is???*** Our revenue has been stagnant during his tenure while expenses have doubled. Haven't you seen the numbers? Our previous cosch never made this much revenue. Good thing these "revenue" guys aren't responsible for any business decisions or that business would be up Sh*t creek .

---

If you can't see there's improvement, you just can't look at it objectively. Are we close to being great? No, but we're close to being good. We're a player or 2 away imo. If ready and sword hadn't started the year hurt, zuppardo hadnt blown a knee, and staley played, we're in the nit no doubt. Injurues are part of it though. We just aren't talented enough to absorb injuries. Our talent level will be better next season though...

I've heard more than a few times that if cox hadnt gotten kicked off and market hadn't gotten hurt, we'd have won against OM. Why is that excuse valid for football (85 man roster), but not for basketball (13 man roster)?

Does it not stand to reason that a very good/much improved defense is a significant contributing factor for less offense? Deeper shot clock -- fewer possessions -- fewer points. I don't have a premium kenpom subscription to verify it -- but I believe it will show that our offensive efficiency is about the same as last year. Which is, by no means, good enough -- but I sincerely doubt the dropoff that the PPG snapshot would project...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougeDawg

Wait you can't see how great ray is???*** Our revenue has been stagnant during his tenure while expenses have doubled. Haven't you seen the numbers? Our previous cosch never made this much revenue. Good thing these "revenue" guys aren't responsible for any business decisions or that business would be up Sh*t creek .

---

I've never seen anyone circle back to a position after being owned to the extent that you were on this one. You never cease to amaze...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

If you can't see there's improvement, you just can't look at it objectively. Are we close to being great? No, but we're close to being good. We're a player or 2 away imo. If ready and sword hadn't started the year hurt, zuppardo hadnt blown a knee, and staley played, we're in the nit no doubt. Injurues are part of it though. We just aren't talented enough to absorb injuries. Our talent level will be better next season though...

I've heard more than a few times that if cox hadnt gotten kicked off and market hadn't gotten hurt, we'd have won against OM. Why is that excuse valid for football (85 man roster), but not for basketball (13 man roster)?

---

All these IFS. I'm basing everything on ACTUAL results. Not what may have or could have been. If I had won the lottery i could have done a lot of different things myself but guess what, i haven't.

Double Post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Holy.Shit.

There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that you are this dense. No way. I've never seen anyone come back to a position after being publicly proven an idiot.

---

Proven wrong?? How is the common knowledge that inflation is a fact of economics? Also it is a known fact that energy costs (IE electricity to heat, cool and light the hump and practice facility, gas for plane and bus rides, and higher costs for every good that uses transportation for distribution has gone up since our last coach) has gone up dramatically over the last 4-5 years, while our revenue has been stagnant. But we are supposed to believe that we are better off economically now than before. Have you ever heard of profit, margins, and what percent margins a business must maintain to stay in business?

I'm dumb it down for you. If your costs go up incrementally year after year, but your overall income remanins stagnant, your profit margins shrink incrementally. I used your revenue stats and applied them in real life terms. So by your numbers our men's BBall "Profit Margin" is shrinking under Ray. Please elaborate with your inquisite business skills how this can be viewed as something positive? Unless we are getting our electricity donated there's no way we are clearing more now than 4 years ago if your revenue numbers are correct.

What business economics are you using if you believe we are better off economicallyNow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougeDawg

Proven wrong?? How is the common knowledge that inflation is a fact of economics? Also it is a known fact that energy costs (IE electricity to heat, cool and light the hump and practice facility, gas for plane and bus rides, and higher costs for every good that uses transportation for distribution has gone up since our last coach) has gone up dramatically over the last 4-5 years, while our revenue has been stagnant. But we are supposed to believe that we are better off economically now than before. Have you ever heard of profit, margins, and what percent margins a business must maintain to stay in business?

---

You didn't even read the other thread you "cleverly" made a personal attack about me after midnight on a Friday night did you? This is still psychobabble. Expenses are reported, in detail, exactly how revenue is.

