Men's Postseason chatter thread (Merged)

[AU64 10,122]

1 hour ago, ellitor said:

1. They were here longer than 3 years and 2. Neither 1 started from the total cesspool of a program that Bruce had to start with.

 I agree that BP has more time due him... but I also think that part of the cesspool was created by himself in year one and year two.  . The rate of attrition was awful and most of those guys were his guys..

And he came into a much better situation from a facilities standpoint and with his ESPN notoriety which helped with recruiting.

 There are lots of apples and oranges being compared in my view. 

[boomstick 1,315]

19 hours ago, AU64 said:

 I agree that BP has more time due him... but I also think that part of the cesspool was created by himself in year one and year two.  . The rate of attrition was awful and most of those guys were his guys..

And he came into a much better situation from a facilities standpoint and with his ESPN notoriety which helped with recruiting.

 There are lots of apples and oranges being compared in my view. 

Rate of attrition? There hasn't been a season with more than three early departures in it, and the only real attrition we've seen is Thompson, Purchase, Canty, Reed, and New. Four seniors, a Soph and a Frosh left his first year. Two of those were grad transfers necessary to be competitive because there were no high school recruits coming because of the coaching change and show cause.  Year two had 6 players leave, with three leaving early (Canty, Reed, and Taj due to injury). There hasn't been any quality youth on the team so Pearl has had to get JUCOs and grad transfers to even consider being competitive. I would imagine that the only attrition this year, short of disciplinary issues, is going to be New. So only losing one guy to transfer in year three is an improvement as well. 

[tigerbrotha12 2,362]

At the end of this regular season- we will more than likely be either 18-13 or 19-12, depending on whether we can go to a UGA and win, a goal I believe we can achieve since they will have no Maten for this game. (I'm assuming we can handle Mizzou at home as well). I'm just alright with both of those records. That's ether 18-13 (7-11 SEC) or 19-12 (8-10 SEC). While the ladder would be better, both are significant improvements. Hopefully, we can go get a win in Athens tomorrow and catch some fire going into the SEC tournament to position for post-season, but overall, in excited about this team's direction. Losing to Arky stunk, but they're a pretty dern good team this year. Let's finish!

[ellitor 33,062]

20 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

The problem with the Barbee hire was simple.  Jacobs thought he could bring in someone from the Calipari tree and have success, but he didn't think about the fact that even Calipari couldn't have success at a school that employed Rich McGlynn. We needed someone who could build the program without seeing how close to the edge he could walk with the rules. You don't learn that under Calipari.

This plus needed a HC was not a hard core Nike guy like Barbee was.He was simply lost on some targets not having Nike to help him.

[AU64 10,122]

44 minutes ago, boomstick said:

Rate of attrition? There hasn't been a season with more than three early departures in it, and the only real attrition we've seen is Thompson, Purchase, Canty, Reed, and New. Four seniors, a Soph and a Frosh left his first year. Two of those were grad transfers necessary to be competitive because there were no high school recruits coming because of the coaching change and show cause.  Year two had 6 players leave, with three leaving early (Canty, Reed, and Taj due to injury). There hasn't been any quality youth on the team so Pearl has had to get JUCOs and grad transfers to even consider being competitive. I would imagine that the only attrition this year, short of disciplinary issues, is going to be New. So only losing one guy to transfer in year three is an improvement as well. 

Attrition seems to have settled down...my point was that the first two years we lost (in addition to grads) a number of players where scholarships had been committed ...names you mentioned ....and Purifoy was supposed to play last season but did not become eligible and we sat on Reed's scholarship an extra season too if I recall correctly... .somewhere along the line we also lost Atewe and I think Granger never finished his career at AU. 

I guess I should have expanded my comment to include the one and dones also....but however it is defined, we had no significant carryover from one year to the next.

Just suggesting that BP rolled the dice on a bunch of one year players hoping for instant success.....did not get very much of it and ended up with a team this year without much experience, very little size and no leadership...all of which was the outcome of his recruiting strategy.  And can you imagine what things would look like if someone had not convinced Wiley that it was a good idea to skip his senior year or HS.  I bet this time last year nobody at AU was expecting him to be on the team for 2017.

All of that discourse is just to say that I think it is lame to keep blaming today's problems on a coach who ahs been gone for 3 seasons. 

[Tiger 8,817]

Are people suggesting we should have taken 2 star players in years 1 and 2 instead of jucos/grad transfers? I don't want to put words in mouths but IDK what the alternative was to get to where we are right now (starting all 4*-5* players and Bryce Brown). We needed guys to be in here a short time and leave so we can get more talented players in the program -- because if one thing is for sure it's that Bruce Pearl can recruit. The only reason we have the 5 stud freshman right now is that there was room for them (Bruce intentionally planned like this IMO) and BP needed those  2 years to get back into the college game and recruit again. He finally had time to get back into the recruiting game and build relationships and look at us. We have a handful of 4-5* star players. When has that ever happened?

