Ben Johnson has more road victories this year than Pitino had all of last year

True, but Fox was hurt almost immediately after he signed and Ihnen is not a center. So he knew in April he was short at the 5 spot and convincing Curry to play and signing Ogele were the only remedies (successfully) pursued.
And he went for and lost Theo John, Race Thompson, Mitchell, Rebrajca, and Manley to name a few. It’s not like he don’t try to get more front court depth. He just didn’t land any this year. He then proceeded to get a top 100 big in Payne. I bet he doesn’t get shut out in the portal next year, but we will see. What they didn’t do was settle for someone who didnt fit (Pohto and Freeman are likely examples of this) what they are trying to build. The whole idea that the staff didn’t prioritize front court guys is laughable though. If we don’t fix the front court issues next year it’s worth being worried and then we would have the start of a trend.
 

Why the long essay? I don't need lectures on the team. I appreciate what the coaches and players have done well. Here's some advice: don't talk to people like they just showed up for the first time today and don't know anything. Maybe you're like those people on the Progressive commercial: turning into your parents!

Here are simple facts from last night's game: two starting Pitt forwards combined for 25 rebounds and 27 points while Curry, Daniels, and Ogele combined for 6 rebounds and 8 points. Do you think that the staff, just maybe, could have made a little more effort to make some improvement to this portion of the roster?
Wow! Feeling defensive or something? I didn't see an essay nor a lecture. Nothing different from your earlier posts rehashing the same. Restating something clearly as MNVCGUY did can be helpful.

Simple FACT from last night's game... Gophers limited the rest of the Pitt line up and won the game!
 

And he went for and lost Theo John, Race Thompson, Mitchell, Rebrajca, and Manley to name a few. It’s not like he don’t try to get more front court depth. He just didn’t land any this year. He then proceeded to get a top 100 big in Payne. I bet he doesn’t get shut out in the portal next year, but we will see. What they didn’t do was settle for someone who didnt fit (Pohto and Freeman are likely examples of this) what they are trying to build. The whole idea that the staff didn’t prioritize front court guys is laughable though. If we don’t fix the front court issues next year it’s worth being worried and then we would have the start of a trend.
It's a bit unfortunate that we struck out on Mitchell and Manley - Ben should take some blame here. I tried to quickly figure out what they were doing nowadays but it looks like they might not even be playing professionally, like they intended. Would've been great for both parties to have them this season.
 

And he went for and lost Theo John, Race Thompson, Mitchell, Rebrajca, and Manley to name a few. It’s not like he don’t try to get more front court depth. He just didn’t land any this year. He then proceeded to get a top 100 big in Payne. I bet he doesn’t get shut out in the portal next year, but we will see. What they didn’t do was settle for someone who didnt fit (Pohto and Freeman are likely examples of this) what they are trying to build. The whole idea that the staff didn’t prioritize front court guys is laughable though. If we don’t fix the front court issues next year it’s worth being worried and then we would have the start of a trend.
I'm not saying he didn't try, but it seems like after he missed on the top 2 or 3, we kind of gave up and fell back on Curry. Ogele seems to have been mostly an after-thought. Combine that with extreme reluctance to play Thompson and we're in a bad place at that position.

It seems like there should have been some options in between Race Thompson and Curry. Giving one scholarship to a less than ideal "fit" in order to fill a huge gaping black hole on the roster doesn't = derailing what you're building. I'd argue losing games by 25 that you otherwise would have been competitive in does the opposite, in fact.
 

I'm not saying he didn't try, but it seems like after he missed on the top 2 or 3, we kind of gave up and fell back on Curry. Ogele seems to have been mostly an after-thought. Combine that with extreme reluctance to play Thompson and we're in a bad place at that position. It seems like there should have been some options in between Race Thompson and Curry.
Have no clue who all may or may not have been available but I do think they weren't going to bring in a big man with multiple years left who they didn't really want just for the purposes of this season. Not sure how big the pool of one year big men was but assume those would have been the only guys they were looking hard at after some of the initial players they really wanted didn't pan out.