Quote:

---

I'm dumb it down for you. If your costs go up incrementally year after year, but your overall income remanins stagnant, your profit margins shrink incrementally. I used your revenue stats and applied them in real life terms. So by your numbers our men's BBall "Profit Margin" is shrinking under Ray. Please elaborate with your inquisite business skills how this can be viewed as something positive? Unless we are getting our electricity donated there's no way we are clearing more now than 4 years ago if your revenue numbers are correct.

---

Yep -- still herp derping with that foot in your mouth.

Quote:

---

What business economics are you using if you believe we are better off economicallyNow?

---

The business economics of "reading and understanding official federal income tax data from Mississippi State -- which include detailed revenue and expense reports".

In other words -- this isn't even economics. Economics is factored into the accounting. This is simple arithmetic and reading comprehension. 2 things you lack in great abundance. Economics. Lmao.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Does it not stand to reason that a very good/much improved defense is a significant contributing factor for less offense? Deeper shot clock -- fewer possessions -- fewer points. I don't have a premium kenpom subscription to verify it -- but I believe it will show that our offensive efficiency is about the same as last year. Which is, by no means, good enough -- but I sincerely doubt the dropoff that the PPG snapshot would project...

---

Slightly improved offensive efficiency year over year from 260 to 240. We went from the 25th percentile to the 31st. We're in the back of the pack in the SEC on offensive efficiency with Missouri coming up next at 185. Offense is just horrid.

Teams ranked worse than us in offensive efficiency in the past 14 years (note that Ray's first year was the worst in the SEC in this period):

MSU - 2014 (260)
Texas A&M - 2013 (276)
MSU - 2013 (326)
Auburn - 2013 (252)
Auburn - 2011 (284)
LSU - 2011 (307)
LSU - 2010 (249)
Georgia - 2009 (281)
Georgia - 2005 (299)
Arkansas - 2003 (250)
Auburn - 2002 (262)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by codeDawg

Slightly improved offensive efficiency year over year from 260 to 240. We went from the 25th percentile to the 31st. We're in the back of the pack in the SEC on offensive efficiency with Missouri coming up next at 185. Offense is just horrid.

Teams ranked worse than us in offensive efficiency in the past 14 years (note that Ray's first year was the worst in the SEC in this period):

MSU - 2014 (260)
Texas A&M - 2013 (276)
MSU - 2013 (326)
Auburn - 2013 (252)
Auburn - 2011 (284)
LSU - 2011 (307)
LSU - 2010 (249)
Georgia - 2009 (281)
Georgia - 2005 (299)
Arkansas - 2003 (250)
Auburn - 2002 (262)

---

That's some good data. Which is about what I thought. Slight improvement on offense, big improvement on defense. If we could flip that script next year with just a slight defensive improvement and a big offensive improvement, we can be where we need to be. I think Zuppardo is going to give us a boost on that end and some of the freshmen may as well at least somewhat...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

That's some good data. Which is about what I thought. Slight improvement on offense, big improvement on defense. If we could flip that script next year with just a slight defensive improvement and a big offensive improvement, we can be where we need to be. I think Zuppardo is going to give us a boost on that end and some of the freshmen may as well at least somewhat...

---

We are still only 113th in adjusted D, so still well below ncaa tourney quality. We need big improvement on D and an astronomical improvement on O.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

I wouldn't be mad if we hired a new coach this year. I'm nowhere near sold ray can get us where we need to be. I just don't think there's any way we fire Ray, so I'm trying to keep an open mind and hope for the best

---

Just because he's apparently gonna get another year doesn't make it right. Raise enough hell and maybe something can be done this year. If he's here next year, I hope we go undefeated, but that doesn't mean I can't voice my displeasure with were we are right now in his tenure, which is significantly off from where we expected to be in the W & L columns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

We are still only 113th in adjusted D, so still well below ncaa tourney quality. We need big improvement on D and an astronomical improvement on O.

---

Largely related to our average of 15 turnovers per game.

