Anyone Seen Howard Washington Practicing?

Status
Not open for further replies.

OrangeFoo

All Conference
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
3,151
Like
4,042
In what little we saw of Howard Washington's freshman year he showed he has point guard instincts. If JB were as patient with him as he is with Buddy, who knows?
He doesn’t give jb what he wants at the top of the zone.
 

Zelda Zonk

Hollywood Liberal Elite Globalist
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
5,001
Like
7,964
You are trying to make two points here, I think.

The first is that my opinion isn’t anymore valid than anyone else’s. While that inherently sounds like it ought to be correct, it would only apply when I’m voicing my own opinion, which I very infrequently do. I don’t have theories on root problems, because I know that given my own limited knowledge of what’s really going on at practices and in games and my own very unimpressive basketball resume really doesn’t allow that.

Your second point is that is unlikely that everything the staff says is true. So therefore, anything they say is possibly wrong. Well, I don’t know if everything JB does is right or not. But I strongly believe that when he answers questions and expounds at pressers or in interviews, we are getting an unusually straight story that people ought to listen carefully to.

Some people don’t listen at all. some listen, but are unaffected because what he says doesn’t match the narrative they believe. And some actually believe he is mistaken or lying or FOS.

All I am frequently doing is pushing back on opinions.

I am in the unfortunate position of being an SU fan. I like the school, the teams, the coaches and the players. If a Georgetown or NC State fan showed up here and said half the stuff our “fans” say after a loss, they’d be run off the board in short order.
That's an interesting point, and one i have been meaning to discuss in some form or another for a while. Reminds me of my freshman year, and an upperclassman on my dorm floor was just not a JB lover. Like, at all. Whenever the topic of SU hoops came up, he took a very firm stance against the coach. This was in 85. Me being the noob that i was, i took this almost personally. How dare he insult the program with which i was now associated? Wasn't everyone at SU supposed to be devoted, unequivocally, to complete and total fandom?

Well, i matured. I began to recognize that many of his criticisms or dislikes were valid. And i began to not take it personally, and to reconcile that love isn't absolute. To this day, i still believe some of what he said was borne of being a natural contrarian, but the point remains. If a non-fan or fan of some other program came to say some of the things 'we' say after a loss, they'd be run off, sure. Because we'd take it as an attack on our identities. Which is an immature thought process. That's how fights erupt in stadiums, or people get attacked in arena parking lots. Having those same attacks in a virtual forum doesn't mean there aren't the same foundations for them.

Back to your statement that JB provides "an unusually straight story that people ought to listen carefully to" — i can buy that in part. But, he, like everyone else, has perspectives. And he also is in a position where he needs to forcefully protect those perspectives, which leads him down roads of justification and rationalization. He's no less truthful than any other coach, but he's not always right, and he does change his mind and his approaches. So, it's not as if what he says in pressers or interviews is "truth." It's just one man's opinion in the moment, or the opinion he wants us to hear at that time.

I've said this before: his induction into the HoF while active is the one of the worst things to happen to reasonable conversation about him. IMHO, too many people assign a different level of intelligence/competence/infallibility/...genius to him now. And he is no genius. In sport or otherwise. He's a really good basketball coach over a long period of time. Doesn't mean he can't be mistaken or FOS.
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
That's an interesting point, and one i have been meaning to discuss in some form or another for a while. Reminds me of my freshman year, and an upperclassman on my dorm floor was just not a JB lover. Like, at all. Whenever the topic of SU hoops came up, he took a very firm stance against the coach. This was in 85. Me being the noob that i was, i took this almost personally. How dare he insult the program with which i was now associated? Wasn't everyone at SU supposed to be devoted, unequivocally, to complete and total fandom?

Well, i matured. I began to recognize that many of his criticisms or dislikes were valid. And i began to not take it personally, and to reconcile that love isn't absolute. To this day, i still believe some of what he said was borne of being a natural contrarian, but the point remains. If a non-fan or fan of some other program came to say some of the things 'we' say after a loss, they'd be run off, sure. Because we'd take it as an attack on our identities. Which is an immature thought process. That's how fights erupt in stadiums, or people get attacked in arena parking lots. Having those same attacks in a virtual forum doesn't mean there aren't the same foundations for them.