Welcome to the ground floor, everybody. Consider this year 1 because BP was just trying to have bodies to put on the floor in years 1 and 2. Now he is bringing in his guys, let them grow.  Years 1 and 2 have to be thrown out because those weren't Bruce built teams.  Those were a glued together hodgepodge of fringe Power 5 players mixed with one another just so we could run a full bodied practice. We were pretty lucky BP found Bryce Brown and got Horace Spencer to commit to us just based on the Bruce Pearl brand alone. IMO we can truly assess Bruce's direction of the program from here on out IMO. But to be honest, I don't know how good we are going to be next year because we aren't bringing in any more size so our rebounding probably remains a big weakness, our PG situation will be a true FR and a soph which is just not particularly ideal (especially when your sophomore is only 5'9), and unless Okeke is a bonafide defender we still have nobody who wants to play defense other than maybe Horace.

Aren't we the only team in the nation whose top 4 scorers are all freshman? When you're relying so heavily on freshman you're going to find yourself wondering what the hell is going on out there at times. 

[Tiger 8,817]

15 minutes ago, AU64 said:

Attrition seems to have settled down...my point was that the first two years we lost (in addition to grads) a number of players where scholarships had been committed ...names you mentioned ....and Purifoy was supposed to play last season but did not become eligible and we sat on Reed's scholarship an extra season too if I recall correctly... .somewhere along the line we also lost Atewe and I think Granger never finished his career at AU. 

I guess I should have expanded my comment to include the one and dones also....but however it is defined, we had no significant carryover from one year to the next.

Just suggesting that BP rolled the dice on a bunch of one year players hoping for instant success.....did not get very much of it and ended up with a team this year without much experience, very little size and no leadership...all of which was the outcome of his recruiting strategy.  And can you imagine what things would look like if someone had not convinced Wiley that it was a good idea to skip his senior year or HS.  I bet this time last year nobody at AU was expecting him to be on the team for 2017.

All of that discourse is just to say that I think it is lame to keep blaming today's problems on a coach who ahs been gone for 3 seasons. 

A few notes: Granger did finish his career here.

And for the 2nd bolded comment I don't think he was hoping for instant success he was hoping to fill out a roster IMO with the plan being set in motion of being able to get talent into the program later. The choices were go after studs right now and try to make up 4 years of recruiting in 1.5 seasons which ain't gonna be very successful or go after jucos/grad transfers and buy time to actually develop recruiting relationships to bring in classes of 4 and 5 star talent, which he is successfully doing now.

Now I'd like to see another 4 or 5* big man commit to us that would make me feel muuuuch better but Bruce has our wing situation looking pretty damn good. And Harper was a good get for sure and I hope Davion Mitchell is even better (not a knock on Harper at all I love watching him play) but our PG situation next year is a sprained ankle away from being a catastrophe because at least this year, in a pinch, we could have Dunans being our primary ball handler/playmaker for stretches but next year I don't know who's going to be that 3rd option. 

 

Even with all the disappointing losses, we are still light years ahead of where we were as a program compared to when we had to run Cim Bowers at PG. It was only a year ago but it seems so far away.

[cole256 17,039]

It's a big big disappointment to people who didn't understand the scenario with our team and who thought we had more talent than we actually had. 

It's not a coincidence that most people that are complaining don't too much care for CBP in the first place. The formula is make high expectations that's really not attainable then complain about it. 

Once again if you have argued on the football side about giving Gus a pass because sw was hurt or a redshirt freshman but complaining about this team full of one and two year players you don't have any credibility IMO

[au302 2,669]

Yes this team has the talent to make the tournament, but we also must remember this has been a positive step in the right direction. Yes, we need more discipline and better defense. Maybe more staff changes. But this team has been our best team in a long time, whether you like it or not. We can have 19 wins by the end of the week, that's not bad. 

[mustache eagle 2,388]

The previous years teams had some pretty impressive, and dare I say, significant, wins.  Also the 3 game run in sec tourney play.  

We don't do those things without those 1 and done juco and transfer guys (which led to the attrition).  That wouldn't have happened with  "low star" high school recruits.

I'd argue there were very few teams in the country that got the press auburn did in that short few day window of that sec tournament.  We didn't get anywhere close to that type of attention (good or bad) the few years prior. 

Heck we had a point shaver on the team investigated by the FBI and that didn't even make a very big news blip.