This is absolutely a tournament-level defensive team that's prettymuch elite on that side other than point guard position...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

If you can't see there's improvement, you just can't look at it objectively. Are we close to being great? No, but we're close to being good. We're a player or 2 away imo. If ready and sword hadn't started the year hurt, zuppardo hadnt blown a knee, and staley played, we're in the nit no doubt. Injurues are part of it though. We just aren't talented enough to absorb injuries. Our talent level will be better next season though...

I've heard more than a few times that if cox hadnt gotten kicked off and market hadn't gotten hurt, we'd have won against OM. Why is that excuse valid for football (85 man roster), but not for basketball (13 man roster)?

---

Well I haven't seen anyone claim we would've beaten OM with cox and market. But if we're playing that comparison, the football team win 10 of their 11 other regular season games and didn't lose to the equivalent of sc-upstate multiple times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Largely related to our average of 15 turnovers per game.

This is absolutely a tournament-level defensive team that's prettymuch elite on that side other than point guard position...

---

"Elite"? Maybe you can argue we have a ncaa tourney caliber D but it ain't close to elite.

And I'm pretty sure things like TOs are factored into the adjusted D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

That's some good data. Which is about what I thought. Slight improvement on offense, big improvement on defense. If we could flip that script next year with just a slight defensive improvement and a big offensive improvement, we can be where we need to be. I think Zuppardo is going to give us a boost on that end and some of the freshmen may as well at least somewhat...

---

While that would be my hope, I think we are more likely to see more talented kids that still haven't been taught to run a half-court set, get open, and take high percentage shots (and pass, and dribble, and inbound...). I think the writing is on the wall with this one. Nobody in the conference is this bad in offense and recovers.

Look at the past teams with offenses so constantly bad. LSU under Trent Johnson started with an SEC championship, and a first round win in the NCAA tourney. He then went 11-20 twice (2-14, 3-13 SEC) before making it back into the NIT (7-9 SEC), which was not good enough. He went to TCU where he has stunk it up with awful offense until this year where his is still 3-11 in the conference.

Tony Barbee coached 2010 to 2014. He finished his career at 48-75, the lowest winning percentage of any coach ever at Auburn with more than 2 years there.

That Texas A&M team (should be 2014 above) payed outstanding defense (ranked 33) to go with crappy offense, and the offense recovered.

History is not on Ray's side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Largely related to our average of 15 turnovers per game.

This is absolutely a tournament-level defensive team that's prettymuch elite on that side other than point guard position...

---

We are 10th in the SEC in defensive efficiency.

ETA: Didn't read the top part. Yes, we are a very good scoring defense because we force teams to shoot from the outside. I think we are 4th or 5th in the SEC there. That is the high point of this team.

Guys :This is all good data ,but and I say but after this game we play Vandy ,South Car. and Mo. We need to win all 3 games or we will be playing opening day in the SEC Tour. for the 3rd time in a row .Yes we have looked and played better but does a coach gets a fourth year just to pull us out of opening day play. Think about, let it sink in have our fan base been dull down that badly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goat from MSU

Guys :This is all good data ,but and I say but after this game we play Vandy ,South Car. and Mo. We need to win all 3 games or we will be playing opening day in the SEC Tour. for the 3rd time in a row .Yes we have looked and played better but does a coach gets a fourth year just to pull us out of opening day play. Think about, let it sink in have our fan base been dull down that badly.

---

No one thinks where we are is good enough.

Both sides need to at least enter the discussion honestly. Criticizing Ray by saying, 'Just getting to .500 in the SEC is now good enough for you guys?!' is ridiculous. Similarly, supporting Ray by saying, 'Hey, 'we're showing improvement by going from horrid to pretty darn horrid' is stupid.

We all knew when the decision was made to get rid of Stans that it was a move that would hurt us in the immediate future, and that was before we saw how many guys left, were injured, etc. I mean, Ray's first team had 1 point that had ever been scored in D1 basketball, combined. So we knew things would turn downward initially. But it was made to give us a chance to ultimately go higher than Stans had taken us.