Back to your statement that JB provides "an unusually straight story that people ought to listen carefully to" — i can buy that in part. But, he, like everyone else, has perspectives. And he also is in a position where he needs to forcefully protect those perspectives, which leads him down roads of justification and rationalization. He's no less truthful than any other coach, but he's not always right, and he does change his mind and his approaches. So, it's not as if what he says in pressers or interviews is "truth." It's just one man's opinion in the moment, or the opinion he wants us to hear at that time.

I've said this before: his induction into the HoF while active is the one of the worst things to happen to reasonable conversation about him. IMHO, too many people assign a different level of intelligence/competence/infallibility/...genius to him now. And he is no genius. In sport or otherwise. He's a really good basketball coach over a long period of time. Doesn't mean he can't be mistaken or FOS.
Funny you should use the “G” word. I’m not saying Boeheim’s a genius, because I’m not qualified to do so. But there are credible people that have described him as such.

One of my son’s father in law is a big time supporter of St. Louis University. When Rick Majerus was coach there he used to have meeting with this group of significant contributors. In one of these meetings, Majerus explained to the group that Boeheim, in his opinion, had one of the best if not the best mind in all of college basketball. He called JB a “genius”.

I’m pretty sure Coach K is of the same opinion.

So while you say JB isn’t a genus, there are others with pretty significant bona fides who say he is.

But coaching genius only goes so far. You get enough limitations from sanctions, early departures, injuries, players that aren’t as good as you thought they were going to be, players that don’t develop, or players that decide they don’t give a shot and all the coaching genius in the world isn’t enough to overcome all of it.

A few weeks ago, some smart guy posted a scattergram of coaches that compared performance in games decided by less than five points. The results were so stunning that it actually silenced the critics on here for a whole week.

That JB is a HOF coach doesn’t mean he can’t be criticized. That he is one of the best coaches ever in close games ought to give the critics some pause.
 

kcsu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,150
Like
10,627
Very clever and well written.

But, unfortunately, the analogy on which it is based is flawed. Making hamburgers is far simpler than Modern day CBB.

Let’s try another approach.

Random fan to wife: My doctor says my chloresterol is too high and he wants to put me on statins.

Wife: Nonsense. He’s just pushing pills as an agent of Big Pharma. I read in the Washington Post Health section that a diet of whale blubber and raw fish is better. Because Eskimos have no heart disease. Also, my friend, Sharon, said that her father lived to be 100 and always had high chlorestoral.”

Now, I’m no expert on fast foods. I stopped eating that junk 25 years ago when I noticed I felt worse after eating it. If in fact, McDonalds burgers are worse than they were, it’s because the company has decided that people don’t really care how bad it is, so long as it’s cheap and there’s a place for the kids to run around like wild Indians while they work on getting their BMI up a few more points.
Not your best.
 

Zelda Zonk

Hollywood Liberal Elite Globalist
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
5,001
Like
7,964
Funny you should use the “G” word. I’m not saying Boeheim’s a genius, because I’m not qualified to do so. But there are credible people that have described him as such.

One of my son’s father in law is a big time supporter of St. Louis University. When Rick Majerus was coach there he used to have meeting with this group of significant contributors. In one of these meetings, Majerus explained to the group that Boeheim, in his opinion, had one of the best if not the best mind in all of college basketball. He called JB a “genius”.

I’m pretty sure Coach K is of the same opinion.

So while you say JB isn’t a genus, there are others with pretty significant bona fides who say he is.

But coaching genius only goes so far. You get enough limitations from sanctions, early departures, injuries, players that aren’t as good as you thought they were going to be, players that don’t develop, or players that decide they don’t give a shot and all the coaching genius in the world isn’t enough to overcome all of it.

A few weeks ago, some smart guy posted a scattergram of coaches that compared performance in games decided by less than five points. The results were so stunning that it actually silenced the critics on here for a whole week.