In the end it was pretty clear that 21-22 wasn't a priority and they were only going to bring in guys they really wanted as opposed to just adding bodies.
 


And he went for and lost Theo John, Race Thompson, Mitchell, Rebrajca, and Manley to name a few. It’s not like he don’t try to get more front court depth. He just didn’t land any this year. He then proceeded to get a top 100 big in Payne. I bet he doesn’t get shut out in the portal next year, but we will see. What they didn’t do was settle for someone who didnt fit (Pohto and Freeman are likely examples of this) what they are trying to build. The whole idea that the staff didn’t prioritize front court guys is laughable though. If we don’t fix the front court issues next year it’s worth being worried and then we would have the start of a trend.
What’s laughable is our front court.
 

What’s laughable is our front court.

Battles good. Fox will be a real nice piece. Daniels and Curry are serviceable. I get it and it’s not something that can be tolerated in any year other than this one. If it’s this bad next year, concerns are and should be warranted.
 

I'm not saying he didn't try, but it seems like after he missed on the top 2 or 3, we kind of gave up and fell back on Curry. Ogele seems to have been mostly an after-thought. Combine that with extreme reluctance to play Thompson and we're in a bad place at that position.

It seems like there should have been some options in between Race Thompson and Curry. Giving one scholarship to a less than ideal "fit" in order to fill a huge gaping black hole on the roster doesn't = derailing what you're building. I'd argue losing games by 25 that you otherwise would have been competitive in does the opposite, in fact.
I listed a pretty long list of players. I don’t think he gave up. Ben just didn’t land one and that’s on him for sure. Ogele was a super late add and it didn’t bother me. I don’t know who else we would’ve been able to add at that point once Ihnen got hurt.
I’d also rather lose by 25 in year one by making sure guys play hard and stay together vs losing by 15 with a better big man who’s lazy or didn’t fit in. Losing is losing imo, but setting a tone defensively and building non negotiable sometimes mean you end up with an Ogele vs someone more talented.
 

Battles good. Fox will be a real nice piece. Daniels and Curry are serviceable. I get it and it’s not something that can be tolerated in any year other than this one. If it’s this bad next year, concerns are and should be warranted.
Battle does not appear to be a true front court player. He is a swing man. The only reason he has fair rebounding numbers is that he plays so many minutes and has to bear some of the load on this team.

Daniels and Curry may be serviceable but, since they are only serviceable, it would be nice to have someone else who is at least serviceable.

But, we do agree on the following:

"it’s not something that can be tolerated in any year other than this one. If it’s this bad next year, concerns are and should be warranted."
 



It seems like there should have been some options in between Race Thompson and Curry. Giving one scholarship to a less than ideal "fit" in order to fill a huge gaping black hole on the roster doesn't = derailing what you're building. I'd argue losing games by 25 that you otherwise would have been competitive in does the opposite, in fact.

What you're reading are classic examples of an authoritarian leader worship mind frame infused with a strong distaste for dissension. Right now, they don't want to hear that the leader did anything wrong. If we have two or three straight bad years and they become disillusioned, then they won't want to hear about the leader doing anything right.

You and I have an easier job. All we have to do is look at the disaster of the front court in last night's game, say "Ben blew this part of the recruiting," and we are correct. They can't deny how awful the front court looks so they have to resort to lame arguments that this failing was "unavoidable" or that certain players didn't "fit." Of course, they would be completely at a loss for words to describe exactly how certain players didn't "fit" if called upon to explain that remark. When certain types have nothing else, they resort to opaque cliches.
 