If you told me that after 2 years of Ray, we were still at the bottom of the SEC, I would have said fine. Again, we all knew the first 2 years were essentially a loss and that we would be awful. However, if you told me that after 3 years we would be in the same place, I wouldn't have liked that. Time is running out for Ray, no doubt. He needs to produce a serious turnaround next year that shows us he can put a good team on the floor.

No one's expectations have been lowered for our program as a whole. No one thinks consistently missing the NCAAT, let alone the NIT, is good enough. If Ray proves that he can't ever get us even to where Stans had us, everyone will support him being removed.

And yes, the last 3 games for us are very important. We have to win at least 2 of them, or I will support a change being made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goat from MSU

Guys :This is all good data ,but and I say but after this game we play Vandy ,South Car. and Mo. We need to win all 3 games or we will be playing opening day in the SEC Tour. for the 3rd time in a row .Yes we have looked and played better but does a coach gets a fourth year just to pull us out of opening day play. Think about, let it sink in have our fan base been dull down that badly.

---

Oh, I agree. Not being the worst in one category doesn't mean you should get to keep coaching.

Great offense that is fun to watch tends to lead to a longer leash. If Ray is 5-9 SEC but 4th in offense I think he has less heat on his seat. Don't ever be terrible on offense basically.

Losers improve. Winners win. We aren't winning much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CottonDog

Losers improve. Winners win. We aren't winning much.

---

Come on now, why would you let reality get in the way of an agenda?**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

No one thinks where we are is good enough.

Both sides need to at least enter the discussion honestly. Criticizing Ray by saying, 'Just getting to .500 in the SEC is now good enough for you guys?!' is ridiculous. Similarly, supporting Ray by saying, 'Hey, 'we're showing improvement by going from horrid to pretty darn horrid' is stupid.

We all knew when the decision was made to get rid of Stans that it was a move that would hurt us in the immediate future, and that was before we saw how many guys left, were injured, etc. I mean, Ray's first team had 1 point that had ever been scored in D1 basketball, combined. So we knew things would turn downward initially. But it was made to give us a chance to ultimately go higher than Stans had taken us.

If you told me that after 2 years of Ray, we were still at the bottom of the SEC, I would have said fine. Again, we all knew the first 2 years were essentially a loss and that we would be awful. However, if you told me that after 3 years we would be in the same place, I wouldn't have liked that. Time is running out for Ray, no doubt. He needs to produce a serious turnaround next year that shows us he can put a good team on the floor.

No one's expectations have been lowered for our program as a whole. No one thinks consistently missing the NCAAT, let alone the NIT, is good enough. If Ray proves that he can't ever get us even to where Stans had us, everyone will support him being removed.

And yes, the last 3 games for us are very important. We have to win at least 2 of them, or I will support a change being made.

---

Another really smart post of many from Smootness and I wil dispute something you said too. I used to think everyone agreed that replacing Stansbury would hurt us in the short term and lower expectations for the first few years would be obvious.
But not everyone seems to subscribe to this. If it's not agreed upon that we were a complete dumpster when Ray got here then there is no need in arguing with the Ray detractors. Them not understanding this fundamental reality makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion on the topic.
It can be argued as to how long it takes to rebuild but the expectations of where we should be with this group of upperclassmen bricklayers is unrealistic to me.
No basketball coach can look smart offensively when the roster can't shoot. You can teach shooting a little but you can't turn a slasher into Jeff Malone or Darryl Wilson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schultzy

It can be argued as to how long it takes to rebuild but the expectations of where we should be with this group of upperclassmen bricklayers is unrealistic to me.

---

I don't think anyone thinks we have a bunch of sharpshooters on this team, but offense is beyond bad. It's historically awful. They turn the ball over at a high rate, they do not get assists, they don't get open shots, and they don't take high percentage ones. They look like they don't know what they are doing because they haven't been adequately taught what to do. If we were just not very good on offense it would be one thing, but in year 3 we are putrid.

