Ben Johnson Reasonable Expectations

[cjbfbp]

You can do both. You don’t have to sacrifice what it takes for long term success to win by year 3.
Are you saying you’ll be disappointed in year 3 if their winning because you can’t win that fast?

Of course not. Why the hell would I say (or even think) something as stupid as that? You should try to understand your audience a little better instead of assuming that everyone is an idiot and speaking to them accordingly.

Here is your quote:

You can turn around a program almost instantly with a few pieces.

That's simply wrong. To "turn around a program," you need to get a sufficient number of quality pieces over an extended period of time. That's much harder than getting some quality pieces here and there and finding some occasional success (often when those pieces mature). That's what Pitino did and that's pretty common even among P6 coaches who are fired.

If you don't want to be misunderstood, then I would suggest being a little more careful in your choice of words.

 

[Some guy]

Of course not. Why the hell would I say (or even think) something as stupid as that? You should try to understand your audience a little better instead of assuming that everyone is an idiot and speaking to them accordingly.

Here is your quote:

You can turn around a program almost instantly with a few pieces.

That's simply wrong. To "turn around a program," you need to get a sufficient number of quality pieces over an extended period of time. That's much harder than getting some quality pieces here and there and finding some occasional success (often when those pieces mature). That's what Pitino did and that's pretty common even among P6 coaches who are fired.

If you don't want to be misunderstood, then I would suggest being a little more careful in your choice of words.

Iowa state this year coming off a shit season had what would be the greatest legal gopher season since the early 90s

You can turn it around fast, and if you can’t, you probably aren’t going to turn it around.


Feel free to provide examples of teams in the last 20 years who were bad under a coach for 4 years and then all of a sudden had sustained success the following years

 

[cjbfbp]

Please list the 'lot of good teams' that were playing a gimpy 4 at the center position, a solid 3 as a 4, and 3 average guards. Did these 'good teams' also have little to no bench so they were forced to play timid basketball to avoid foul trouble while competing for boards?

I'll answer your question. On second thought, never mind, I can't think of any.

I will make what I believe to be a deserved technical correction. In addition to our 3 masquerading as a 4, I felt Willis' performance this season was above average for the league's guards; maybe not top 15th percentile but definitely above average.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Iowa state this year coming off a shit season had what would be the greatest legal gopher season since the early 90s

That is only remotely true if your entire barometer for judging a season is how well they do in the NCAA tournament.

 

[Some guy]

That is only remotely true if your entire barometer for judging a season is how well they do in the NCAA tournament.

What season that is still on the books is better than iowas 2022?
16-17
04-05

Are the only two years that would even be in contention post scandal


You got me on those two. They might be a little better if you don’t care about ncaa tourney games.

 

[MNVCGUY]

What season that is still on the books is better than iowas 2022?
16-17
04-05

Are the only two years that would even be in contention post scandal


You got me on those two. They might be a little better if you don’t care about ncaa tourney games.

Iowa state went 7-11 in conference for a .39 winning percentage

Just going back to 2000 I count 11 seasons where we had a better conference winning percentage than that.

ISU had a solid year, improved a ton from the year before and did enough to get into the tournament. Then got super fortunate with their matchups and managed to win a few. That is great for them, but it is not like they had some historic season where they were great all year.

There is zero doubt that Iowa State had a better season than we did in 2021-22 but let's not go turning their season into something it wasn't. They were still a sub .500 team in the Big 12.

 

[cjbfbp]

Iowa state this year coming off a shit season had what would be the greatest legal gopher season since the early 90s

You can turn it around fast, and if you can’t, you probably aren’t going to turn it around.


Feel free to provide examples of teams in the last 20 years who were bad under a coach for 4 years and then all of a sudden had sustained success the following years

That's an easy challenge: Scott Drew.

But that has nothing to do with what I've stated in these posts.

I think I've figured out your cognitive problem: you don't pay attention to the words of the opposite party in a conversation; you're only focused on your part of the conversation.

Nowhere have I stated that a coach who has quick success is a bad bet for continued success (again, I'm not an idiot who makes irrational arguments although you seem intent on casting me in that role). All I've stated is that it takes far more recruiting effort to achieve stable and continued success than occasional success. You need more than a "few pieces' for the former.

The current Iowa State coach is off to a great start but that's no guarantee that he won't be fired within 8 years. After all, his predecessor at ISU made the NCAA tournament in 3 of his first 4 years and also achieved a final 16 finish in one of those years. Unfortunately, he followed those four years with two losing seasons including one that was as bad as anyone could imagine for a P6 team and was gone after 6 years.

