Since we blame Zo when players play poorly

#126
#126
volbeast33 said:
He definitely has to prove it on the court and if/when he does everyone will start getting behind me....Three yrs of struggling to hang on for dear life on the bubble and the recruiting doesnt appear to be solid....It doesnt give fans much to look forward too. Zo has his chance to prove everyone wrong.
Click to expand...

Agree.

There's still time left, I'm curious what the feeling would be if Martin were to win out though the SECT.
 
#127
#127
bleedingTNorange said:
No, not what I'm saying. I'm just saying I don't think recruiting higher rated guys always works.

I know people will hate this, but some of Pearls best players were transfers and lesser rated guys.
Click to expand...

Its not the end all as far as being good but the best players Pearl brought in were highly rated guys....Hopson,Chism,Mcrae,Harris,JP Prince, etc.....we had good role players that were lower rated guys and some can definitely be stars....C-LO and Jajuan Smith but it is usually a good indication the direction you are headed.
 
#129
#129
bleedingTNorange said:
No, not what I'm saying. I'm just saying I don't think recruiting higher rated guys always works.

I know people will hate this, but some of Pearls best players were transfers and lesser rated guys.
Click to expand...

The transfers were Maymon (4*) Tyler Smith (high 4*) JP (5*) and John Fields that I recall. Unless you're counting Juco guys, which I think Melvin and Bobby were top 20 Juco players.

Pearl's best players we're Wayne Chism (high 4*) Scotty Hopson (5*) JP (5*) Tyler Smith (high 4*) Tobias Harris (5*) and obviously Jordan has turned into a good player, along with Maymon. On the court, Ramar was a good player, mainly due to his absolutely ferocious defense. Sad that he made so many mistakes off the court.

Pearl's project guys were people like Brian Williams, who was a 3 star, top 150 guy. Pearl did work wonders with him.

Under Pearl we didn't really take many lower rated people. Generally several top 60-80 players and maybe a 3 star guy to round out a class.
 
#131
#131
VolArmy74 said:
He's that much better than any coach Tennessee has had in 35 years. Especially compared to the coaches that have book ended him.

And if you're seriously saying Pearl wasn't a good coach, but got NCAA seeds because of his flamboyant personality, you're the one is is far beyond delusional. Bruce Pearl is 462-146 as a coach in 18 seasons. He's been in a Division 1 conference for 9 seasons and was the CoY in those conferences 5 of the 9 years and is a National Coach of the Year winner. But I supposed he flamboyanted his way to those 462 wins, the Div II National Championships, the Horizon League Championships, the only SEC regular season championship we've had in 40+ years, and the best post season success we've ever had. Can''t coach, just gives a better interview than Martin and that's the only difference. Or at least your post strongly implies that.

*Edit
Pearl IS the Michael Jordan of Tennessee coaches.
Click to expand...

Or you could read the whole post. I said what I think is good about Pearl. At no point did I say he wasn't a good coach, nor that he wasn't successful. Nothing you said changes the fact that he often made bizarre personnel choices and in-game decisions, nor that he was, while an excellent open-court coach, a mediocre half-court coach. Every coach has his own style. Every successful coach wins in his own way. And every coach has deficiencies. (Some are masked better than others.) I do think that with identical records at an identical school, the guy who gets into the dance is the flamboyant one; which is what I was showing by quoting actual records.

And, I was the Michael Jordan of my gym class. Big deal.
 
#132
#132
VolsByNature said:
Do we give him credit when the players are playing great like they have been?
Click to expand...

You absolutely do. The last 2 games have been great, team has played with energy, great on the defensive end which I think has sparked their offense. Question still remains, where the hell has this team been all year?

It also still doesn't negate some of the head scratching coaching decisions and tactics throughout the year. For me, I hope it signals a turned page from some really, really poor and inconsistent efforts from the players and coach to a focused, smart and energetic effort that leads to a decent run in the NCAA tourney.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
bleedingTNorange said:
No, not what I'm saying. I'm just saying I don't think recruiting higher rated guys always works.

I know people will hate this, but some of Pearls best players were transfers and lesser rated guys.
Click to expand...

And especially if you fill specific needs with your recruiting. A guy who can rebound and block shots can be more valuable than the average 5 star recruit if you've already got guys who can score.
 
#134
#134
lostsheep said:
Did you score improve? Obviously it did.

Did you also under-achieve on the test? Absolutely.

When you have the ability to be scoring a 95% and you score a 71%, then there's a key component that missing somewhere that's keeping you from meeting your full potential.

In this team's case, the key component is the mid-major guy we have in charge.
Click to expand...

But, you still improved. Something you said this team would not have done between years 2 and 3 even if he makes the tournament. So which is it? I've never said that it is not disappointing, but you have said they've not improved. If/when they make the tournament is an improvement regardless if it was up to expectations.
 
#135
#135
volbeast33 said:
Its not the end all as far as being good but the best players Pearl brought in were highly rated guys....Hopson,Chism,Mcrae,Harris,JP Prince, etc.....we had good role players that were lower rated guys and some can definitely be stars....C-LO and Jajuan Smith but it is usually a good indication the direction you are headed.
Click to expand...

Chism wasn't highly rated in the sense that I was talking, top 50ish. Hopson wasn't what he was expected, Pearl did nothing with McRae, and Prince was a transfer as I mentioned.

Pearls best players were more often lesser rated than the guys who didn't quite pan out. Woolridgre, Negedu, Hall, Crews, Ramar, Johnson etc

I agree that typically you're more likely to succeed with more talent, but maybe our coach is one of the anomalies? I think a guy ranked 100-150 that fits your system is better than a guy ranked 50-100 that doesn't.
 