Last edited:

You and I have an easier job. All we have to do is look at the disaster of the front court in last night's game, say "Ben blew this part of the recruiting," and we are correct. They can't deny how awful the front court looks so they have to resort to lame arguments that this failing was "unavoidable" or that certain players didn't "fit." Of course, they would be completely at a loss for words to describe exactly how certain players didn't "fit" if called upon to explain that remark. When certain types have nothing else, they resort to opaque cliches.
Agreed. And criticizing Ben for screwing up this position doesn't mean I think he's terrible and will fail here. But it seems like he took a couple swings on big name guys. Then threw his hands up, got Curry to come back and focused 100% on 2022. Maybe that was the right move, but I don't think it was a binary choice.

In any case, we are what we are now. My complaint is that you simply must play Thompson much more and let him learn to sink or swim. It might lead to a couple losses now in exchange for a couple wins later, but it will make next year better for sure. If he just wants to squeeze as many wins out the non-conference as possible first, I guess i get that. But come January, let's see what he can do. He really can't be that much worse.

It reminds me of when Al Nolen broke his foot and the only available PG was a freshman Maverick Ahanmisi. So we played Blake Hoffarber and everyone else of out position instead. In the very short term we won a couple games. In the long-term it killed the season. It would have been better to throw Mav in there and see if he could swim. Even Tubby later admitted it was a mistake.
 
Last edited:

What you're reading are classic examples of an authoritarian leader worship mind frame infused with a strong distaste for dissension. Right now, they don't want to hear that the leader did anything wrong. If we have two or three straight bad years and they become disillusioned, then they won't want to hear anything about the leader doing anything right.

You and I have an easier job. All we have to do is look at the disaster of the front court in last night's game, say "Ben blew this part of the recruiting," and we are correct. They can't deny how awful the front court looks so they have to resort to lame arguments that this failing was "unavoidable" or that certain players didn't "fit." Of course, they would be completely at a loss for words to describe exactly how certain players didn't "fit" if called upon to explain that remark. When certain types have nothing else, they resort to opaque cliches.

So you've given yourself the easy "job" of raining on everyone's joy in the limited success Ben's team has had, a team that's been in place for what, 8 months? That is ascinating.

This board is a never ending source of entertainment for me.
 

Agreed. And criticizing Ben for screwing up this position doesn't mean I think he's terrible and will fail here. But it seems like he took a couple swings on big name guys. Then threw his hands up, got Curry to come back and focused 100% on 2022. Maybe that was the right move, but I don't think it was a binary choice.

In any case, we are what we are now. My complaint is that you simply must play Thompson much more and let him learn to sink or swim. It might lead to a couple losses now in exchange for a couple wins later, but it will make next year better for sure. If he just wants to squeeze as many wins out the non-conference as possible first, I guess i get that. But come January, let's see what he can do. He really can't be that much worse.

It reminds me of when Al Nolen broke his foot and the only available PG was a freshman Maverick Ahanmisi. So we played Blake Hoffarber and everyone else of out position instead. In the very short term we won a couple games. In the long-term it killed the season. It would have been better to throw Mav in there and see if he could swim. Even Tubby later admitted it was a mistake.

I agree with all of that. I like Ben and want him to succeed. I thought he did a very good job of recruiting the transfer guards/swing men and I like his team's style of play much, much better than Pitino's. He does need to trust Thompson to play some significant minutes (who knows? Maybe he will after Miss State and the two Michigans). As you said, he can't be much worse and he does at least have the size that someone like Ogele clearly lacks. I also would rather see bigger losses with some young player development than see closer losses without. I feel the same way about Thiam.
 



So you've given yourself the easy "job" of raining on everyone's joy in the limited success Ben's team has had, a team that's been in place for what, 8 months? That is ascinating.

This board is a never ending source of entertainment for me.
Thanks! You just validated my point. You're so sensitive that you consider any dissenting remarks as "raining on your parade."
 

What you're reading are classic examples of an authoritarian leader worship mind frame infused with a strong distaste for dissension. Right now, they don't want to hear that the leader did anything wrong. If we have two or three straight bad years and they become disillusioned, then they won't want to hear about the leader doing anything right.