 

[GFBfan]

Iowa state this year coming off a shit season had what would be the greatest legal gopher season since the early 90s

You can turn it around fast, and if you can’t, you probably aren’t going to turn it around.


Feel free to provide examples of teams in the last 20 years who were bad under a coach for 4 years and then all of a sudden had sustained success the following years

Scott Drew and Baylor.
Year 1: 8-21 overall 3 - 13 in Big 12 for 11th place
Year 2: 9-19 overall 1 - 15 in Big 12 for 12th place
Year 3: 4-13 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 12th place Only played a conference schedule
Year 4: 15-16 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 11th place
After that year they started winning more than they lost.
In conference play these are there finishes since then: 5th, 9th, 3rd, 7th, 3rd, 6th, 6th, 4th, 5th, 2nd, 6th,4th, 2nd, 1st and 1st

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

You’re giving him way more leeway than I would. Unless he has high level recruits already committed for year 4 and year 5…lower than 10th in each of the first 3 years should be done.

I don’t know what the difference between warm, lukewarm, and hot is….but if you have know measurable success after 3 years. I’m over it.
If you don’t have a top 5 finish in the conference after 6 years, I’m over it.


This isn’t football. You can turn around a program almost instantly with a few pieces.

I think you're probably right that I'm giving more than enough leeway. I think that's a product of my aversion to constant change. With everything I've typed, I will also say that if after three years we are garbage and Coyle moves on, I also wouldn't blame him.

 

[cjbfbp]

Iowa state went 7-11 in conference for a .39 winning percentage

Just going back to 2000 I count 11 seasons where we had a better conference winning percentage than that.

ISU had a solid year, improved a ton from the year before and did enough to get into the tournament. Then got super fortunate with their matchups and managed to win a few. That is great for them, but it is not like they had some historic season where they were great all year.

There is zero doubt that Iowa State had a better season than we did in 2021-22 but let's not go turning their season into something it wasn't. They were still a sub .500 team in the Big 12.

I agree with you that Iowa State's performance this season isn't enough to conclude that they are some emerging dynasty. However, their coach does have the advantage of heading a program in better shape (and better thought of by recruits) than ours despite the fact that the program had one amazingly bad season last year. In the last 11 years, they've had 8 twenty-plus win seasons and 8 tournament appearances.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Scott Drew and Baylor.
Year 1: 8-21 overall 3 - 13 in Big 12 for 11th place
Year 2: 9-19 overall 1 - 15 in Big 12 for 12th place
Year 3: 4-13 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 12th place Only played a conference schedule
Year 4: 15-16 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 11th place
After that year they started winning more than they lost.
In conference play these are there finishes since then: 5th, 9th, 3rd, 7th, 3rd, 6th, 6th, 4th, 5th, 2nd, 6th,4th, 2nd, 1st and 1st

Scott Drew inherited maybe the worst mess in college basketball history two months before his first season was starting.

 

[GopherJake]

Don't align yourself with the biggest losers of this board and feel the need to bring up my profession every time you disagree with me. It makes you look bitter and pathetic. It also makes you look intimidated by someone's profession (like short guys constantly bringing up height). It's a bad look.

But back to basketball. You could have taken the time to point out what point of yours I missed. I said that I expect much better portal players from Ben in year 2. You replied to that post to say that you think Ben brought in some good players.

Clearly, my reply to your post was that when you look at the crop of transfer players, ON THE WHOLE, they were substandard (for the reasons I listed). We couldn't even use them all (unheard of) and used two of them on players who should never have been on a Big 10 roster.

It's kind of like saying that recruiting needed to improve after Jerry Kill. That's true despite the fact that Eric Murray, Hageman, Campbell and Wilson were very good football players. On the whole, we weren't bringing in enough talent.

Similar to Ben in the transfer portal. He landed some good players (as you pointed out and I FULLY comprehended) but on the whole he clearly didn't bring in enough talent.

What am I failing to discern?

A typical year will not require 12 players from the transfer portal.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Who had more turnovers last years or this years ?

Last years. What is your point? We played incredibly slow and didn't feed the ball into the post. We took care of the ball well but they did with Pitino as well.

Who had more wins?

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Please list the 'lot of good teams' that were playing a gimpy 4 at the center position, a solid 3 as a 4, and 3 average guards. Did these 'good teams' also have little to no bench so they were forced to play timid basketball to avoid foul trouble while competing for boards?

I'm talking strictly size. And the Gophers could have played the size that was on their bench more than they did, like they did with success against Rutgers.

The Gophers starters were 6'3", 6'4", 6'4", 6'7", and 6'9".