[FoundationEagle 637]

There's a fine balance here. Had Bruce recruited all freshman his first year then there may not have been any improvement in the team. That could have hurt recruiting the. Ext year and therefore the year after. I'm disappointed in this year and I believe there are some possibly serious questions about the coaching support staff. That said, Bruce had one hell of a mountain to climb. If they make the tourney next year, name another coach that could have done that out of this crap show of a program.  I've said all year I have coaching concerns but nothing should happen until after next year. There is a solid reason for my thinking this. Next year will be the first year with continuity on this team. There should be marked improvement next year.  Then and only then should any real eval be made. Bruce has gotten unreal talent here compared to what we are used to. Let's wait til next year to evaluate progress. Either way, we have the best recruiting coach we've ever had. He may have to tweak his staff, but we are a thousand miles closer than we were 4 years ago. 

[AuburnNTexas 7,127]

Some don't think that BP did a good job in 1st 2 years recruiting but as others have pointed out he was building relationships so he could recruit the players we currently have. A lot of people are blaming his staff because we are not playing great defense and at time our offense is inconsistent.  It is one thing to work a couple of new players into an existing team and get that player to play with the existing players as a unit it is totally different when all the starting players most of the subs are all playing together for the first time. If you watch the team defense issue it is threefold. 1 Our big men (really only one after Horace got hurt) need help down low, 2 players out front sag to help down low and give up open threes, 3 sometimes players just miss assignments.

Wiley will get better on Post Defense with a years experience and off season workout to get stronger and quicker, Spencer will be back and will have a off season to learn the 4 position, McLemore is undersized but is improving and will continue to improve so that should help with defense down low. With Defense down low improved players up front will be able to stay home more helping prevent open threes. A years experience and another off season with most of the same guys together will cut down on the number of missed assignments I also expect to see them add more Zone D to their repertoire it won't be a staple but there are times it will help a lot. 

I also expect that you will see more emphasis on blocking out and while still having a free hand to shoot the three there will be discussions on when not to shoot the three,  There is only so much you can teach when you have a whole team of new inexperienced players.

[ellitor 33,062]

On 2/27/2017 at 10:09 AM, au302 said:

So what do we have to do to not play in the first round of the sec tournament?

With aTm winning last night it just got a lot tougher. We still have to win out but now the Vols have to lose out or both them & aTm have to win out and UGA lose out plus Bama beat the Rebs tonight. If the Vols beat LSU tonight it's virtually over as far as AU getting out of day 1 of the SEC Tourney as aTm will not beat UK Saturday. Using the win chances on RPIForecast.com we have a 2% chance of not having to play on Day 1 of the SEC Tourney.

[Tiger 8,817]

13 hours ago, mustache eagle said:

The previous years teams had some pretty impressive, and dare I say, significant, wins.  Also the 3 game run in sec tourney play.  

We don't do those things without those 1 and done juco and transfer guys (which led to the attrition).  That wouldn't have happened with  "low star" high school recruits.

I'd argue there were very few teams in the country that got the press auburn did in that short few day window of that sec tournament.  We didn't get anywhere close to that type of attention (good or bad) the few years prior. 

Heck we had a point shaver on the team investigated by the FBI and that didn't even make a very big news blip.

Out of likes but, yes!

 

13 hours ago, FoundationEagle said:

There's a fine balance here. Had Bruce recruited all freshman his first year then there may not have been any improvement in the team. That could have hurt recruiting the. Ext year and therefore the year after. I'm disappointed in this year and I believe there are some possibly serious questions about the coaching support staff. That said, Bruce had one hell of a mountain to climb. If they make the tourney next year, name another coach that could have done that out of this crap show of a program.  I've said all year I have coaching concerns but nothing should happen until after next year. There is a solid reason for my thinking this. Next year will be the first year with continuity on this team. There should be marked improvement next year.  Then and only then should any real eval be made. Bruce has gotten unreal talent here compared to what we are used to. Let's wait til next year to evaluate progress. Either way, we have the best recruiting coach we've ever had. He may have to tweak his staff, but we are a thousand miles closer than we were 4 years ago. 

Agree with this 100%

31 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Some don't think that BP did a good job in 1st 2 years recruiting but as others have pointed out he was building relationships so he could recruit the players we currently have. A lot of people are blaming his staff because we are not playing great defense and at time our offense is inconsistent.  It is one thing to work a couple of new players into an existing team and get that player to play with the existing players as a unit it is totally different when all the starting players most of the subs are all playing together for the first time. If you watch the team defense issue it is threefold. 1 Our big men (really only one after Horace got hurt) need help down low, 2 players out front sag to help down low and give up open threes, 3 sometimes players just miss assignments.

Wiley will get better on Post Defense with a years experience and off season workout to get stronger and quicker, Spencer will be back and will have a off season to learn the 4 position, McLemore is undersized but is improving and will continue to improve so that should help with defense down low. With Defense down low improved players up front will be able to stay home more helping prevent open threes. A years experience and another off season with most of the same guys together will cut down on the number of missed assignments I also expect to see them add more Zone D to their repertoire it won't be a staple but there are times it will help a lot. 