That JB is a HOF coach doesn’t mean he can’t be criticized. That he is one of the best coaches ever in close games ought to give the critics some pause.
I don't want to belabor any of these points, but you raise interesting questions.

1 / There's a difference between "genius" and "coaching genius." The latter still comes from a subset of people, typically former athletes, who never would be considered geniuses in any other context. I don't recall JB saying anything super smart... That said, i don't think we can rely upon anecdotes and tales from and about 'friends,' and especially without some sort of reasoning or support. Coach K calling JB a 'brilliant mind' or somesuch doesn't mean anything. Likewise, Majerus, because, hey, what are his credentials? Don't you have to be of a certain level to recognize the level? I keep talking about a psych principle that discusses that concept in the off-topic (political) forum... Also reminds me of a similar argument i had with my trump supporting friend who asserted Trump must be a genius, because, 'he has a billion dollars.' But, i also used to share an office with someone senior level in the NBA Players Union, and he did not regard JB very highly, and confirmed my suggestions as to why he was highly sought after for pro positions.

2 / The scattergram. I vaguely remember that. I think it's interesting that you 'took the temperature' of the board with regard to its reaction to that illustration. Could you consider that it 'silenced' critics because there's no way to prove it 'wrong?' Or, that some people have enough grace to not want to spoil your party? When we win a game, even a game with warts, we don't often discuss those warts. We are grateful for the win, and turn to positives and 'bask' in the small glories. But, let's take the scattergram. I'm going to go from memory, and ask questions rather than directly confront it.
If it meant to demonstrate that JB is an 'amazing' coach in that he wins the most games decided by 5 points or less...
• Could that 'statistic' have anything to do with SU being so markedly a team that 'slams the brakes' when it begins to accumulate 'lead points,' instead of continuing to increase the lead? And then milks the clock with the intention of limiting the number of opponent possessions? So that the lead actually becomes artificially compressed, and we are in a 'hold on' mode, rather than a 'break it open' mode? How many other teams have such a vividly obvious scheme in such situations?
• Could it also be that SU plays at such a slow pace that scoring is low, either by intent or ineptitude, so that the difference between our and the opponent's score is also going to be compressed, simply due to the smaller number of possessions? Resulting in more opportunities for close games?
• Could the zone be a component in restraining opponent scoring simply by pace of game matters? When both teams score fewer points, there are more opportunities for close games.
• If we attribute 'excellence' to JB in those close games, what exactly is the 'genius' in what he's doing? Since we only have 8 plays, i don't see it in the playcalling. Is it in the timing of timeouts? Is that really genius? Is it the slowing down and milking the shot clock and limiting possessions? Is that genius? What else does that scattergram represent?

It is obviously better to be on the positive side of that chart than the negative. But, what does it really mean? I'd like, just for conversation's sake, to see a scattergram of 'blowout wins versus similarly ranked opponents.' Somehow, i think that would be a bit more revealing, but both would be specious and still without a ton of probative value.
 

two3zone

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
12,911
Like
17,159
Townie's funny, can you imagine arguing with about who makes the best burgers in the World:

Random: "Townie, the quality of McDonald's burgers are going way down hill."

Townie: "Over a billion served. They have a sign that proves that. How many burgers have you made in your life?"

Random: "Not a billion, but I know a good burger when I eat one."

Townie: "One billion served. You think you know more about quality burgers than a restaurant that's served over a billion?"

Random: "I get it, but only half the burger has ketchup, the pickle already fell off. The patty is disgusting. The quality is just bad."

Townie: "You're a pessimist. I go in without expectations. This way I'm pleased regardless. Nobody can make burgers better. One billion served proves that. Everyone makes mistakes. I'm supposed to take your opinion seriously - you've served how many burgers in your life?"

Random: "None professionally. I'm not a chef. But I know a good burger when I see one."

Townie: "You're an amateur. Trust the process. Why would anyone care what you think - one billion served. They know burgers best. Just enjoy the burger and shut up."

Random: "Maybe the process is the problem?"

Townie: "One billion served."

Random: ***Leaves Crying***
Best post in the history of the board.
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
I don't want to belabor any of these points, but you raise interesting questions.

