Originally posted by leeraymond
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Wes Miller Thread
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Gmann View Post
Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.
Miller has been here 4 years and the talent he has are guys he recruited and most of who were highly rated before coming here. My take is that he doesn't develop what he has and indeed needs more self motivated guys because he can't provide it. In the B12 I feel they really need more size and strength in the post since what he brought in hasn't developed. I also feel his overall scheme, especially on offense, is garbage regardless of who the players are.
I know he has another year and I hope he proves me wrong and finally gets his team to that .500 mark in league and in the tourney. I feel Cats' fans have been very patient with the guy and only improved results matter.
I think that understanding where a player is on the motivation scale is of key importance. Some players are always ready, from the neck up, for the next game. Those will probably be the team's most competitive players. Other players, like Page perhaps, need all types of motivation, hand-holding, and confirmation that they can perform at high levels.
I could also imagine that motivating players over the course of a season takes its toll on a coach. That is why coaches may prefer older more experienced players. Fast story. When I was a sophomore in high school, my baseball team was dominated by seniors. We also had a brand new coach that was a football coach and had never coached basball before. That team went to the City Championship without really having a coach. The players were self-motivated and that made all the difference in the world.Last edited by leeraymond; 03-12-2025, 10:47 AM.
Comment
-
My question/fear is whether CWM is capable of doing HONEST self-assessment and analysis of EVERYTHING in his control. As I see it, here are some points:
1) Roster construction - Is how he builds a roster compatible with the Big 12 ?
2) Offense approach - Is that approach workable in the Big 12 ?
Seems to me he has constructed a roster full of wing-type players which combined with his offensive approach results in a very perimeter oriented approach with poor shooting 3 pt players.
That's problematic. The run so much offense parallel to the 3-pt line and with no inside scoring threat there is not inside-out game possible. Thus far, I've not seen CWM admit that fundamental
changes are necessary... we are beyond needing only tweaks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gmann View Post
Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.
Miller has been here 4 years and the talent he has are guys he recruited and most of who were highly rated before coming here. My take is that he doesn't develop what he has and indeed needs more self motivated guys because he can't provide it. In the B12 I feel they really need more size and strength in the post since what he brought in hasn't developed. I also feel his overall scheme, especially on offense, is garbage regardless of who the players are.
I know he has another year and I hope he proves me wrong and finally gets his team to that .500 mark in league and in the tourney. I feel Cats' fans have been very patient with the guy and only improved results matter.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by sedz View PostThis is where the semantics comes in. 7-13 is indeed 6 games "under .500". We would have to win our next 6 games to get to .500 (now impossible because the season is over). But we finished 3 games "behind" a 10-10 team.
So, I am not following you when you say 6 games under .500.Last edited by leeraymond; 03-12-2025, 03:41 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gypo O'Leary View Post
ya...Lukosius and Badaogo were both brought in before the move to the Big 12. In the AAC they would have been fine. So...exactly my point - 2 of the starting 5 are not Big 12 quality. And yet we blew a road game against Kansas St. by a bucket. a home game against them we could have won. a road game against Utah by a bucket. and 1 bucket loss home to WV. So really...we are five buckets from flipping those games and being over .500 in the Big 12 despite starting 2 seniors that are not Big 12 Quality. And I'm back to my point. Mckinley/Griffith/Page/Betsey ...add them to this roster as contributors and you are adding three big men and a wing. So...I see next year as the year Wes needs to produce, and I see the recruits as all guys brought in for the Big 12.
going into the Big XII before those players were
”recruited”.
- 1 like
Comment
-
7-13 is 6 games under .500 but those 6 games could be made up in 3 games since you’re adding a victory and subtracting a loss in each of those 3 games. Semantics.Last edited by GunSlinger; Yesterday, 12:14 AM.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gypo O'Leary View Post
ya...Lukosius and Badaogo were both brought in before the move to the Big 12. In the AAC they would have been fine. So...exactly my point - 2 of the starting 5 are not Big 12 quality. .
****, Aziz Bandago was ranked as the 17th overall player in the transfer portal. You can go check the rankings and you'll have to scroll down (and down, and down) quite aways past him to see the Power 5 offers dissipate. I guarantee you the vast majoirty of the Big 12 would have gladly taken him as a transfer.
Simas Lukosius started 32 of 32 games in the Big East as a true Sophmore, and he averaged 12 points a game doing it. There is no doubt that he was, at least at the time, a legitimate option to start in any league.
I mean, we call all debate whether these guys were ultimately the right fit, or if they were developed and/or used correctly. But I'm sorry, pretending as if we were somehow disadvanted, or that we hampered by being a member of the AAC for 6 more weeks is simply not true.
All you have to to do look at how much money they making. It is "Big 12" money or is it "AAC money"? The AAC has nothing to do with these players not performing up to standards. We either spent our money on the wrong players, or we didn't do enough once they got here to put them in a position for success. Take your pick.
- 2 likes
Comment
-
I agree MDW79 . Our roster is good enough to compete. Simas would be great in any system that uses off ball actions and more of a pack line defense. Aziz is being misused as a focal point on offense. I think there are quite a few coaches who would have led this team to a top half finish in the B12.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by sedz View PostI agree MDW79 . Our roster is good enough to compete. Simas would be great in any system that uses off ball actions and more of a pack line defense. Aziz is being misused as a focal point on offense. I think there are quite a few coaches who would have led this team to a top half finish in the B12.
Comment
-
Originally posted by sedz View PostI agree MDW79 . Our roster is good enough to compete. Simas would be great in any system that uses off ball actions and more of a pack line defense. Aziz is being misused as a focal point on offense. I think there are quite a few coaches who would have led this team to a top half finish in the B12.
Comment
Responsive Ad Widget
Collapse
Comment