Villanova has always played small with 4 guards and one big typically around 6'8" under Jay Wright to high success. This year they don't play anyone taller than 6'7"

St. Peters has one guy in the rotation at 6'8" and he's at the end of their bench. The rest are 6'7" and under.

Kansas has one guy at 6'10". The rest of their rotation is 6'8" and under. Iowa St was the same way.

Baylor's national title team last year had one forward at 6'8", the rest of their rotation was guards.

Ohio St didn't play anyone taller than 6'8".

This is just a few off the top of my head. Many program's rotation consists of one or two bigs at 6'8 - 6'10" and the rest is guards.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

A typical year will not require 12 players from the transfer portal.

Well yeah, obviously. I never implied it did.

Is that the point you thought I missed? I guess I didn't think I'd have to spell out the obvious. So, although we are adding fewer portal players, we need to improve amount of talent we are bringing in (on the whole). Think of it like any other recruiting class. Classes with 30 people will obviously have more people than classes of 20. Hitting on 16 of 30 players is significantly worse than hitting on 15 of 20 players.

 

[SanDiegoGopherFan]

Of course not. Why the hell would I say (or even think) something as stupid as that? You should try to understand your audience a little better instead of assuming that everyone is an idiot and speaking to them accordingly.

Here is your quote:

You can turn around a program almost instantly with a few pieces.

That's simply wrong. To "turn around a program," you need to get a sufficient number of quality pieces over an extended period of time. That's much harder than getting some quality pieces here and there and finding some occasional success (often when those pieces mature). That's what Pitino did and that's pretty common even among P6 coaches who are fired.

If you don't want to be misunderstood, then I would suggest being a little more careful in your choice of words.

You’re thinking football. Basketball is a different game, you literally need just a few true stars and put the correct personel around them and decent bench, boom!

And you’ re also perhaps thinking were not going to have players good enough to leave for the nba early, thats not the mentality I want/have for the gophers.

 

[Some guy]

Scott Drew and Baylor.
Year 1: 8-21 overall 3 - 13 in Big 12 for 11th place
Year 2: 9-19 overall 1 - 15 in Big 12 for 12th place
Year 3: 4-13 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 12th place Only played a conference schedule
Year 4: 15-16 overall 4 - 12 in Big 12 for 11th place
After that year they started winning more than they lost.
In conference play these are there finishes since then: 5th, 9th, 3rd, 7th, 3rd, 6th, 6th, 4th, 5th, 2nd, 6th,4th, 2nd, 1st and 1st

That’s a good example
Is there a second?

 

[cjbfbp]

Scott Drew inherited maybe the worst mess in college basketball history two months before his first season was starting.

I remember watching them a couple of times during the last of his four consecutive losing seasons. I think that was the year before my cable company picked up the Big Ten Network so I wasn't watching as many Big Ten games then. I seemed to watch a lot of Big 12 games that year as that conference played a lot of fast paced and entertaining basketball at the time (that was Kevin Durant's only college year). I was fairly amazed at how well Baylor looked for a team that finished 11 out of 12 teams that year and I used that for a rationale to my die hard Iowa and Big Ten fan friend why I mostly watched Big 12 games that season.

 

[Some guy]

Iowa state went 7-11 in conference for a .39 winning percentage

Just going back to 2000 I count 11 seasons where we had a better conference winning percentage than that.

ISU had a solid year, improved a ton from the year before and did enough to get into the tournament. Then got super fortunate with their matchups and managed to win a few. That is great for them, but it is not like they had some historic season where they were great all year.

There is zero doubt that Iowa State had a better season than we did in 2021-22 but let's not go turning their season into something it wasn't. They were still a sub .500 team in the Big 12.

So you think a 9-11 season and no ncaa birth would be preferable to 8-12 with a sweet 16?

Because that is kind of what you are arguing here.
Yeah I think there are two seasons you could argue are better than Iowa states 22 since the scandal. Those would be the two that the team was over .500 in conference and made the tourney (both first round losses).

 

[Some guy]

Scott Drew inherited maybe the worst mess in college basketball history two months before his first season was starting.

Yeah I would agree with that. But I do like the example anyways. Would feel better about being bad in year 3 if there were more Scott drew type examples

 

[cjbfbp]

You’re thinking football. Basketball is a different game, you literally need just a few true stars and put the correct personel around them and decent bench, boom!

And you’ re also perhaps thinking were not going to have players good enough to leave for the nba early, thats not the mentality I want/have for the gophers.

Please don't tell me that you're as dense as some guy. Assembling one good roster will get you two or three good years. It won't "turn around" a program for the long-term. If you are able to assemble multiple good rosters over a period of ten years and have had seven or more 20 win seasons during that period, then maybe you've elevated a program for the long term.