You and I have an easier job. All we have to do is look at the disaster of the front court in last night's game, say "Ben blew this part of the recruiting," and we are correct. They can't deny how awful the front court looks so they have to resort to lame arguments that this failing was "unavoidable" or that certain players didn't "fit." Of course, they would be completely at a loss for words to describe exactly how certain players didn't "fit" if called upon to explain that remark. When certain types have nothing else, they resort to opaque cliches.
That reply was to my post. It literally said Ben was at fault, but it was also in to responses of posters saying Ben neglected the front court. He didn’t neglect it, he just didn’t land guys. He did chose character guys like Ogele who are and were obviously limited. You just watched 8 years of a coach take shortcuts and just take the most talented he could find instead of worrying about fit. No one is saying this is a tournament team or that Ben is free and clear of any blame or fault. Most can just look at the situation and understand that it’s year one and are giving some grace. If that’s Authoritarian worship than so be it I guess.
 

That reply was to my post. It literally said Ben was at fault, but it was also in to responses of posters saying Ben neglected the front court. He didn’t neglect it, he just didn’t land guys.

No, that reply was not to your post. I responded directly to your post (see above) and that one wasn't caustic. Yes, I know you said he bore some fault and that's really all I'm saying as well.

I'm sorry but I still think Ben & staff made some missteps in recruiting the front court. They recruited reasonable quality guys for guards and swing men pretty quickly. As impressive as that was, perhaps they should have started in the front court (other than Battle, of course) where the pickings were slimmer and the initial demand probably was greater or they should have settled for some players a bit less illustrious for a year or two. In the end they ended up settling for far less than some of their targets anyway.
 


No, that reply was not to your post. I responded directly to your post (see above) and that one wasn't caustic. Yes, I know you said he bore some fault and that's really all I'm saying as well.

I'm sorry but I still think Ben & staff made some missteps in recruiting the front court. They recruited reasonable quality guys for guards and swing men pretty quickly. As impressive as that was, perhaps they should have started in the front court (other than Battle, of course) where the pickings were slimmer and the initial demand probably was greater or they should have settled for some players a bit less illustrious for a year or two. In the end they ended up settling for far less than some of their targets anyway.
Fair enough on the replying part. You don’t and shouldn’t apologize for acknowledging Ben didn’t land a high quality Big this year. The staff certainly knows it and I would hope any fan who watches basketball semi regularly could know it. Got Payne coming in and I still think we add a transfer again. Now will that transfer be on a Race Thompson level or another Charlie Daniels? How ready will Payne be? A lot of questions for sure and something we certainly need to watch.
 

What you're reading are classic examples of an authoritarian leader worship mind frame infused with a strong distaste for dissension.
LOL. Literally.

"Classic examples of an authoritarian worship mindframe..."
 

Yes, it would have been nice to have at least one more big man ----

Providing that big man was a fit for what Johnson wants to do. It certainly appears that the Gophers coaching staff has a plan and an identity for what they want the program to be. They also seem to have a specific idea for the type of players they want to run their system.

So just bringing in "Big Man X" and slapping him in the middle of the lane may sound like a good idea, but not if X doesn't jibe with what the team needs or wants from that position.

it's not like you can just go down to the "Big Man" store at the mall and pick one out.

Because - believe or it not - that player has to want to come to your school.

Once Johnson has a year under his belt and demonstrates his approach, it should make it a little easier to fill holes next year.
 

Yes, it would have been nice to have at least one more big man ----

Providing that big man was a fit for what Johnson wants to do. It certainly appears that the Gophers coaching staff has a plan and an identity for what they want the program to be. They also seem to have a specific idea for the type of players they want to run their system.

So just bringing in "Big Man X" and slapping him in the middle of the lane may sound like a good idea, but not if X doesn't jibe with what the team needs or wants from that position.

it's not like you can just go down to the "Big Man" store at the mall and pick one out.