I also expect that you will see more emphasis on blocking out and while still having a free had to shoot the three there will be discussions on when not to shoot the three,  There is only so much you can teach when you have a whole team on new inexperienced players.

Great points.

[au302 2,669]

55 minutes ago, ellitor said:

With aTm winning last night it just got a lot tougher. We still have to win out but now the Vols have to lose out or both them & aTm have to win out and UGA lose out plus Bama beat the Rebs tonight. If the Vols beat LSU tonight it's virtually over as far as AU getting out of day 1 of the SEC Tourney as aTm will not beat UK Saturday. Using the win chances on RPIForecast.com we have a 2% chance of not having to play on Day 1 of the SEC Tourney.

Damn, that really sucks. Playing on day one sucks for many reasons but I don't want to play LSU again. They're horrible but with our luck we'd lose. Plus, it's very hard to beat a team three times, no matter how bad or good they are. 

[jared52 4,354]

A win over UGA might have put AU back on the NIT bubble, but I'm not even sure it would have been enough. Postgame thread has my feelings about the game so I'll leave that there. But this thread is dead for NIT talk. It's on to whether the CBI will take AU's money to let them play in their tourney. Frankly, that makes this season a miss on the expected finish. Lots of work to do over the summer in the gym and on the recruiting trail. AU needs a couple of more good classes to have the depth to make the post season. 

[AUGoo 2,659]

Gotta hand it to "them".

"They" picked us to be 11th in the SEC.

"They" nailed it.

[Gowebb11 9,308]

1 minute ago, AUGoo said:

Gotta hand it to "them".

"They" picked us to be 11th in the SEC.

"They" nailed it.

Unfortunately, underachieving is becoming all too common with the big three in men's sports the past few years

[AU64 10,122]

13 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

Unfortunately, underachieving is becoming all too common with the big three in men's sports the past few years

Yep....been a pretty safe call to pick us near the bottom in those sports....and sort of interesting that most fans are inclined to get mad at the media for "disrespecting" AU instead of getting upset with performance of the teams that causes them to be ranked so low.   We don't have much of a history lately of over-achieving.  

[ellitor 33,062]

44 minutes ago, jared52 said:

A win over UGA might have put AU back on the NIT bubble, but I'm not even sure it would have been enough. Postgame thread has my feelings about the game so I'll leave that there. But this thread is dead for NIT talk. It's on to whether the CBI will take AU's money to let them play in their tourney.

We are already on the NIT Bubble. We are projected in now as a 6 seed. To make it though we gotta beat Mizzou twice (They will be our 1st round SEC Tourney opponent) and beat whoever the 6 seed is. That's between Bama, Rebs, Vandy, & UGA. No matter who it is we have to win that game. The rest of the quoted part is just wrong for the moment.

[Jgarrett7 957]

Let's just go ahead and win the SEC tourney and head to the dance. 

 

One can dream right?

[jared52 4,354]

11 hours ago, ellitor said:

We are already on the NIT Bubble. We are projected in now as a 6 seed. To make it though we gotta beat Mizzou twice (They will be our 1st round SEC Tourney opponent) and beat whoever the 6 seed is. That's between Bama, Rebs, Vandy, & UGA. No matter who it is we have to win that game. The rest of the quoted part is just wrong for the moment.

Well I stand corrected. Maybe the other conference games changed the outlook, but I thought that AU had to go 4-2 over the last 6 to make it and they are 1-4 so far. I fully expect a win over Mizzou. Maybe that was to be on the NCAA bubble?

That said, it's hard to beat a team 3 times in a season in basketball. So that Mizzou tournament game isn't a gimme. If they have to play uat in the second round, it will be that much more difficult. I think AU can matchup against any of those 4, except UGA, but then, if they are still down their best player, the 3 game rule falls in AU's favor there.

[Tiger 8,817]

12 hours ago, Jgarrett7 said:

Let's just go ahead and win the SEC tourney and head to the dance. 

 

One can dream right?

While IDK if we can win the tourney I could see us making a run just because we are literally unstoppable when we are hot. The problem is for every 1 minute of hot play we have it's accompanied by 1-1.5 minutes of subpar play

[boomstick 1,315]

At this point, I expect us to be a one-and-done at the SECT this year. This team seems so mentally fragile. If they get to Nashville and don't have their shots fall early, it will probably be a short stay in Nashville. On top of that, having to play the same opponent in back-to-back games will make things more difficult.

[au302 2,669]

Yea I can see us losing in the first round. Playing Mizzou back to back isn't good. This is gonna sound stupid so don't take it seriously but a small part of me thinks we may as well rest our main players this weekend and focus on the second matchup with Mizzou. Obviously, can't do that while trying to play for the NIT