The only coaches in the SEC that have been this consistently bad on that side of the ball have continued to be terrible after getting fired. I'm not saying upgrading the roster wouldn't help, because it obviously would, but coaching is the crux of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by codeDawg

I don't think anyone thinks we have a bunch of sharpshooters on this team, but offense is beyond bad. It's historically awful. They turn the ball over at a high rate, they do not get assists, they don't get open shots, and they don't take high percentage ones. They look like they don't know what they are doing because they haven't been adequately taught what to do. If we were just not very good on offense it would be one thing, but in year 3 we are putrid.

The only coaches in the SEC that have been this consistently bad on that side of the ball have continued to be terrible after getting fired. I'm not saying upgrading the roster wouldn't help, because it obviously would, but coaching is the crux of the problem.

---

But you don't design an offense around rubs and double screens for open 3's when you can't shoot.

You do what Ray has done which is to take it to the rim and draw fouls. We did this well the first half of the season but now the league has decided to take dribble penetration away from us as much as they can and force us to shoot from outside.

That is a difficult weakness do hide even for a great coach, if not impossible. The true test of Rick Ray will be if he can win when he has a decent roster. I hope he makes it long enough for us to find out.

I will agree his inbounds and press breaking approach needs to improve immediately. You have to get someone to the middle of the floor when breaking a press, trying to dribble your way out of it won't work at any level. He can improve here, though.

I just wish more people agreed on how far we had to come back from. And how terrible high school players are coached in the southeast. I love basketball and wonder if it will ever be played well again with the advent of AAU and players thinking they have to leave their high school and the accountability that is inherent there to their local community in terms of playing to win instead of playing for the highlight reel to be sent out to colleges.

It has hurt SEC basketball greatly and college hoops on the whole as well. To me, even watching a top ten matchup is bad basketball these days. Athletic, but bad basketball.

I actually think we're good at breaking the press. Most of our turnovers come from dumb plays in the halfcourt.

Our problem against the press is that even when we break it, we don't have guys that can really capitalize on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schultzy

If it's not agreed upon that we were a complete dumpster when Ray got here then there is no need in arguing with the Ray detractors. Them not understanding this fundamental reality makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion on the topic.

---

Well, we may have been a dumpster fire off the court but we were never a dumpster fire on the court other than at times we didn't play live up to maximum potential. Stans' last team was ranked in the Top 20 just 4 weeks prior to season's end and was a 1 seed in the NIT. Stans' teams never had losing records and were always competitive within the SEC. I was expecting to be pretty weak the first year Ray was here but anyone who says they knew or even thought we were going to have 3 straight overall losing records after changing coaches is likely not being honest either. Several things have contributed to it taking this long to try and pull ourselves up under Ray including 1. a ridiculous number of injuries, 2. extremely poor recruiting in the first couple of seasons, 3. very little emphasis on coaching up things offensively (ie., "the offense will take care of itself" attitude) and 4. lack of backing of Ray by the fanbase (many of the old Stans supporters have made it as difficult on Ray as Polk supporters did on Cohen). At this point I'm resigned to having Ray back again next year but I'm not seeing things ever really getting significantly better under him. Getting to middle of the pack in the SEC may be the ceiling with him. Hope he can prove me wrong. Now if we sign Malik that could be a game changer because it would bring back the fanbase, nearly assure us of having an NCAA tourney team next year and will help us with other top line recruits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maroonmania

Well, we may have been a dumpster fire off the court but we were never a dumpster fire on the court other than at times we didn't play live up to maximum potential. Stans' last team was ranked in the Top 20 just 4 weeks prior to season's end and was a 1 seed in the NIT. Stans' teams never had losing records and were always competitive within the SEC.

---

We had one losing season and one .500 season under Stans.

And anyone pointing to that 2011-2012 team still winning 20 games is missing the reason that year was so bad. We had won 17 games the year before and were still only a 4 seed (not a 1) in the NIT that year with all that talent.

That was not a 'Well, we're still ok, so we can get better from here' kind of year. That was as good as it was going to get again. We have never had the kind of talent we had on that team. That's why it was such a big year for Stans...and we crashed and burned down the stretch and ended up being an average-at-best SEC team. It wasn't getting better than that going forward. That was our new ceiling.