1 / There's a difference between "genius" and "coaching genius." The latter still comes from a subset of people, typically former athletes, who never would be considered geniuses in any other context. I don't recall JB saying anything super smart... That said, i don't think we can rely upon anecdotes and tales from and about 'friends,' and especially without some sort of reasoning or support. Coach K calling JB a 'brilliant mind' or somesuch doesn't mean anything. Likewise, Majerus, because, hey, what are his credentials? Don't you have to be of a certain level to recognize the level? I keep talking about a psych principle that discusses that concept in the off-topic (political) forum... Also reminds me of a similar argument i had with my trump supporting friend who asserted Trump must be a genius, because, 'he has a billion dollars.' But, i also used to share an office with someone senior level in the NBA Players Union, and he did not regard JB very highly, and confirmed my suggestions as to why he was highly sought after for pro positions.

2 / The scattergram. I vaguely remember that. I think it's interesting that you 'took the temperature' of the board with regard to its reaction to that illustration. Could you consider that it 'silenced' critics because there's no way to prove it 'wrong?' Or, that some people have enough grace to not want to spoil your party? When we win a game, even a game with warts, we don't often discuss those warts. We are grateful for the win, and turn to positives and 'bask' in the small glories. But, let's take the scattergram. I'm going to go from memory, and ask questions rather than directly confront it.
If it meant to demonstrate that JB is an 'amazing' coach in that he wins the most games decided by 5 points or less...
• Could that 'statistic' have anything to do with SU being so markedly a team that 'slams the brakes' when it begins to accumulate 'lead points,' instead of continuing to increase the lead? And then milks the clock with the intention of limiting the number of opponent possessions? So that the lead actually becomes artificially compressed, and we are in a 'hold on' mode, rather than a 'break it open' mode? How many other teams have such a vividly obvious scheme in such situations?
• Could it also be that SU plays at such a slow pace that scoring is low, either by intent or ineptitude, so that the difference between our and the opponent's score is also going to be compressed, simply due to the smaller number of possessions? Resulting in more opportunities for close games?
• Could the zone be a component in restraining opponent scoring simply by pace of game matters? When both teams score fewer points, there are more opportunities for close games.
• If we attribute 'excellence' to JB in those close games, what exactly is the 'genius' in what he's doing? Since we only have 8 plays, i don't see it in the playcalling. Is it in the timing of timeouts? Is that really genius? Is it the slowing down and milking the shot clock and limiting possessions? Is that genius? What else does that scattergram represent?

It is obviously better to be on the positive side of that chart than the negative. But, what does it really mean? I'd like, just for conversation's sake, to see a scattergram of 'blowout wins versus similarly ranked opponents.' Somehow, i think that would be a bit more revealing, but both would be specious and still without a ton of probative value.
So, the people who call JB a coaching genius are insincere or unqualified to do so.

And, this macro basketball statistic could mean anything or could actually be masking incompetence.

But the unwashed masses on here, actually know something?

Got it!

You’ll excuse me that this does sound like political “spin” in which the obvious is twisted so that it is obscured.

Sort of like the non-explanation of the Clinton's changing their long held opinion on the Uranium deal and then getting a $10 million donation to the Clinton Foundation in an obvious exchange.
 

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
15,825
Like
16,996
Funny you should use the “G” word. I’m not saying Boeheim’s a genius, because I’m not qualified to do so. But there are credible people that have described him as such.

One of my son’s father in law is a big time supporter of St. Louis University. When Rick Majerus was coach there he used to have meeting with this group of significant contributors. In one of these meetings, Majerus explained to the group that Boeheim, in his opinion, had one of the best if not the best mind in all of college basketball. He called JB a “genius”.

I’m pretty sure Coach K is of the same opinion.

So while you say JB isn’t a genus, there are others with pretty significant bona fides who say he is.

But coaching genius only goes so far. You get enough limitations from sanctions, early departures, injuries, players that aren’t as good as you thought they were going to be, players that don’t develop, or players that decide they don’t give a shot and all the coaching genius in the world isn’t enough to overcome all of it.