Because - believe or it not - that player has to want to come to your school.

Once Johnson has a year under his belt and demonstrates his approach, it should make it a little easier to fill holes next year.
"it's not like you can just go down to the "Big Man" store at the mall and pick one out."

You've used that line before. Trust me, it doesn't improve with age.

"They also seem to have a specific idea for the type of players they want to run their system."

It's still early yet but it doesn't appear to me so far that a big man will ever run this system unless they find an exceptional and multi-talented one. If what we see now is a blue print for the future, then big men will be role players on this team although some might be much better role players than others.

"Because - believe or it not - that player has to want to come to your school."

Isn't that the case with every recruit? If you insist on talking down to people regularly, then maybe you could at least try to be a bit more clever in doing it. If that is your idea of being clever, then you need to work a little harder on your schtick.

"Providing that big man was a fit for what Johnson wants to do."

Can you define specifically what "fit" means in that context? That was a rhetorical question because I know you can't. Also, you're much too old to be harboring childish fantasies that Ben Johnson, or any other coach for that matter, can look at hundreds of names on transfer portal list and decide with certainty which select small group of players would be the right "fit" for his team. The best one can do is look at a player's history (including film if that is available), ask around if you have connections, and make an educated guess which players have the potential to be productive at this level and determine whether there are red flags in the player's background that might point to character concerns. After that, you can do interviews (easier these days than it used to be) to see whether or not you can learn anything else about the person. You will always make some recruiting mistakes but you can make mistakes of commission (recruiting the wrong person) or omission (not recruiting a person who probably would have helped you).
 

"it's not like you can just go down to the "Big Man" store at the mall and pick one out."

You've used that line before. Trust me, it doesn't improve with age.

"They also seem to have a specific idea for the type of players they want to run their system."

It's still early yet but it doesn't appear to me so far that a big man will ever run this system unless they find an exceptional and multi-talented one. If what we see now is a blue print for the future, then big men will be role players on this team although some might be much better role players than others.

"Because - believe or it not - that player has to want to come to your school."

Isn't that the case with every recruit? If you insist on talking down to people regularly, then maybe you could at least try to be a bit more clever in doing it. If that is your idea of being clever, then you need to work a little harder on your schtick.

"Providing that big man was a fit for what Johnson wants to do."

Can you define specifically what "fit" means in that context? That was a rhetorical question because I know you can't. Also, you're much too old to be harboring childish fantasies that Ben Johnson, or any other coach for that matter, can look at hundreds of names on transfer portal list and decide with certainty which select small group of players would be the right "fit" for his team. The best one can do is look at a player's history (including film if that is available), ask around if you have connections, and make an educated guess which players have the potential to be productive at this level and determine whether there are red flags in the player's background that might point to character concerns. After that, you can do interviews (easier these days than it used to be) to see whether or not you can learn anything else about the person. You will always make some recruiting mistakes but you can make mistakes of commission (recruiting the wrong person) or omission (not recruiting a person who probably would have helped you).
Another bad day, huh?
 


Battles good. Fox will be a real nice piece. Daniels and Curry are serviceable. I get it and it’s not something that can be tolerated in any year other than this one. If it’s this bad next year, concerns are and should be warranted.
I was being a bit tongue and cheek.

But I think “serviceable” is doing a lot of work here. Curry may hit that mark, but Daniels had some rough minutes the other night. Also, as others mentioned, I haven’t seen Battle inside of three point line yet.

Like you, I’m not specifically holding this year’s roster shortcomings on BJ. It’s the nature of the rebuild, transfer year, track records, etc. lots of moving pieces.
 

LOL. Literally.

"Classic examples of an authoritarian worship mindframe..."

You're welcome. Glad I could provide you with a laugh. Since you're such a dank and humorless sort yourself, you probably need others to provide that for you on occasion.
 




Top Bottom