So pointing to that year saying 'We were still at least playing in the postseason' seems to indicate some belief that we could still be pretty good. But again, that was as good as it was going to get from there. That wasn't an average year under Stans anymore, that was the new ceiling. We had won 17 the year before and would have won probably about 15 or so the next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schultzy

But you don't design an offense around rubs and double screens for open 3's when you can't shoot.

You do what Ray has done which is to take it to the rim and draw fouls. We did this well the first half of the season but now the league has decided to take dribble penetration away from us as much as they can and force us to shoot from outside.

That is a difficult weakness do hide even for a great coach, if not impossible. The true test of Rick Ray will be if he can win when he has a decent roster. I hope he makes it long enough for us to find out.

I will agree his inbounds and press breaking approach needs to improve immediately. You have to get someone to the middle of the floor when breaking a press, trying to dribble your way out of it won't work at any level. He can improve here, though.

I just wish more people agreed on how far we had to come back from. And how terrible high school players are coached in the southeast. I love basketball and wonder if it will ever be played well again with the advent of AAU and players thinking they have to leave their high school and the accountability that is inherent there to their local community in terms of playing to win instead of playing for the highlight reel to be sent out to colleges.

It has hurt SEC basketball greatly and college hoops on the whole as well. To me, even watching a top ten matchup is bad basketball these days. Athletic, but bad basketball.

---

Serious question. What makes you think Ray is the guy to be successful here? The question isn't why it was / is hard to succeed from where we were, but what is it that Ray has shown that indicates he will win at the level we are all looking for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by codeDawg

Serious question. What makes you think Ray is the guy to be successful here? The question isn't why it was / is hard to succeed from where we were, but what is it that Ray has shown that indicates he will win at the level we are all looking for?

---

The things I like from Ray's teams, and they've been pretty consistent, are the defense, the consistent effort and energy, and the fact that they seem to be fully bought in. He has yet to lose a team despite losing a lot of games. Those are the primary positives.

The negatives mostly have to do with talent. Turnovers, jump shooting, post offense, etc. Those are the primary negatives. And they're big negatives, no doubt.

The question is, do I think he can turn it around? And I'm not sold one way or the other. I'm less sold that he can do it than I was a year or two ago, but at the same time, his recruiting is picking up, and I think the talent level has been the main negative.

So if he can increase the talent while at the very least keeping the positives we've seen, some of those negatives should turn around. But if next year's team still struggles like this, then it's probably time to make a move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

The things I like from Ray's teams, and they've been pretty consistent, are the defense, the consistent effort and energy, and the fact that they seem to be fully bought in. He has yet to lose a team despite losing a lot of games. Those are the primary positives.

The negatives mostly have to do with talent. Turnovers, jump shooting, post offense, etc. Those are the primary negatives. And they're big negatives, no doubt.

The question is, do I think he can turn it around? And I'm not sold one way or the other. I'm less sold that he can do it than I was a year or two ago, but at the same time, his recruiting is picking up, and I think the talent level has been the main negative.

So if he can increase the talent while at the very least keeping the positives we've seen, some of those negatives should turn around. But if next year's team still struggles like this, then it's probably time to make a move.

---

That's the problem with the stansbury fanatics left here... Not bashing ray = we think ray is john wooden. Some of us just aren't as hasty to pull the plug. Some of us want to give ray his final year. None of us are certain ray is the answer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

We had one losing season and one .500 season under Stans.

And anyone pointing to that 2011-2012 team still winning 20 games is missing the reason that year was so bad. We had won 17 games the year before and were still only a 4 seed (not a 1) in the NIT that year with all that talent.

That was not a 'Well, we're still ok, so we can get better from here' kind of year. That was as good as it was going to get again. We have never had the kind of talent we had on that team. That's why it was such a big year for Stans...and we crashed and burned down the stretch and ended up being an average-at-best SEC team. It wasn't getting better than that going forward. That was our new ceiling.