A few weeks ago, some smart guy posted a scattergram of coaches that compared performance in games decided by less than five points. The results were so stunning that it actually silenced the critics on here for a whole week.

That JB is a HOF coach doesn’t mean he can’t be criticized. That he is one of the best coaches ever in close games ought to give the critics some pause.
Calhoun once said JB was the best. In some ways, he is a victim of his greatness. He wins with mediocre talent which he puts in position to succeed and it makes the players appear to be better than they are, which creates unreasonable expectations from fans.
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
Best post in the history of the board.
Wow!

The point, I suspect Zelda was trying to make is that just because you are successful doesn't mean you are any good.

But instead of actually trying to make that case he veered off into a strange argument about the connection of hamburger quality and McDonald's selling billions of them. Just because they sell a lot of them doesn't mean the hamburgers are any good.

It's a terrible analogy. it doesn't work even a little bit.

As anyone should know, the success of McDonalds in selling billions is more tied to the fact that their customer base I see quite happy gobbling that crap down doesn't care about quality as long as the food is cheap and has lots of fat and salt in it.

So McDonald's is successful because they understand what customers want and what they don't care about.
 

CuseFaninVT

Living Legend
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
24,356
Like
29,973
Wow!

The point, I suspect Zelda was trying to make is that just because you are successful doesn't mean you are any good.

But instead of actually trying to make that case he veered off into a strange argument about the connection of hamburger quality and McDonald's selling billions of them. Just because they sell a lot of them doesn't mean the hamburgers are any good.

It's a terrible analogy. it doesn't work even a little bit.

As anyone should know, the success of McDonalds in selling billions is more tied to the fact that their customer base I see quite happy gobbling that crap down doesn't care about quality as long as the food is cheap and has lots of fat and salt in it.

So McDonald's is successful because they understand what customers want and what they don't care about.
You may want to call it a night. While your posts are almost always tired, clearly you are veering off course here even more than normal. Zelda never mentioned burgers. That was Ghost's very witty analogy. Spot on, actually.

Off you go now...
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
You may want to call it a night. While your posts are almost always tired, clearly you are veering off course here even more than normal. Zelda never mentioned burgers. That was Ghost's very witty analogy. Spot on, actually.

Off you go now...
The analogy didn't work and SUNY may owe you a refund.
 

CuseFaninVT

Living Legend
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
24,356
Like
29,973
The analogy didn't work and SUNY may owe you a refund.
No it did, and if I put a poll up about it, I guaranFINGtee you my side would be far more supported than yours.
And feel free to overlook the fact you are getting confused by which poster may have made the post in the first place.
 

Shaggy1

Scout Team
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
374
Like
581
I’m sorry to put this post back on track. Howard Washington is at best an average Ivy League level point guard. I don’t care who coaches him, he’s slow, under average size for the acc, not Uber athletic and has a junpshot that will be below 35 percent. I hate to call out players here, but I just did. Serve my crow rare if I’m wrong please.
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
No it did, and if I put a poll up about it, I guaranFINGtee you my side would be far more supported than yours.
And feel free to overlook the fact you are getting confused by which poster may have made the post in the first place.
There's plenty of dumb people in the world.
 

OrangeDW

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
21,100
Like
46,322
I’m sorry to put this post back on track. Howard Washington is at best an average Ivy League level point guard. I don’t care who coaches him, he’s slow, under average size for the acc, not Uber athletic and has a junpshot that will be below 35 percent. I hate to call out players here, but I just did. Serve my crow rare if I’m wrong please.
So why did Butler want him if he’s Ivy level?

I think the key is the outside shot. If he’s 35% from 3 and 40% from field, that’s fine.

35% overall...well, yeah. That’s not gonna cut it.

I will say that Z Sims was slow and couldn’t shoot. There’s something to be said for being good with the ball. Washington looks like he might be.
 

Townie72

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,424
Like
5,639
No it did, and if I put a poll up about it, I guaranFINGtee you my side would be far more supported than yours.
And feel free to overlook the fact you are getting confused by which poster may have made the post in the first place.
No, it doesn't work. and I challenge you to try and explain it in a way that makes sense.