 

[Some guy]

Please don't tell me that you're as dense as some guy. Assembling one good roster will get you two or three good years. It won't "turn around" a program for the long-term. If you are able to assemble multiple good rosters over a period of ten years and have had seven or more 20 win seasons during that period, then maybe you've elevated a program for the long term..

For sure I advocated putting together one good roster and then tanking. Lol

 

[GopherJake]

Well yeah, obviously. I never implied it did.

Is that the point you thought I missed? I guess I didn't think I'd have to spell out the obvious. So, although we are adding fewer portal players, we need to improve amount of talent we are bringing in (on the whole). Think of it like any other recruiting class. Classes with 30 people will obviously have more people than classes of 20. Hitting on 16 of 30 players is significantly worse than hitting on 15 of 20 players.

I don’t know what the hell you are talking about. In a typical year, we will need *maybe* 3 transfers- I have no idea what you are talking about with 30. If next year Ben brings in 3 transfers that are equivalent to Payton, Battle and Loewe, that will be a massive haul. Are you actually shocked that the 11 & 12 transfers into a complete rebuild didn’t contribute? Get real.

 

[cjbfbp]

Villanova has always played small with 4 guards and one big typically around 6'8" under Jay Wright to high success. This year they don't play anyone taller than 6'7"

Are you serious? Villanova? Yes, Villanova traditionally is a very guard oriented offense but since 2018, they've placed 4 big men in the NBA. Yes, they don't have many big men on the court at one time but the ones they have on the court are much better than average college big men (generally very strong too).

 

[cjbfbp]

For sure I advocated putting together one good roster and then tanking. Lol

Look, I told you the following: if you don't want to be misunderstood, then pick your words more carefully. Turning around a program (emphasis on the word "program") means elevating the program to a higher level, not just having a good year or two.

Don't blame me for your imprecise vocabulary. I'm just the messenger.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Yeah I would agree with that. But I do like the example anyways. Would feel better about being bad in year 3 if there were more Scott drew type examples

The $cot Drew example is from nearly 20 years ago at a very different time in college basketball than today. As Bob mentioned they were the biggest mess in college basketball, and they didn't become good until they started landing multiple high 4* and 5* recruits. That did, and still does raise a lot of question$$$$$ about $cot Drew.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Are you serious? Villanova? Yes, Villanova traditionally is a very guard oriented offense but since 2018, they've placed 4 big men in the NBA. Yes, they don't have many big men on the court at one time but the ones they have on the court are much better than average college big men (generally very strong too).

Again, we're talking strictly size. I didn't expect the Gophers to be Villanova now, or even in several years talent wise. People saying the Gophers weren't big enough to be a better rebounding team this season is a myth. A lot of highly successful, better rebounding teams, are smaller than the Gophers were this year.

 

[Ragnor]

I'm talking strictly size. And the Gophers could have played the size that was on their bench more than they did, like they did with success against Rutgers.

The Gophers starters were 6'3", 6'4", 6'4", 6'7", and 6'9".

Villanova has always played small with 4 guards and one big typically around 6'8" under Jay Wright to high success. This year they don't play anyone taller than 6'7"

St. Peters has one guy in the rotation at 6'8" and he's at the end of their bench. The rest are 6'7" and under.

Kansas has one guy at 6'10". The rest of their rotation is 6'8" and under. Iowa St was the same way.

Baylor's national title team last year had one forward at 6'8", the rest of their rotation was guards.

Ohio St didn't play anyone taller than 6'8".

This is just a few off the top of my head. Many program's rotation consists of one or two bigs at 6'8 - 6'10" and the rest is guards.

Interesting, I had a sense that this was probably a thing but hadn't looked into it. What do you see as our problem on the inside this last year? should have worked more for offensive rebounds? Poor rebounding players inside? Poor scoring players inside? I had chalked it up to not having a "True Post" I think Curry and TT are more PF. I would say TT has more potential as a post than curry but I think we will be better if he is a PF. Or do you think our problem revolved around our guards not rebounding or scoring well enough inside. Interested in your thoughts.

 

[BarnBurner]

Best coaches will adapt strategy to personnel.

I suspect we'll prioritize getting back on defense over crashing the boards but no one here can say.

Do you just like being argumentative ass?

Well, if the strategy is similar to this past season, personnel be darned, winning will be very difficult.

Do you just like losing the rebounding battle game after game?

 

[BarnBurner]

More than anything? Our lack of size was biggest detriment in rebounds.

Nope. Lots of teams rebound much much better than Mn with similar size. But don’t let that get in the way of your excuses.