So pointing to that year saying 'We were still at least playing in the postseason' seems to indicate some belief that we could still be pretty good. But again, that was as good as it was going to get from there. That wasn't an average year under Stans anymore, that was the new ceiling. We had won 17 the year before and would have won probably about 15 or so the next year.

---

Yea, correct on the seeding, we were a mid-level NIT team by the time it got to that point. I had just remembered we hosted. To the point though, winning 17 games the year before and winning 21 games in 2012 is not a dumpster fire ON THE COURT which was what I was addressing. I know there were big issues off the court that needed addressing and its a shame that Stans would rather "retire" than do that. Just losing Sidney and Bost would have helped on that front though. And yes, we would have been weaker the next year under Stans, but not as weak as we were with Ray because Rodney Hood and Josh Gray IMO would have also been on that team. Also, Lewis and Steele would not have fallen out of favor and Stans would have recruited his way back to another very competitive team by the next year, its just what he did. And I will also agree that barely making the NCAA tourney every now and then was probably Stans' ceiling going forward but that is about the most I ever see Ray doing either if even that. Off the court are our only improvements with the coaching change at this point. But hey, we play hard.

Will just add though that I was on the fence when we got rid of Stans so I wasn't upset about it, just think the hire we made wasn't the right one at the time. Still don't understand why a guy like Kermit Davis with a good coaching HC record and MSU ties wasn't given more consideration if we were just going to hire some unknown staff member off a lower tier ACC basketball program.

So you agree that barely making the NCAA Tournament was the new ceiling for the program, and you're ok with that?

As has been stated way more times than should have been necessary, getting rid of Stans is a different argument than hiring Ray. If you don't think Ray is the guy, fine. But that doesn't mean we should have kept Stans.

If you think we should have kept Stans, given what you just said, I'm not sure what to say. We certainly wouldn't accept that from any of our other athletic programs.

It's also funny, btw, that you think getting rid of Bost would have helped the off-court issues while also bringing in Gray and keeping Lewis.

And yes, 21 wins with the talent we had was a dumpster fire. I don't care if you're a 4 seed in the NIT with ridiculous talent or a 13-win team with no talent. They're both embarrassing, unacceptable, and not enjoyable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

So you agree that barely making the NCAA Tournament was the new ceiling for the program, and you're ok with that?.

---

I'm becoming more OK with it. If we are not willing to recruit in basketball the way things are done now the new ceiling may be the NIT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

As has been stated way more times than should have been necessary, getting rid of Stans is a different argument than hiring Ray. If you don't think Ray is the guy, fine. But that doesn't mean we should have kept Stans.

---

Like I said, I was on the fence. I had no doubts about getting rid of Sherrill, Croom and Polk at the times we did, but I knew in basketball if we made the wrong move we could slide down even from where we were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

If you think we should have kept Stans, given what you just said, I'm not sure what to say. We certainly wouldn't accept that from any of our other athletic programs.

---

I was OK making the change but not if we didn't have a solid, high quality to hire to replace him with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

It's also funny, btw, that you think getting rid of Bost would have helped the off-court issues while also bringing in Gray and keeping Lewis.

---

Sidney and Bost had major issues with team chemistry; Lewis smoked weed but I don't know that he had problems with teammates, Gray doesn't seem to be destroying LSU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

And yes, 21 wins with the talent we had was a dumpster fire. I don't care if you're a 4 seed in the NIT with ridiculous talent or a 13-win team with no talent. They're both embarrassing, unacceptable, and not enjoyable.

---

Well at least I got to enjoy a great pre-season tournament championship and a rise to 15th in the rankings before all fell apart. This year the season essentially ended in December before the SEC even started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maroonmania

Well at least I got to enjoy a great pre-season tournament championship and a rise to 15th in the rankings before all fell apart. This year the season essentially ended in December before the SEC even started.

---

If watching a team with unlimited potential crashing and burning and losing to legitimately bad teams is something you like, then go ahead.

Again, no one is saying that what we have currently is good enough. Literally no one. Not one single person.