Ghost was trying to make the point that huge successes don't always necessarily mean JB is a great coach.

After all, he reasons, McDonalds sells billions of hamburgers and that doesn't mean their hamburgers are any good.

Of course it doesn't. What it does mean is that McDonalds has figured out a way to sell huge quantities of fast food around the globe in spite of not producing a what any one would call a good hamburger.

But McDonalds selling a lot of bad hamburgers is in no way analogous to Boeheim's level of coaching expertise and his record of successful.

Now Ghost might have made this work if he had said some people have made a lot of money in spite of themselves. Just because they happen to have a lot of money doesn't prove they are that much smarter than anyone else.

Extraordinary results could be due to luck or happenstance or the work of others.

That halfway works as an analogy. Results do not always prove genius.
 

Zelda Zonk

Hollywood Liberal Elite Globalist
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
5,001
Like
7,964
So, the people who call JB a coaching genius are insincere or unqualified to do so.

And, this macro basketball statistic could mean anything or could actually be masking incompetence.

But the unwashed masses on here, actually know something?

Got it!

You’ll excuse me that this does sound like political “spin” in which the obvious is twisted so that it is obscured.

Sort of like the non-explanation of the Clinton's changing their long held opinion on the Uranium deal and then getting a $10 million donation to the Clinton Foundation in an obvious exchange.
You’ve misinterpreted or mischaracterized much of what you chose to excerpt.

Who actually called him a “coaching genius?” What does that really mean to you, and how would that be demonstrated or proven? And have you never seen or heard of a friend or colleague saying something nice about someone, to the extent of harmless exaggeration?

Where did you see me indicate the 5 minute chart thing was an illustration of “incompetence?” My god, you JB fiends always twist something objective into something else. Last week, I called myself ugly and someone said I was insulting jb... Anyway... the point was that the chart represented something, and was ostensibly used to prove end-game strategic mastery or some such. I presented a few scenarios that might also affect the results. You didn’t bother to Dispute any of them. Instead, you distorted the rationale for questioning the results. Not critical thinking by someone who prides himself on his big giant brain.

The Unwashed Masses here? Of which you are a component... Well, I’ll say his again: I have not won a single game as a coach. But my opinions often align with those of coaches who have won tens of thousands of games, and some who have better records than JB. Discounting an ‘amateur’ opinion is stupid. Yes, so,Erika’s we actually do know something.

It’s kind of funny, reading the whining from the Pollyannas about how critiques of our play are unwarranted or unqualified when we lose, and then later when the team actually begins to do some of the things suggested in the critiques, the pollyannas are very quick to praise JB’s genius for the correction. It’s not rocket surgery.

Bring your WhatAboutHillary nonsense to the off topic side. See what happens.: )
 

Zelda Zonk

Hollywood Liberal Elite Globalist
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
5,001
Like
7,964
Wow!

The point, I suspect Zelda was trying to make is that just because you are successful doesn't mean you are any good.

But instead of actually trying to make that case he veered off into a strange argument about the connection of hamburger quality and McDonald's selling billions of them. Just because they sell a lot of them doesn't mean the hamburgers are any good.

It's a terrible analogy. it doesn't work even a little bit.

As anyone should know, the success of McDonalds in selling billions is more tied to the fact that their customer base I see quite happy gobbling that crap down doesn't care about quality as long as the food is cheap and has lots of fat and salt in it.

So McDonald's is successful because they understand what customers want and what they don't care about.
I didn’t mention burgers, and no, your suspicion about the point I was making is wrong. I’m surprised you got so confused. Aren’t you an attorney or som’n?

But let’s expand on analogies. Madonna is not a very good singer and yet she’s incredibly successful as a singer. How is that possible, you must be wondering...”Success” is a product of a great many components. “Success” itself is subjective. Jb, after 40 years has the same number of championships as Steve Fisher and it’s only one year more recent than Gary Williams’. How many would he have, and how long would he have been the head coach for us without the Carrier Dome?

Oh, this was a Howard Washingtonthread? Apologies. I got lost.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Bottom