#136
#136
garfield said:
Zo does a great job of coaching the talent at hand. Defensively they play hard all the time and are usually in the right spots. He has had them in position to win in most of the games we have lost. His biggest shortcoming is in attracting talent to his school. Which is the same problem that every school but two have in the SEC. Lousy talent in a lousy basketball conference.
Click to expand...


You realize we have 2 SEC poy candidates?
 
#139
#139
whobethis16 said:
Which he developed into them. Don't forget that.
Click to expand...


Stokes has looked great the last dozen games. Don't know why CM didn't face him up the first part of the season. He finally listened to Stokes and we've seen the moves he showed as a freshman and a few more. Plus, teammates are getting out of the way, and post feeds are the best this year they have been in several years.
 
#140
#140
bleedingTNorange said:
Chism wasn't highly rated in the sense that I was talking, top 50ish. Hopson wasn't what he was expected, Pearl did nothing with McRae, and Prince was a transfer as I mentioned.

Pearls best players were more often lesser rated than the guys who didn't quite pan out. Woolridgre, Negedu, Hall, Crews, Ramar, Johnson etc

I agree that typically you're more likely to succeed with more talent, but maybe our coach is one of the anomalies? I think a guy ranked 100-150 that fits your system is better than a guy ranked 50-100 that doesn't.
Click to expand...
I agree with the last paragraph 100%. Always have. That's my biggest criticism of Cal. I tell all my UK friends all the time that Cal needs to get the for sure talent like Wall, Davis, Cousins, Randle...but then surround them with 3 stars and 4 stars that will stay and develop and gain chemistry. His Davis and MKG team had a special chemistry and he will never get that again if he keeps only getting one and dones.
 
#141
#141
Stoked4Zo said:
I agree with the last paragraph 100%. Always have. That's my biggest criticism of Cal. I tell all my UK friends all the time that Cal needs to get the for sure talent like Wall, Davis, Cousins, Randle...but then surround them with 3 stars and 4 stars that will stay and develop and gain chemistry. His Davis and MKG team had a special chemistry and he will never get that again if he keeps only getting one and dones.
Click to expand...

They're rioting in Kentucky about Jackson Davis. Kentucky hasn't even made contact, yet all these other schools are offering. His dad played at UK, the could would likely commit on the spot. He's a solid player, and would be a 4 year guy, what's wrong with that?
 
#142
#142
You guys notice that it seems we aren't going to Maymon early at all like we did earlier? He is getting his off rebs and from stokes double teams. I think going into him in our set offense slows us down and prefer we stick with him getting his the way he is now, and feeding him when there is an obvious mismatch. Don't post him and feed him with a big man on him anymore and he will play well.
 
#143
#143
papatomany said:
Or you could read the whole post. I said what I think is good about Pearl. At no point did I say he wasn't a good coach, nor that he wasn't successful. Nothing you said changes the fact that he often made bizarre personnel choices and in-game decisions, nor that he was, while an excellent open-court coach, a mediocre half-court coach. Every coach has his own style. Every successful coach wins in his own way. And every coach has deficiencies. (Some are masked better than others.) I do think that with identical records at an identical school, the guy who gets into the dance is the flamboyant one; which is what I was showing by quoting actual records.

And, I was the Michael Jordan of my gym class. Big deal.
Click to expand...

So a Coach like Martin doesn't make the dance because of his style of play and his sideline demeanor ?
 
#144
#144
Sudden Impact said:
So a Coach like Martin doesn't make the dance because of his style of play and his sideline demeanor ?
Click to expand...


Quite possibly, yes. If bad gameplan like first vandy or Xavier games and/or lack of team enthusiasm and attitude affects a game, absolutely. Especially if the gameplan directly affects the team aggressiveness, as it has this year at times.
 
#145
#145
bleedingTNorange said:
Chism wasn't highly rated in the sense that I was talking, top 50ish. Hopson wasn't what he was expected, Pearl did nothing with McRae, and Prince was a transfer as I mentioned.

Pearls best players were more often lesser rated than the guys who didn't quite pan out. Woolridgre, Negedu, Hall, Crews, Ramar, Johnson etc

I agree that typically you're more likely to succeed with more talent, but maybe our coach is one of the anomalies? I think a guy ranked 100-150 that fits your system is better than a guy ranked 50-100 that doesn't.
Click to expand...

Chism was #34 according to Rivals but I think solidly in the top 100 is where most of your players need to come from to have a solid foundation.
 
#147
#147
This is the team we all thought we would see in January, now we got to win Saturday and the first 2 in the SEC next week then we are in, then he is back but if we don't make it, hit the door its simple win 3 and at least 1 or 2 in the dance.
 
#149
#149
bleedingTNorange said:
They're rioting in Kentucky about Jackson Davis. Kentucky hasn't even made contact, yet all these other schools are offering. His dad played at UK, the could would likely commit on the spot. He's a solid player, and would be a 4 year guy, what's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

They don't take players that will be there 4 years, that's against there coaches rules.:)
 
#150
#150
Spartacavolus said:
Quite possibly, yes. If bad gameplan like first vandy or Xavier games and/or lack of team enthusiasm and attitude affects a game, absolutely. Especially if the gameplan directly affects the team aggressiveness, as it has this year at times.
Click to expand...

Every game we have lost first Vandy, MO, Texas A&M (home - Yes, Away - Maybe), NC State, Texas El Paso. I think falls on the coach's Shoulders Squarely. Each of these games were lost in a different way and it almost seems like it was either an in game coaching mistake or a lack of preparation, or a failure to execute.

I hate to bring Pearl into it, but he knew how to close out games. I not sure what his record was at UT, but in games he held a lead fewer than 5 or 6 points his win percentage was like 25-5 or better. I read this somewhere and would always feel good about the teams ability to close out a game. That to me is coaching.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top