The Holy Land of Hoops

Interested to see the results

I voted Lavin, which everyone has so far, but some of the blame is also on the players. I'd split it 80% Lavin, 20% players, given the choice.

Westbrook36 wrote:I voted Lavin, which everyone has so far, but some of the blame is also on the players. I'd split it 80% Lavin, 20% players, given the choice.

i'd say 60/40

what was bad was the walk on in the 1st half played by far the best of any of his players.

I blame lavin, not just for not coming with an offensive scheme to capitalize on the players he has, but recruiting the players he has with too many overlapping skill sets. I said it when they signed their #3 class that too many of the players were exactly the same and were run and jump athletes with out basketball skills.

So not only did he recruit the wrong players, but isn't even using the players he did get correctly. Despite the player's limitations they could still be a tournament team if given the right system. It's not the players fault that they were ranked highly based on their athleticism. It is Lavin's fault for recruiting them and not giving them a good system or teaching them basketball skills.

Thanks for the responses guys. I was thinking I should have made a 4th option "A mix of Lavin being a bad coach and the players not living up to expectations". It really is amazing going back to 2011 looking at the anti-Lavin posts from UCLA fans…they know him extremely well after his 7 year tenure there. And they nailed what he is. Used car salesman, great recruiter, great speaker, looks the part, but once it comes down to coaching and player development, he fails every time. Not one player on our roster has gotten better. Some have even declined. That's very strange. He even took a jab at the players when he said Ndiyae (the walk-on he brilliantly started vs. G'Town) was coachable and that's why he was in. That obviously implies the other guys are not coachable. What a mess.

Lavinwood wrote:Thanks for the responses guys. I was thinking I should have made a 4th option "A mix of Lavin being a bad coach and the players not living up to expectations". It really is amazing going back to 2011 looking at the anti-Lavin posts from UCLA fans…they know him extremely well after his 7 year tenure there. And they nailed what he is. Used car salesman, great recruiter, great speaker, looks the part, but once it comes down to coaching and player development, he fails every time. Not one player on our roster has gotten better. Some have even declined. That's very strange. He even took a jab at the players when he said Ndiyae (the walk-on he brilliantly started vs. G'Town) was coachable and that's why he was in. That obviously implies the other guys are not coachable. What a mess.

yeah but then he even screwed up the walk-on starting because the walk-on did well- but he didn't put him back in the game much

Lavin is %100 at fault. Same trend that happened in UCLA is playing out in New York. You don't recruit players you can't control, and if you cant control them, let them go. That's on him.

I didn't vote for any of the choices provided. They need a point guard. Maybe Jordan will eventually become that player.

I think it's a combo of both. Some of Lavin's decisions have been head scratching to say the least (i.e. starting a walk on against G'Town on the road) but have you seen this team on offense? They are one of the worse shooting teams I have ever seen. I disagree with the whole "developing players" concept to a degree. Pointer & Greene are better now than when they were as freshman, Obpeka is better now than last year also. Harrison is Harrison, he is averaging 18.5 PPG, not bad if you ask me., He hasn't been able to "develop" Jordan, Sanchez, Hooper, etc b/c this is their first year of action. Sampson will be interesting to watch as the year unfolds.

I think that St John's and Marquette have a similar problem - they can't shoot from the outside.

As a result, they are very easy to defend. Pack the paint and beg them to shoot three pointers.